Fetal Biometric Charts and Reference Equations for Pregnant Women Living in Port Said and Ismailia Governorates in Egypt

Authors

  • Moustafa Hegab Obstetrics & Gynecology Department, Al-Azhar University, Cairo
  • Mahmoud Farouk Midan Obstetrics & Gynecology Department, Al-Azhar University, Damietta
  • Tamer Taha Reproductive Health Research Department, National Research Centre, Giza
  • Mamdouh Bibars Reproductive Health Research Department, National Research Centre, Giza
  • Khaled Helmi El Wakeel Biological Anthropology Department, National Research Centre, Giza
  • Hesham Amer Reproductive Health Research Department, National Research Centre, Giza
  • Osama Azmy Reproductive Health Research Department, National Research Centre, Giza

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2018.179

Keywords:

Fetal growth, Biometric charts, Reference equations, Pregnancy, Egypt

Abstract

AIM: To construct new fetal biometric charts and equations for some fetal biometric parameters for women between 12th and 41st  weeks living in Ismailia and Port Said Governorates in Egypt.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study was carried out on 656 Egyptian women (from Ismailia and Port Said governorates) with an uncomplicated pregnancy, and all were sure of their dates. The selected group was between the 12th and 41st weeks of gestation, recruited from the district general hospital in Ismailia and Port Said to measure ultrasonographically biparietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL), then for each measurement separate regression models were fitted to estimate both the mean and the Standard deviation at each gestational age.

RESULTS: New Egyptian charts were reported for BPD, HC, AC, and FL. Reference equations for the dating of pregnancy were presented. The mean of the previous measurements at 12th and 41st weeks were as follows: (23.37, 98.72), (83.05, 336.12), (67.85, 332.57) and (12.50, 74.92) respectively.

CONCLUSION: New fetal biometric charts and regression equations for pregnant women living in Port Said & Ismailia governorates in Egypt.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block

References

Figueras F, Gratacós E. Update on the diagnosis and classification of fetal growth restriction and proposal of a stage-based management protocol. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2014; 36(2):86-98. https://doi.org/10.1159/000357592 PMid:24457811

Stock S, Myers J. Defining Abnormal Fetal Growth and Perinatal Risk: Population or Customized Standards? PLOS Med. 2017; 14(1):e1002229. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002229 PMid:28141844 PMCid:PMC5283679

Gardosi J. Clinical strategies for improving the detection of fetal growth restriction. Clin Perinatol. 2011; 38(1): 21-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clp.2010.12.012 PMid:21353087

Abd El-Wahed MA, El-Farghali OG, ElAbd HAS, El-Desouky ED and Hassan SM. Metabolic derangements in IUGR neonates detected at birth using UPLC-MS. The Egyptian Journal of Medical Human Genetics. 2017; 18: 281–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmhg.2016.12.002

Mayer C, Joseph K. Fetal growth: a review of terms, concepts and issues relevant to obstetrics. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 41(2): 136-145. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.11204 PMid:22648955

Giorlandino M, Padula F, Cignini P, mastrandrea M, Vigna R, Buscicchio G and Giorlandino C. Reference interval for fetal biometry in Italian population. J Prenat Med. 2009; 3(4): 62-65. PMid:22439050 PMCid:PMC3279111

Jung SI, Lee YH, Moon MH, Song MJ, Min JY, Kim JA, Park JH, Yang JH, Kim MY, Chung JH, Cho JY, Kim KG. Reference charts and equations of Korean fetal biometry. Prenat Diagn 2007; 27(6):545-551. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.1729 PMid:17431930

Bernstein IM, Mohs G, Rucquoi M and Badger GJ. The case for hybrid fetal growth curves: a population-based estimation of normal fetal size across gestational age. J Matern Fetal Med. 1996; 5(3): 124–127. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6661(199605/06)5:3<124:: AID-MFM5>3.0.CO;2-O

Chung JH, Boscardin WJ, Garite TJ, Lagrew DC and Porto M. Ethnic differences in birth weight by gestational age: at least a partial explanation for the Hispanic epidemiologic paradox? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 189(4): 1058–1062. https://doi.org/10.1067/S0002-9378(03)00848-2

