Modern concepts of low birth weight and fetal growth restriction

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The aim of this work is to study the state of the problem of the development of small-for-gestational-age fetus and fetal growth restriction over the past 5 years. A review of randomized trials of the PubMed database for the period of 2015 to 2020 was carried out. Experts reached an agreement on the definition of diagnostic criteria for small-for-gestational-age fetus and fetal growth restriction, a clinically valid classification was created, and the main monitoring strategies were developed. Due to the different pathogenesis, fetal growth restriction is divided into early and late. The observation algorithm includes tests that have shown higher sensitivity and specificity. There is no single standard for the median weight and abdominal circumference of a fetus, indicators of the reference range for fetal Doppler. Smoking cessation and taking acetylsalicylic acid at a dose of 150 mg at high risk of preeclampsia is recommended to prevent the small-for-gestational-age fetus and fetal growth restriction. The pregnancy management algorithm includes Doppler ultrasound examination of the umbilical artery, cardiotocography. If this pathology occurs before 32 weeks of pregnancy, the blood flow in ductus venosus is additionally examined, and after 32 weeks of pregnancy, the middle cerebral artery blood velocities and cerebroplacental ratio are assessed. Indicators of Doppler velocimetry and cardiotocography, which serve as criteria for early termination of pregnancy, are developed, measures are proposed to improve neonatal outcomes — prevention of respiratory distress syndrome at 24–34 weeks of gestation, as well as magnesium therapy for fetal neuroprotection. The problems of preventing fetal growth restriction and the algorithm for monitoring pregnant women who do not have risk factors for small-for-gestational-age fetus, management tactics and indications for delivery while slowing fetal weight gain remain unresolved.

About the authors

O V Yakovleva

Saratov State Medical University named after V.I. Razumovsky

Author for correspondence.
Email: jkovlevaov@yandex.ru
Russian Federation, Saratov, Russia

