Accuracy of clinically estimated fetal weight in pregnancies complicated by diabetes mellitus and obesity.

MedStar author(s):
Citation: American Journal of Perinatology. 31(1):31-7, 2014 Jan.PMID: 23456900Institution: MedStar Health Research Institute | MedStar Washington Hospital CenterDepartment: Obstetrics and Gynecology/Maternal-Fetal MedicineForm of publication: Journal ArticleMedline article type(s): Journal Article | Research Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralSubject headings: *Diabetes Complications | *Diabetes, Gestational | *Fetal Macrosomia/di [Diagnosis] | *Fetal Weight | *Obesity | *Pregnancy in Diabetics | Adult | Birth Weight | Female | Humans | Predictive Value of Tests | Pregnancy | Retrospective Studies | Young AdultYear: 2014ISSN:
  • 0735-1631
Name of journal: American journal of perinatologyAbstract: CONCLUSION: CEFW is a poor predictor of macrosomia in pregnancies complicated by obesity and diabetes. Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of clinically estimated fetal weight (CEFW) in patients with gestational diabetes (GDM), pregestational diabetes (DM), and obesity.RESULTS: The accuracy of CEFW in our population was 54.3 to 64.4% and was significantly lower in patients with DM and obesity and patients with obesity but not diabetes. When CEFW was analyzed in the >4,000-g and>4,500-g groups, its accuracy was 20 to 51% and 14 to 40%, respectively. CEFW overestimated BW more commonly in GDM, obese GDM, and obese groups. The sensitivity of CEFW for diagnosing BW>4,000g or>4,500g was 19.6% and 9.6%, respectively, and it improved in pregnancies complicated by diabetes.STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis of Consortium of Safe Labor data. Subjects were classified into six groups: DM, DM and obese, GDM, GDM and obese, nondiabetic obese, and controls. The mean difference between birth weight (BW) and CEFW, the percent of accurate CEFW (defined as<10% difference), and the sensitivity for identifying BW>4,000g and>4,500g were calculated for each group.All authors: Benson JE, Drassinower D, Driggers RW, Huang CC, Landy HJ, Timofeev JFiscal year: FY2014Digital Object Identifier: Date added to catalog: 2014-10-01
Holdings
Item type Current library Collection Call number Status Date due Barcode
Journal Article MedStar Authors Catalog Article 23456900 Available 23456900

CONCLUSION: CEFW is a poor predictor of macrosomia in pregnancies complicated by obesity and diabetes. Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of clinically estimated fetal weight (CEFW) in patients with gestational diabetes (GDM), pregestational diabetes (DM), and obesity.

RESULTS: The accuracy of CEFW in our population was 54.3 to 64.4% and was significantly lower in patients with DM and obesity and patients with obesity but not diabetes. When CEFW was analyzed in the >4,000-g and>4,500-g groups, its accuracy was 20 to 51% and 14 to 40%, respectively. CEFW overestimated BW more commonly in GDM, obese GDM, and obese groups. The sensitivity of CEFW for diagnosing BW>4,000g or>4,500g was 19.6% and 9.6%, respectively, and it improved in pregnancies complicated by diabetes.

STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis of Consortium of Safe Labor data. Subjects were classified into six groups: DM, DM and obese, GDM, GDM and obese, nondiabetic obese, and controls. The mean difference between birth weight (BW) and CEFW, the percent of accurate CEFW (defined as<10% difference), and the sensitivity for identifying BW>4,000g and>4,500g were calculated for each group.

English

Powered by Koha