Am J Perinatol
DOI: 10.1055/a-2677-6720
Original Article

Growth Velocity and Sonographic Estimation of Birthweight Among Low-Risk Pregnancies

1   Epidemiology Branch, Division of Population Health Research, Division of Intramural Research,, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States (Ringgold ID: RIN35040)
,
Madeleine Laughon St Ville
2   Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Branch, Division of Population Health Research, Division of Intramural Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States (Ringgold ID: RIN35040)
,
3   Epidemiology Branch, DiPHR, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, BETHESDA, United States (Ringgold ID: RIN35040)
,
Dian He
4   The Prospective Group, Inc., Fairfax, United States
5   Division of Population Health Research, Division of Intramural Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States (Ringgold ID: RIN35040)
,
William A Grobman
6   Warren Alpert School of Medicine, Brown University, Providence, United States
,
D Skupski
7   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, NewYork-Presbyterian Queens, Flushing, United States (Ringgold ID: RIN3371)
,
roger newman
8   OB-GYN, MUSC, Charleston, United States
,
John Owen
9   Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, United States
,
Edward Chien
10   OB GYN Specialist, Cleveland Clinic OB GYN and Women's Health Institute, Cleveland, United States (Ringgold ID: RIN284703)
,
Angela Ranzini
11   Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The MetroHealth System/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, United States
,
Sungduk Kim
12   Biostatistics Branch, National Cancer Institute Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Bethesda, United States (Ringgold ID: RIN272131)
,
Paul Albert
12   Biostatistics Branch, National Cancer Institute Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Bethesda, United States (Ringgold ID: RIN272131)
,
Jagteshwar Grewal
5   Division of Population Health Research, Division of Intramural Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States (Ringgold ID: RIN35040)
,
Zhen Chen
2   Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Branch, Division of Population Health Research, Division of Intramural Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, United States (Ringgold ID: RIN35040)
› Institutsangaben

Gefördert durch: Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development HHSN27500006,HHSN275200800002I,HHSN275200800003IC,HHSN275200800012C,HHSN275200800013C,HHSN275200800014C,HHSN275200800028C,HHSN275201000009C Clinical Trial: Registration number (trial ID): NCT00912132, Trial registry: ClinicalTrials.gov (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/), Type of Study: Prospective cohort
Preview

Objective: To examine whether addition of fetal growth velocities, based on serial scans, compared to estimated fetal weight (EFW) alone, improves prediction accuracy of birthweight (BW). Study Design: From the prospective NICHD Fetal Growth Studies–Singletons (2009-2013) that recruited women at low-risk for aberrant fetal growth, we included 2,397 participants with two to five ultrasounds between 15-41 weeks. Fetal growth velocity (V) was calculated between successive visits. Linear regression estimated relationship between EFW and BW: Non-V model, absent all growth velocities, included EFW at visit 5, interval from visit 5 to delivery, their cubic polynomials, and delivery gestational age (GA); All-V model added all available velocities between research visits (i.e., V2+V3+V4+V5) to the Non-V model; Single-V model added only the velocity between visit 4 and 5. Results: Non-V performed the worst, with the highest mean absolute error of 197 g and lowest R2, 0.63. The two best performing models were All-V and Single-V, with the lowest mean absolute error (192 g for both), highest R2 of 0.65 (for both), and greatest proportion of predicted BWs within 10% of actual BW (84.7% for both). Conclusion: Integrating fetal growth velocities into BW estimating formulas improved BW prediction accuracy which has potential to guide clinical intervention decisions that rely on EFW.



Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 22. Mai 2025

Angenommen nach Revision: 05. August 2025

Accepted Manuscript online:
07. August 2025

© . Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor , NY 10001 New York, USA