I E Rogozhina

Saratov State Medical University named after V.I. Razumovsky

Email: jkovlevaov@yandex.ru
Russian Federation, Saratov, Russia

T N Glukhova

Saratov State Medical University named after V.I. Razumovsky

Email: jkovlevaov@yandex.ru
Russian Federation, Saratov, Russia

References

  1. Bushnik T., Yang S., Kaufman J.S., Kramer M.S., Wilkins R. Socioeconomic disparities in small-for-gestational-age birth and preterm birth. Health Reports. Statistics Canada. 2017. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/82-003-x/2017011/article/54885-eng.htm (access date: 01.03.2021).
  2. Marzouk A., Filipovic-Pierucci A., Baud O., Tsatsaris V., Ego A., Charles M.A., Goffinet F., Evain-Brion D., Durand-Zaleski I. Prenatal and post-natal cost of small for gestational age infants: a national study. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2017; 17 (1): 221. doi: 10.1186/s12913-017-2155-x.
  3. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM); Martins J.G., Biggio J.R., Abuhamad A.; Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) Consult Series No. 52: Diagnosis and Management of Fetal Growth Restriction. AJOG. 2020; 223 (4): 2–17. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.05.010.
  4. Lees C.C., Stampalija T., Baschat A.A., da Silva Costa F., Ferrazzi E., Figueras F., Hecher K., Kingdom J., Poon L.C., Salomon L.J., Unterscheider J. ISUOG Practice Guidelines: diagnosis and management of small-for-gestational-age fetus and fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2020; 56: 298–312. doi: 10.1002/uog.22134.
  5. McCowan L.M., Figueras F., Anderson N.H. Evidence-based national guidelines for the management of suspected fetal growth restriction: comparison, consensus, and controversy. AJOG. 2018; 218 (2): 855–868. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.12.004.
  6. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecolo­gists, Committee on Practice Bulletins — Obstetrics, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicin. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 204: Fetal Growth Restriction. Obstet. Gynecol. 2019; 133 (2): 97–109. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003070.
  7. Sharma D., Farahbakhsh N., Shastri S., Sharma P. Intrauterine growth restriction — part 2. J. Matern. Fetal. Neonatal. Med. 2016; 29: 4037–4048. doi: 10.3109/­14767058.2016.1154525.
  8. Salomon L.J., Alfirevic Z., Da Silva Costa F., Deter R.L., Figueras F., Ghi T., Glanc P., Khalil A., Lee W., Napolitano R., Papageorghiou A., Sotiriadis A., Stirnemann J., Toi A., Yeo G. ISUOG Practice Guidelines: ultrasound assessment of fetal biometry and growth. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2019; 53: 715–723. doi: 10.1002/uog.20272.
  9. Department of Health Australia. Pregnancy care guidelines. Fetal growth restriction and well-being. 2018. https://www.health.gov.au (access date: 01.03.2021).
  10. Figueras F., Caradeux J., Crispi F., Eixarch E., Peguero A., Gratacos E. Diagnosis and surveillance of late-onset fetal growth restriction. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2018; 218 (2S): 790–802. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.12.003.
  11. Gardosi J. Fetal growth and risk assessment: is there an impasse? Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2019; 220 (1): р747576777879808182. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.10.007.
  12. Katanoda K., Noda M., Goto A., Mizunuma H., Lee J.S., Hayashi K. Impact of birth weight on adult-onset diabetes mellitus in relation to current body mass index: the Japan Nurses' Health Study. J. Epidemiol. 2017; 27: 428–434. doi: 10.1016/j.je.2016.08.016.
  13. Tuzun F., Yucesoy E., Baysal B., Kumral A., Duman N., Hasan Ozkan H. Comparison of INTERGROWTH-21 and Fenton growth standards to assess size at birth and extrauterine growth in very preterm infants. J. Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Med. 2018; 31 (17): 2252–2257. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2017.1339270.
  14. Zeitlin J., Monier I. Clarification of INTERGROWTH-21st newborn birthweight standards. Lancet. 2018; 391 (10134): 1995–1996. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30292-7.
  15. Kiserud T., Piaggio G., Carroli G., Widmer M., Carvalho J., Neerup Jensen L., Giordano D., Cecatti J.G., Abdel Aleem H., Talegawkar S.A., Benachi A., Diemert A., Tshefu Kitoto A., Thinkhamrop J., Lumbiganon P., Tabor A., Kriplani A., Gonzalez Perez R., Hecher K., Hanson M.A., Gülmezoglu A.M., Platt L.D. The World Health Organization fetal growth charts: a multinational longitudinal study of ultrasound biometric measurements and estimated fetal weight. PLoS Med. 2017; 14: р1002220. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002220.
  16. Ghi T., Cariello L., Rizzo L., Ferrazzi E., Periti E., Prefumo F., Stampalija T., Viora E., Verrotti C., Rizzo G.; Società Italiana di Ecografia Ostetrica e Ginecologica Working Group on Fetal Biometric Charts. Customized fetal growth charts for parents' characteristics, race, and pa­rity by quantile regression analysis: a cross-sectional multicenter Italian study. J. Ultrasound Med. 2016; 35: 83–92. doi: 10.7863/ultra.15.03003.
  17. Ego A., Prunet C., Lebreton E., Blondel B., Kaminski M., Goffinet F., Zeitlin J. Customized and non-custo­mized French intrauterine growth curves. I-Methodology. J. Gynecol. Obstet. Biol. Reprod. (Paris). 2016; 45: 155–164. doi: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2015.08.009.
  18. Gordijn S.J., Beune I.M., Thilaganathan B., Papageorghiou A., Baschat A.A., Baker P.N., Silver R.M., Wy­nia K., Ganzevoort W. Consensus definition of fetal growth restriction: a Delphi procedure. Ultrasound Obstet. ­Gynecol. 2016; 48 (3): 333–339. doi: 10.1002/uog.15884.
