Ultrasound Measurement of Placental Thickness: A Reliable Estimation of Gestational Age in Normal Singleton Pregnancies in Nigerian Women

Overview

Journal J West Afr Coll Surg

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2022 Oct 7

PMID 36203931

Authors

Omolara A Olaleye

Olubunmi O Olatunji

Kamaldeen O Jimoh

Abiola O Olaleye

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this article is to evaluate the accuracy of placental thickness (PT) in determination of gestational age (GA) in normal singleton foetuses.

Materials And Methods: The study was a cross-sectional descriptive study which recruited consecutively a total of 406 pregnant women with singleton pregnancies (at 15-40 weeks of gestation), referred for routine obstetric ultrasound (US) scan at the National Hospital, Abuja from October to December 2019. Biparietal diameter (BPD), femur length (FL), head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC), and PT were measured using standard protocols. All measurements were calculated by taking three best measurements, and the mean of the measurements was taken and recorded for each participant. Pearson's correlation analysis was computed to determine linear relationships between variables. A significant statistical level was determined at a critical value of < 0.05.

Results: The mean age was 31.8 ± 4.8 years. The mean PTs in the second and third trimesters were 23.2 ± 3.1 and 34.1 ± 3.7 mm, respectively. PT had a linear relationship and a statistically significant positive correlation (=0.99, = 0.00) with GA. There was also a statistically significant positive correlation between PT on the one hand, and BPD, AC, HC, FL, PT, and GA, on the other hand.

Conclusion: There was a significant and strong positive correlation between PT and GA. The study shows that US measurement of PT is a reliable method of estimating GA in singleton pregnancies in Nigeria.

Citing Articles

Fetal survival in pregnancy complicated by massive subchorionic thrombohaematoma.

Carlson K, Hergenrader A BMJ Case Rep. 2023; 16(12).

PMID: 38160039 PMC: 10759021. DOI: 10.1136/bcr-2023-258402.

References

Charan J, Biswas T . How to calculate sample size for different study designs in medical research?. Indian J Psychol Med. 2013; 35(2):121-6. PMC: 3775042. DOI: 10.4103/0253-7176.116232. View

Agwuna K, Eze C, Ukoha P, Umeh U . Relationship between Sonographic Placental Thickness and Gestational Age in Normal Singleton Fetuses in Enugu, Southeast Nigeria. Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2017; 6(6):335-340. PMC: 5423332. DOI: 10.4103/amhsr.amhsr_457_15. View

Karthikeyan T, Subramaniam R, Johnson W, Prabhu K . Placental thickness & its correlation to gestational age & foetal growth parameters- a cross sectional ultrasonographic study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2013; 6(10):1732-5. PMC: 3552215. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2012/4867.2652. View

Reece E, Gabrielli S, DeGennaro N, Hobbins J . Dating through pregnancy: a measure of growing up. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1989; 44(7):544-55. DOI: 10.1097/00006254-198907000-00010. View

Nwagha U, Ugwu O, Nwagha T, Anyaehie U . The influence of parity on the gestational age at booking among pregnant women in Enugu, South East Nigeria. Niger J Physiol Sci. 2009; 23(1-2):67-70. DOI: 10.4314/njps.v23i1-2.54928. View

Macaulay S, Buchmann E, Dunger D, Norris S . Reliability and validity of last menstrual period for gestational age estimation in a low-to-middle-income setting. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2018; 45(1):217-225. DOI: 10.1111/jog.13801. View

Elchalal U, Ezra Y, Levi Y, Bar-Oz B, Yanai N, Intrator O . Sonographically thick placenta: a marker for increased perinatal risk--a prospective cross-sectional study. Placenta. 2000; 21(2-3):268-72. DOI: 10.1053/plac.1999.0466. View

Hellman L, Kobayashi M, Fillisti L, Lavenhar M, Cromb E . Growth and development of the human fetus prior to the twentieth week of gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1969; 103(6):789-800. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9378(69)90575-4. View

Park S, Jang I, Lee M, Kim Y, Chun S, Park M . Screening for chromosomal abnormalities using combined test in the first trimester of pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2016; 59(5):357-66. PMC: 5028642. DOI: 10.5468/ogs.2016.59.5.357. View

10.

Dietz P, England L, Callaghan W, Pearl M, Wier M, Kharrazi M . A comparison of LMP-based and ultrasound-based estimates of gestational age using linked California livebirth and prenatal screening records. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007; 21 Suppl 2:62-71. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3016.2007.00862.x. View

11.

Azagidi A, Ibitoye B, Makinde O, Idowu B, Aderibigbe A . Fetal Gestational Age Determination using Ultrasound Placental Thickness. J Med Ultrasound. 2020; 28(1):17-23. PMC: 7194423. DOI: 10.4103/JMU.JMU_127_18. View

12.

Hoddick W, Mahony B, Callen P, Filly R . Placental thickness. J Ultrasound Med. 1985; 4(9):479-82. DOI: 10.7863/jum.1985.4.9.479. View

13.

Campbell S . The prediction of fetal maturity by ultrasonic measurement of the biparietal diameter. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Commonw. 1969; 76(7):603-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1969.tb06146.x. View