JUM GE Healthcare
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Earn FREE CME Credit
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 Melamed, N.
Right arrow Articles by Ben-Haroush, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Melamed, N.
Right arrow Articles by Ben-Haroush, A.
© 2009 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine
J Ultrasound Med 28:617-629 • 0278-4297

Sonographic Fetal Weight Estimation

Which Model Should Be Used?

Nir Melamed, MD, MSc, Yariv Yogev, MD, Israel Meizner, MD, Reuven Mashiach, MD, Ron Bardin, MD and Avi Ben-Haroush, MD

Helen Schneider Hospital for Women, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tikva, Israel; and Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.

Address correspondence to Nir Melamed, MD, MSc, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Helen Schneider Hospital for Women, Rabin Medical Center, 49100 Petah Tikva, Israel., E-mail: nirm{at}clalit.org.il

Objective. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of different sonographic models for fetal weight estimation. Methods. We evaluated 26 different models using 3705 sonographic weight estimations performed less than 3 days before delivery. Models were ranked on the basis of systematic and random errors and were grouped according to the combination of biometric indices in each model. Cluster analysis was used to compare the accuracy of the different model groups. Results. A considerable variation in the accuracy of the different models was found. For birth weights (BWs) in the range of 1000 to 4500 g, models based on 3 or 4 fetal biometric indices were significantly more accurate than models that incorporated only 1 or 2 indices. The accuracy of weight estimation decreased at the extremes of BWs, leading to overestimation in low-BW categories as opposed to underestimation when the BW exceeded 4000 g. The precision of most models was lowest in the low-BW groups. Conclusions. To improve the accuracy of fetal weight estimation, sonographic models that are based on 3 or 4 fetal biometric indices should be preferred. Recognizing the accuracy and the tendency for underestimation or overestimation of each of the available models is important for the judicious interpretation of fetal weight estimations, especially at the extremes of fetal weight.

Key Words: accuracy • comparison • estimation • fetal • models • weight

Abbreviations: AC, abdominal circumference • ANOVA, analysis of variance • BW, birth weight • BPD, biparietal diameter • EFW, estimated fetal weight • FL, femur length • HC, head circumference




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Ultrasound MedHome page
N. Melamed, Y. Yogev, I. Meizner, R. Mashiach, and A. Ben-Haroush
Sonographic Prediction of Fetal Macrosomia: The Consequences of False Diagnosis
J. Ultrasound Med., February 1, 2010; 29(2): 225 - 230.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.