» Articles » PMID: 20523027

Performance of 36 Different Weight Estimation Formulae in Fetuses with Macrosomia

Overview
Date 2010 Jun 5
PMID 20523027
Citations 14
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this retrospective clinical study was to compare the accuracy of 36 commonly used weight estimation formulae in macrosomic fetuses.

Material And Methods: Ultrasound estimation of fetal weight (FW) was carried out within 7 days up to delivery in 350 singleton fetuses with a birth weight (BW) of >or=4,000 g. The accuracy of the different formulae for FW estimation was compared by, firstly, the mean percentage (MPE) and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), secondly, by the frequency distribution of differences between estimated FW and fetal BW, and thirdly by comparing detection and false positive rates in screening for fetuses with a BW of 4,000, 4,300 and 4,500 g or more.

Results: MPE ranged from -62.2 to 9.6% and was closest to 0 with the Hart formula. With 12 of 36 weight estimation formulae, MAPE was 10% or less, and was smallest with the Hart formulae (3.9%). The mean detection rate among all formulae for fetuses with a BW >or=4,000, >or=4,300 and >or=4,500 g was 29, 24 and 22%, respectively, and the false positive rate was 12% (for >or=4,300 g) and 7% (>or=4,500 g).

Discussion: Some formulae showed advantages as far as mean and absolute percentage errors were concerned, but none reached a detection rate and false positive rate for fetuses >or=4,500 g that could lead to clinical recommendation.

Citing Articles

Evaluation of sonographic and clinical measures in early versus late third trimester for birth weight prediction.

Regev-Sadeh S, Assaf W, Zehavi A, Cohen N, Lavie O, Zilberlicht A Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2024; 168(2):774-782.

PMID: 39268669 PMC: 11726152. DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.15911.


A novel software for method comparison: MCS (method comparison software)-assessing agreement between estimated fetal weights calculated by Hadlock I-V formulas and birth weight.

Yasar S, Arslan A, Polat B, Melekoglu R, Colak C, Yologlu S Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2024; 310(5):2439-2452.

PMID: 39212750 PMC: 11485033. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-024-07680-2.


Application of ultrasonographic human estimated foetal weight formulas to cynomolgus monkeys (Macaca fascicularis) at 129-132 days of gestation: A comparative study of estimated and actual birthweight.

Lee D, Yoon S, Kim J, Mo J, Jo Y, Kwon J Vet Med Sci. 2024; 10(4):e1521.

PMID: 38952271 PMC: 11217594. DOI: 10.1002/vms3.1521.


ULTRASOUND DIAGNOSIS OF MACROSOMIA AMONG WOMEN WITH GESTATIONAL DIABETES - REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.

Lovric B, Sijanovic S, Zmijanovic I, Juric G, Juras J Acta Clin Croat. 2022; 61(1):95-106.

PMID: 36398082 PMC: 9616028. DOI: 10.20471/acc.2022.61.01.12.


Effective Macrosomia Prediction Using Random Forest Algorithm.

Wang F, Wang Y, Ji X, Wang Z Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(6).

PMID: 35328934 PMC: 8951305. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19063245.