Prediction of large‐for‐gestational age at 36 weeks' gestation: two‐dimensional ultrasound vs three‐dimensional ultrasound vs magnetic resonance imaging.

Autor: Mazzone, E., Kadji, C., Cannie, M. M., Badr, D. A., Jani, J. C.
Předmět:
Zdroj: Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology; Apr2024, Vol. 63 Issue 4, p489-496, 8p
Abstrakt: Objective: To compare the performance of two‐dimensional ultrasound (2D‐US), three‐dimensional ultrasound (3D‐US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 36 weeks' gestation in predicting the delivery of a large‐for‐gestational‐age (LGA) neonate, defined as birth weight ≥ 95th percentile, in patients at high and low risk for macrosomia. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study conducted between January 2017 and February 2019. Women with a singleton pregnancy at 36 weeks' gestation underwent 2D‐US, 3D‐US and MRI within 15 min for estimation of fetal weight. Weight estimations and birth weight were plotted on a growth curve to obtain percentiles for comparison. Participants were considered high risk if they had at least one of the following risk factors: diabetes mellitus, estimated fetal weight ≥ 90th percentile at the routine third‐trimester ultrasound examination, obesity (prepregnancy body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) or excessive weight gain during pregnancy. The outcome was the diagnostic performance of each modality in the prediction of birth weight ≥ 95th percentile, expressed as the area under the receiver‐operating‐characteristics curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values. Results: A total of 965 women were included, of whom 533 (55.23%) were high risk and 432 (44.77%) were low risk. In the low‐risk group, the AUCs for birth weight ≥ 95th percentile were 0.982 for MRI, 0.964 for 2D‐US and 0.962 for 3D‐US; pairwise comparisons were non‐significant. In the high‐risk group, the AUCs were 0.959 for MRI, 0.909 for 2D‐US and 0.894 for 3D‐US. A statistically significant difference was noted between MRI and both 2D‐US (P = 0.002) and 3D‐US (P = 0.002), but not between 2D‐US and 3D‐US (P = 0.503). In the high‐risk group, MRI had the highest sensitivity (65.79%) compared with 2D‐US (36.84%, P = 0.002) and 3D‐US (21.05%, P < 0.001), whereas 3D‐US had the highest specificity (98.99%) compared with 2D‐US (96.77%, P = 0.005) and MRI (96.97%, P = 0.004). Conclusions: At 36 weeks' gestation, MRI has better performance compared with 2D‐US and 3D‐US in predicting birth weight ≥ 95th percentile in patients at high risk for macrosomia, whereas the performance of 2D‐US and 3D‐US is comparable. For low‐risk patients, the three modalities perform similarly. © 2023 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Databáze: Complementary Index