  19. Gardener G., Weller M., Wallace E., East C., Oats J., Ellwood D., Kent A., Gordon A., Homer C., Middleton P., McDonald S., Sethna F., Sinclair L., Foord C., Andrews C., Oro L., Firth T., Morris J., Flenady V. Position statement: detection and management of fetal growth restriction in singleton pregnancies. Perinatal society of Australia and New Zealand/Stillbirth centre of research excellence. 2018. https://ranzcog.edu.au/RANZCOG_SITE (access date: 01.03.2021).
  20. Khalil A., Morales-Roselló J., Townsend R., Morlando M., Papageorghiou A., Bhide A., Thilaganathan B. Value of third-trimester cerebroplacental ratio and uterine artery Doppler indices as predictors of stillbirth and perinatal loss. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2016; 47: 74–80. doi: 10.1002/uog.15729.
  21. MacDonald T.M., Hui L., Tong S., Robinson A.J., Dane K.M., Middleton A.L., Walker S.P. Reduced growth velocity across the third trimester is associated with placental insufficiency in fetuses born at a normal birthweight: a prospective cohort study. BMC Med. 2017; 15: 164. doi: 10.1186/s12916-017-0928-z.
  22. Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Ro­yal College of Physicians of Ireland and Directorate of Clinical Strategy and Programmes, Health Service Exe­cutive. Fetal growth restriction and well-being. Pregnancy Care Guidelines. 2017. https://www.health.gov.au/ (access date: 01.03.2021).
  23. O'Connor D. Saving babies lives: care bundle for stillbirth prevention. https://www.england.nhs.uk/ourwork/futurenhs/mat-transformation/saving-babies/ (access date: 01.03.2021).
  24. Morris R.K., Bilagi A., Devani P., Kilby M.D. Association of serum PAPP-A levels in first trimester with small for gestational age and adverse pregnancy outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis. Prenat. Diagn. 2017; 37 (3): 253–265. doi: 10.1002/pd.5001.
  25. Institute of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Ro­yal College of Physicians of Ireland. Fetal growth restriction-recognition, diagnosis management. Clinical practice guideline No. 28. 2017. Version 1.1. http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/publications/Clinical-Strategy-and-Programmes/Fetal-Growth-Restriction.pdf (access date: 02.03.2021).
  26. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Diagnosis and management of fetal growth restriction. Washington, DC: SMFM. 2020. https://www.smfm.org/publications/289-­smfm-consult-series-52-diagnosis-and-management-of-fetal-growth-restriction (access date: 02.03.2021).
  27. Grobman W.A., Rice M.M., Reddy U.M., Tita A.T.N., Silver R.M., Mallett G., Hill K., Thom E.A., El-Sayed Y.Y., Perez-Delboy A., Rouse D.J., Saade G.R., Boggess K.A., Chauhan S.P., Iams J.D., Chien E.K., Casey B.M., Gibbs R.S., Srinivas S.K., Swamy G.K., Simhan H.N., Macones G.A.; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health, Human Development Maternal-Fetal Me­dicine Units Network. Labor induction versus expectant management in low-risk nulliparous women. N. Engl. J. Med. 2018; 379: 513–523. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1800566.
  28. Intrauterine growth restriction. Guideline of the German society of gynecology and obstetrics (S2k-Level, AWMF Registry Number 015/080, October 2016). Geburtsh Frauenheilk. 2017; 77: 1157–1173. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-118908.
  29. Alfirevic Z., Stampalija T., Dowswell T. Fetal and umbilical doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2017; 6: CD007529. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007529.pub4.
  30. García B., Llurba E., Valle L., Gómez-Roig M.D., Juan M., Pérez-Matos C., Fernández M., García-Hernández J.A., Alijotas-Reig J., Higueras M.T., Calero I., Goya M., Pérez-Hoyos S., Carreras E., Cabero L. Do knowledge of uterine artery resistance in the second trimester and targeted surveillance improve maternal and perinatal outcome? UTOPIA study: a randomized controlled trial. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2016; 47: 680–689. doi: 10.1002/uog.15873.
  31. Cruz-Martinez R., Savchev S., Cruz-Lemini M., Mendez A., Gratacos E., Figueras F. Clinical utility of third-trimester uterine artery Doppler in the prediction of brain hemodynamic deterioration and adverse perinatal outcome in small-for-gestational-age fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2015; 45 (3): 273–278. doi: 10.1002/uog.14706.
  32. Drukker L., Staines-Urias E., Villar J., Uauy R., Kennedy S.H., Papageorghiou A.T. International gestatio­nal age-specific centiles for umbilical artery Doppler indices: a longitudinal prospective cohort study of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2020; 222 (6): 602.e1–602.e15. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.01.012.
  33. Di Mascio D., Rizzo G., Buca D., D'Amico A., Leombroni M., Tinari S., Giancotti A., Muzii L., Nappi L., Liberati M., D'Antonio F. Comparison between cerebroplacental ratio and umbilicocerebral ratio in predicting adverse perinatal outcome at term. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2020; 252: 439–443. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.07.032.
  34. Roberge S., Nicolaides K., Demers S., Hyett J., Chaillet N., Bujold E. The role of aspirin dose on the prevention of preeclampsia and fetal growth restriction: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2017; 216: 110–120. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.09.076.
