» Articles » PMID: 25826778

Diagnostic Accuracy of Placental Growth Factor and Ultrasound Parameters to Predict the Small-for-gestational-age Infant in Women Presenting with Reduced Symphysis-fundus Height

Overview
Date 2015 Apr 1
PMID 25826778
Citations 16
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of placental growth factor (PlGF) and ultrasound parameters to predict delivery of a small-for-gestational-age (SGA) infant in women presenting with reduced symphysis-fundus height (SFH).

Methods: This was a multicenter prospective observational study recruiting 601 women with a singleton pregnancy and reduced SFH between 24 and 37 weeks' gestation across 11 sites in the UK and Canada. Plasma PlGF concentration < 5(th) centile, estimated fetal weight (EFW) < 10(th) centile, umbilical artery Doppler pulsatility index > 95(th) centile and oligohydramnios (amniotic fluid index < 5 cm) were compared as predictors for a SGA infant < 3(rd) customized birth-weight centile and adverse perinatal outcome. Test performance statistics were calculated for all parameters in isolation and in combination.

Results: Of the 601 women recruited, 592 were analyzed. For predicting delivery of SGA < 3(rd) centile (n = 78), EFW < 10(th) centile had 58% sensitivity (95% CI, 46-69%) and 93% negative predictive value (NPV) (95% CI, 90-95%), PlGF had 37% sensitivity (95% CI, 27-49%) and 90% NPV (95% CI, 87-93%); in combination, PlGF and EFW < 10(th) centile had 69% sensitivity (95% CI, 55-81%) and 93% NPV (95% CI, 89-96%). The equivalent receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curve areas were 0.79 (95% CI, 0.74-0.84) for EFW < 10(th) centile, 0.70 (95% CI, 0.63-0.77) for low PlGF and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.77-0.86) in combination.

Conclusions: For women presenting with reduced SFH, ultrasound parameters had modest test performance for predicting delivery of SGA < 3(rd) centile. PlGF performed no better than EFW < 10(th) centile in determining delivery of a SGA infant.

Citing Articles

Nearly-complete labial adhesions diagnosed with repetitive cystitis in postmenopausal women: A case report.

Kwon H World J Clin Cases. 2022; 10(35):12990-12995.

PMID: 36569009 PMC: 9782939. DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i35.12990.


Analysis of serum placental growth factor levels in preeclamptic and normotensive pregnant women in Lagos, Nigeria: a worthwhile screening tool?.

Oluwole A, Onakoya A, Okunade K, Babah O, Akinajo O J Obstet Gynaecol. 2022; 42(6):1944-1949.

PMID: 35603727 PMC: 9843609. DOI: 10.1080/01443615.2022.2054686.


Cerebral Blood Flow Monitoring in High-Risk Fetal and Neonatal Populations.

Leon R, Ortigoza E, Ali N, Angelis D, Wolovits J, Chalak L Front Pediatr. 2022; 9:748345.

PMID: 35087771 PMC: 8787287. DOI: 10.3389/fped.2021.748345.


Circulating syndecan-1 is reduced in pregnancies with poor fetal growth and its secretion regulated by matrix metalloproteinases and the mitochondria.

Garcha D, Walker S, MacDonald T, Hyett J, Jellins J, Myers J Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):16595.

PMID: 34400721 PMC: 8367987. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-96077-1.


Placental growth factor in assessment of women with suspected pre-eclampsia to reduce maternal morbidity: a stepped wedge cluster randomised control trial (PARROT Ireland).

Hayes-Ryan D, Khashan A, Hemming K, Easter C, Devane D, Murphy D BMJ. 2021; 374:n1857.

PMID: 34389547 PMC: 8361324. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n1857.


References
1.
Redline R . Placental pathology: a systematic approach with clinical correlations. Placenta. 2007; 29 Suppl A:S86-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.placenta.2007.09.003. View

2.
Clausson B, Gardosi J, Francis A, Cnattingius S . Perinatal outcome in SGA births defined by customised versus population-based birthweight standards. BJOG. 2001; 108(8):830-4. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2001.00205.x. View

3.
Godfrey K, Barker D . Fetal nutrition and adult disease. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000; 71(5 Suppl):1344S-52S. DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/71.5.1344s. View

4.
David C, Tagliavini G, Pilu G, Rudenholz A, Bovicelli L . Receiver-operator characteristic curves for the ultrasonographic prediction of small-for-gestational-age fetuses in low-risk pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996; 174(3):1037-42. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9378(96)70347-2. View

5.
Chang T, Robson S, Boys R, Spencer J . Prediction of the small for gestational age infant: which ultrasonic measurement is best?. Obstet Gynecol. 1992; 80(6):1030-8. View