JUM Track the topics, authors and articles important to you
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Order Full text via Infotrieve
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hadlock, F. P.
Right arrow Articles by Martinez-Poyer, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hadlock, F. P.
Right arrow Articles by Martinez-Poyer, J.

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, Vol 11, Issue 2 81-85, Copyright © 1992 by American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine


JOURNAL ARTICLE

Fetal body ratios in second trimester: a useful tool for identifying chromosomal abnormalities?

F. P. Hadlock, R. B. Harrist and J. Martinez-Poyer
Department of Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas 77030.

This study was carried out to determine if second trimester fetal body ratios are useful in detecting chromosomally abnormal fetuses. As a reference population, normative data for five fetal body ratios (femur length/biparietal diameter, biparietal diameter/fetal length, femur length/head circumference, head circumference/abdominal circumference, and femur length/abdominal circumference) were derived using regression analysis from a population of chromosomally normal fetuses (n = 1770) who underwent genetic amniocentesis at our institution between 14 and 21 menstrual weeks. During the same time period, 37 chromosomally abnormal fetuses were identified by amniocentesis. In comparing the two groups using the 10th and 90th percentiles as cutoffs between normal and abnormal, approximately 25% of chromosomally abnormal fetuses were identified, whereas approximately 20% of the normal fetuses were incorrectly classified as abnormal. Moreover, the use of 1.5 standard deviations above the mean for BPD/FL identified only 19% of Down syndrome fetuses. Our data, and those from a comprehensive review of the literature, suggest that the sensitivity of these ratios in detecting chromosomally abnormal fetuses is too low to recommend them for routine screening.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
V. S. Dogra, R. H. Gottlieb, M. Oka, and D. J. Rubens
Sonography of the Scrotum
Radiology, February 1, 2003; (2003) 2271001744.
[Abstract] [Full Text]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1992 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.