  35. Groom K.M., McCowan L.M., Mackay L.K., Lee A.C., Said J.M., Kane S.C., Walker S.P., van Mens T.E., Hannan N.J., Tong S., Chamley L.W., Stone P.R., McLintock C. Enoxaparin for the prevention of preeclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction in women with a history: a randomized trial. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2017; 216: 296–314. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.01.014.
  36. Rodger M.A., Gris J.C., de Vries J.I.P., Martinelli I., Rey É., Schleussner E., Middeldorp S., Kaaja R., Lan­glois N.J., Ramsay T., Mallick R., Bates S.M., Abhei­den C.N.H., Perna A., Petroff D., de Jong P., van ­Hoorn M.E., Bezemer P.D., Mayhew A.D. Low-mole­cular-weight heparin and recurrent placenta-mediated pregnancy complications: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized controlled trials. Lancet. 2016; 388: 2629–2641. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31139-4.
  37. Rolnik D.L., Wright D., Poon L.C.Y., Syngelaki A., O'Gorman N., de Paco Matallana C., Akolekar R., Cicero S., Janga D., Singh M., Molina F.S., Persico N., Jani J.C., Plasencia W., Papaioannou G., Tenenbaum-Gavish K., Nicolaides K.H. ASPRE trial: performance of screening for preterm pre-eclampsia. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2017; 50: 492–495. doi: 10.1002/uog.18816.
  38. Knight H.E., Cromwell D.A., Gurol-Urganci I., Harron K., van der Meulen J.H., Smith G.C.S. Perinatal mortality associated with induction of labour versus expectant management in nulliparous women aged 35 years or over: An English national cohort study. PLoS Med. 2017; 14: 1002425. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002425.
  39. Walker K.F., Bugg G.J., Macpherson M., McCormick C., Grace N., Wildsmith C., Bradshaw L., Smith G.C., Thornton J.G. Randomized trial of labor induction in ­women 35 years of age or older. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016; 374: 813–822. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1509117.
  40. Bilardo C.M., Hecher K., Visser G.H.A., Papageorghiou A.T., Marlow N., Thilaganathan B., Van Wassenaer-Leemhuis A., Todros T., Marsal K., Frusca T., Ara­bin B., Brezinka C., Derks J.B., Diemert A., Duvekot J.J., Ferrazzi E., Ganzevoort W., Martinelli P., Ostermayer E., Schlembach D., Valensise H., Thornton J., Wolf H., Lees C; ­TRUFFLE Group. Severe fetal growth restriction at 26–32 weeks: key messages from the TRUFFLE study. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2017; 50: 285–290. doi: 10.1002/uog.18815.
  41. Housseine N., Punt M.C., Browne J.L., van 't Hooft J., Maaløe N., Meguid T., Theron G.B., Franx A., Grobbee D.E., Visser G.H.A., Rijken M.J. Delphi consensus statement on intrapartum fetal monitoring in low-­resource settings. Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet. 2019; 146: 8–16. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.12724.
  42. Paules C., Dantas A.P., Miranda J., Crovetto F., Ei­xarch E., Rodriguez-Sureda V., Dominguez C., Casu G., Rovira C., Nadal A., Crispi F., Gratacós E. Premature placental aging in term small-for-gestational-age and growth-restricted fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2019; 53: 615–622. doi: 10.1002/uog.20103.
  43. Parra-Saavedra M., Simeone S., Triunfo S., Crovetto F., Botet F., Nadal A., Gratacos E., Figueras F. Correlation between histological signs of placental underperfusion and perinatal morbidity in late-onset small-for-gestatio­nal-age fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2015; 45 (2): 149–155. doi: 10.1002/uog.14757.
  44. Roberts L.A., Ling H.Z., Poon L.C., Nicolai­des K.H., Kametas N.A. Maternal hemodynamics, fetal bio­metry and Doppler indices in pregnancies followed up for suspected fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2018; 52: 507–514. doi: 10.1002/uog.19067.
  45. Deter R.L., Lee W., Yeo L., Erez O., Ramamurthy U., Naik M., Romero R. Individualized growth assessment: conceptual framework and practical implementation for the evaluation of fetal growth and neonatal growth outcome. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2018; 218: 656–678. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.12.210.
  46. Cheng Y., Leung T.Y., Lao T., Chan Y.M., Sahota D.S. Impact of replacing Chinese ethnicity-specific fetal biometry charts with the INTERGROWTH-21(st) standard. BJOG. 2016; 123 (3): 48–55. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.14008.
  47. Oros D., Ruiz-Martinez S., Staines-Urias E., Conde-Agudelo A., Villar J., Fabre E., Papageorghiou A.T. Reference ranges for Doppler indices of umbilical and fetal middle cerebral arteries and cerebroplacental ratio: syste­matic review. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2019; 53: 454–464. doi: 10.1002/uog.20102.
  48. Ruiz-Martinez S., Papageorghiou A.T., Staines-­Urias E., Villar J., Gonzalez De Agüero R., Oros D. Clini­cal impact of Doppler reference charts on management of small-for-gestational-age fetuses: need for standardization. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2020; 56: 166–172. doi: 10.1002/uog.20380.
  49. Stampalija T., Ghi T., Rosolen V., Rizzo G., Ferrazzi E.M., Prefumo F., Dall'Asta A., Quadrifoglio M., Todros T., Frusca T. SIEOG working group on fetal biometric charts. Current use and performance of the different fetal growth charts in the Italian population. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2020; 252: 323–329. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.06.059.
  50. Poon L.C., Tan M.Y., Yerlikaya G., Syngelaki A., Nicolaides K.H. Birth weight in live births and stillbirths. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2016; 48 (5): 602–606. doi: 10.1002/uog.17287.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

