Study on the Relationship Between Clinical and Ultrasound Diagnosis of Fetal Growth Restriction
Authors/Creators
- 1. Senior Resident, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Darbhanga Medical College and Hospital, Laheriasarai, Bihar
- 2. Senior Resident, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, U.P
- 3. Professor and Head of Department, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Darbhanga Medical College and Hospital, Laheriasarai, Bihar
Description
Background: Fetal growth restriction (FGR) is a prevalent and intricate clinical issue that has a significant morbidity risk. Apart from congenital abnormalities and viral factors, FGR has been found to be a significant factor in perinatal death. This study aims to link the diagnosis of fetal growth limitation made by ultrasonography and clinical means. Methods: This prospective study was carried out from May 2022 to January 2023 at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at DMCH, Laheriasarai, Bihar. The study comprised a total of 288 patients. Results: 33.7% of the participants were found to have FGR. The age group of 20–25 years old accounted for 60.81% of cases. 89 percent of women lived in rural areas. Women made up 67.30% of the upper-lower class. Clinical approaches were shown to have a sensitivity of 70.7% and a specificity of 74.2%, respectively. Doppler and ultrasonography were found to have sensitivity values of 80.5% and 90.2%, respectively, and specificity values of 87.7% and 95.1%. 82 cases (65.1%) out of 126 clinically suspected IUGR cases had IUGR verified at birth. Twenty-three (20.63%) were lost to follow-up. Conclusion: Because of its high specificity, the Doppler study is the most effective modality currently available for identifying FGR; however, clinical assessment, a financially advantageous screening technique, is also a suitable way to diagnose FGR.
Abstract (English)
Background: Fetal growth restriction (FGR) is a prevalent and intricate clinical issue that has a significant morbidity risk. Apart from congenital abnormalities and viral factors, FGR has been found to be a significant factor in perinatal death. This study aims to link the diagnosis of fetal growth limitation made by ultrasonography and clinical means. Methods: This prospective study was carried out from May 2022 to January 2023 at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at DMCH, Laheriasarai, Bihar. The study comprised a total of 288 patients. Results: 33.7% of the participants were found to have FGR. The age group of 20–25 years old accounted for 60.81% of cases. 89 percent of women lived in rural areas. Women made up 67.30% of the upper-lower class. Clinical approaches were shown to have a sensitivity of 70.7% and a specificity of 74.2%, respectively. Doppler and ultrasonography were found to have sensitivity values of 80.5% and 90.2%, respectively, and specificity values of 87.7% and 95.1%. 82 cases (65.1%) out of 126 clinically suspected IUGR cases had IUGR verified at birth. Twenty-three (20.63%) were lost to follow-up. Conclusion: Because of its high specificity, the Doppler study is the most effective modality currently available for identifying FGR; however, clinical assessment, a financially advantageous screening technique, is also a suitable way to diagnose FGR.
Files
IJPCR,Vol16,Issue6,Article103.pdf
Files
(289.4 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:a6a6437ad58b43fdca02a1cf455ac114
|
289.4 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
Dates
- Accepted
-
2024-05-26
Software
- Repository URL
- https://impactfactor.org/PDF/IJPCR/16/IJPCR,Vol16,Issue6,Article103.pdf
- Development Status
- Active
References
- 1. Gardosi J, Madurasinghe V, Williams M, et al. Maternal and fetal risk factors for stillbirth: population-based study. BMJ 2013; 346:f108. 2. Lindqvist PG, Molin J. Does antenatal identification of small-for-gestational age fetuses significantly improve their outcome? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005; 25:258. 3. Marhatta N, Kaul I. Validity of clinical and sonographic diagnosis of IUGR: a comparative study. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 6: 2407-12. 4. Acharya D, Nagraj K. Maternal Determinants of Intrauterine growth restriction. Indian J Clini Biochem. 2006; 21(1):111-5. 5. Kinare AS, Chinchwadkar MC, Natekar AS, Coyaji KJ, Wills AK, Joglekar CV, et al. Patterns of fetal growth in a rural Indian cohort and a comparison with western European population. J Ultrasound Med. 2010; 29(2): 215- 23. 6. Sinha S, Kurude VN. Study of obstetric outcome in pregnancies with intrauterine growth retardation. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 7: 1858-63. 7. Cnattingius S, Axelsson O, Lindmark G. The clinical value of measurement of symphysiofundal height and ultrasonic measurement of the biparietal diameter in the diagnosis of IUGR. J Perinat Med. 1985; 13: 227. 8. Pillay P, Janaki S, Manjila C. A Comparative Study of Gravidogram and Ultrasound in Detection of IUGR. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2012; 62(4): 409-12. 9. Mc Dermott JC, Weiner CP, Peter TJ. Fundal height measurement. When to screen in pregnancy. Obstetrics and Gynecol. 1986; 93: 212- 6. 10. Jensen OH, Larsen S. Evaluation of symphysis fundal measurements weighing during pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynaecol Scand. 1991; 70:13. 11. Hamudu NA, Shafiq M, Mangi KP. Parturient SFH and AG measurement to predict birth weight. Tanazania Med J. 2004;19(1). 12. Strauss RS, Dietz WH. Low maternal weight gain in the second or third trimester increases the risk for intrauterine growth retardation. J Nutrition. 1999; 129: 988-99. 13. Barbara Boughton Fundal height measures for IUGR are often unreliable. OB/GYN News, 2010. 14. Pearce JM, Campbell S. A comparison of symphysis fundal height and ultrasound as screening tests for light for gestational age infants. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1987 94:100-4.15. Sharma DD, Chandnani KC. Clinical study of IUGR cases and correlation of Doppler parameters with perinatal outcome. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 5: 4290-6.