Jacquemyn Y, Sys S and Verdonk P. Fetal biometry in different ethnic groups. Early Hum Dev. 2000; 57(1):1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3782(99)00049-3

Peixoto AB, Da Cunha Caldas TMR, Dulgheroff FF, Martins WP, Araujo Júnior E. Fetal biometric parameters: Reference charts for a non-selected risk population from Uberaba, Brazil. J Ultrasound. 2017; 17(68):23-29. PMid:28439425 PMCid:PMC5392550

Parikh LI, Nolan J, Tefera E and Driggers R. Fetal biometry: does patient ethnicity matter? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014; 27(5):500–504. https://doi.org/10.3109/14767058.2013.820696 PMid:23808379

Pang MW, Leung TN, Sahota DS, Lau TK and Chang AM. Customizing fetal biometric charts. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 22(3): 271–276. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.196 PMid:12942500

Drooger JC, Troe JW, Borsboom GJ, et al. Ethnic differences in prenatal growth and the association with maternal and fetal characteristics. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 26(2): 115–122. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.1962 PMid:16038011

Salomon LJ, Duyme M, Crequat J, Brodaty G, Talmant C, Fries N, Althuser M. French fetal biometry: reference equations and comparison with other charts. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 28(2):193-198. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.2733 PMid:16570263

Okonofua FE, Ayangade SO, Ajibulu OA. Ultrasound measurement of fetal abdominal circumference and the ratio of biparietal diameter to transverse abdominal diameter in a mixed Nigerian population. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 1988; 27(1):1-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7292(88)90079-3

Degani S. Fetal Biometry: Clinical, Pathological, and Technical Considerations. Obstet Gyneco Surv. 2001; 56(3): 159-167. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006254-200103000-00023

Salomon LJ, Alfirevic Z, Berghella V, Bilardo C, Hernandez-Andrade E, Johnsen SL, et al. Practice guidelines for performance of the routine mid-trimester fetal ultrasound scan. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 37(1):116–126. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.8831 PMid:20842655

Snijders R, Nicolaides KH. Fetal biometry at 14-40 weeks'gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1994; 4(1):34-48. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-0705.1994.04010034.x PMid:12797224

Lessoway VA, Schulzer M, Wittmann BK, Gagnon FA and Wilson RD. Ultrasound Fetal Biometry Charts for a North American Caucasian Population. J Clin Ultrasound. 1998; 26(9):433-453. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0096(199811/12)26:9<433::AID-JCU3>3.0.CO;2-O

Ayad C, Abdelrahim A, Ibrahim M, Garelnabi M, Ahmed B, Abdalla E, Saleem M. New Sudanese Reference Chart of Fetal Biometry and Weight Using Ultrasonography. Open Journal of Radiology. 2016; 6(2):131-139. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojrad.2016.62020

Yeo GS, Chan WB, Lun KC and Lai FM. Racial Differences in Fetal Morphometry in Singapore. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 1994; 23(3):371-376. PMid:7944253

Zaki M, Eldeeb H, Gaber K, Geneidi E, Meetkees M. Egyptian fetal ultrasound biometry: pilot data. Middle East Journal of Medical genetics. 2012; 1(1): 44-48. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.MXE.0000407739.42825.22

Shipp TD, Bromley B, Mascola M and Benacerraf B. Variation in Fetal Femur Length With Respect to Maternal Race. J Ultrasound Med. 2001; 20(2): 141-144. https://doi.org/10.7863/jum.2001.20.2.141 PMid:11211134

Published

2018-05-14

How to Cite

1.
Hegab M, Midan MF, Taha T, Bibars M, El Wakeel KH, Amer H, Azmy O. Fetal Biometric Charts and Reference Equations for Pregnant Women Living in Port Said and Ismailia Governorates in Egypt. Open Access Maced J Med Sci [Internet]. 2018 May 14 [cited 2024 Mar. 28];6(5):751-6. Available from: https://oamjms.eu/index.php/mjms/article/view/oamjms.2018.179

Issue

Section

A - Basic Science