© 2021 Yakovleva O.V., Rogozhina I.E., Glukhova T.N.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed
under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.




Согласие на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика»

1. Я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных»), осуществляя использование сайта https://journals.rcsi.science/ (далее – «Сайт»), подтверждая свою полную дееспособность даю согласие на обработку персональных данных с использованием средств автоматизации Оператору - федеральному государственному бюджетному учреждению «Российский центр научной информации» (РЦНИ), далее – «Оператор», расположенному по адресу: 119991, г. Москва, Ленинский просп., д.32А, со следующими условиями.

2. Категории обрабатываемых данных: файлы «cookies» (куки-файлы). Файлы «cookie» – это небольшой текстовый файл, который веб-сервер может хранить в браузере Пользователя. Данные файлы веб-сервер загружает на устройство Пользователя при посещении им Сайта. При каждом следующем посещении Пользователем Сайта «cookie» файлы отправляются на Сайт Оператора. Данные файлы позволяют Сайту распознавать устройство Пользователя. Содержимое такого файла может как относиться, так и не относиться к персональным данным, в зависимости от того, содержит ли такой файл персональные данные или содержит обезличенные технические данные.

3. Цель обработки персональных данных: анализ пользовательской активности с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика».

4. Категории субъектов персональных данных: все Пользователи Сайта, которые дали согласие на обработку файлов «cookie».

5. Способы обработки: сбор, запись, систематизация, накопление, хранение, уточнение (обновление, изменение), извлечение, использование, передача (доступ, предоставление), блокирование, удаление, уничтожение персональных данных.

6. Срок обработки и хранения: до получения от Субъекта персональных данных требования о прекращении обработки/отзыва согласия.

7. Способ отзыва: заявление об отзыве в письменном виде путём его направления на адрес электронной почты Оператора: info@rcsi.science или путем письменного обращения по юридическому адресу: 119991, г. Москва, Ленинский просп., д.32А

8. Субъект персональных данных вправе запретить своему оборудованию прием этих данных или ограничить прием этих данных. При отказе от получения таких данных или при ограничении приема данных некоторые функции Сайта могут работать некорректно. Субъект персональных данных обязуется сам настроить свое оборудование таким способом, чтобы оно обеспечивало адекватный его желаниям режим работы и уровень защиты данных файлов «cookie», Оператор не предоставляет технологических и правовых консультаций на темы подобного характера.

9. Порядок уничтожения персональных данных при достижении цели их обработки или при наступлении иных законных оснований определяется Оператором в соответствии с законодательством Российской Федерации.

10. Я согласен/согласна квалифицировать в качестве своей простой электронной подписи под настоящим Согласием и под Политикой обработки персональных данных выполнение мною следующего действия на сайте: https://journals.rcsi.science/ нажатие мною на интерфейсе с текстом: «Сайт использует сервис «Яндекс.Метрика» (который использует файлы «cookie») на элемент с текстом «Принять и продолжить».