Comparación de la utilidad clínica de datos antropométricos de recién nacidos prematuros empleando las gráficas Fenton e Intergrowth-21st / Comparison of the clinical utility of anthropometric data of preterm infants using Fenton and Intergrowth -21 st charts

Introducción: no existe consenso sobre la gráfica idónea para monitorizar el crecimiento de prematuros, sin embargo, Fenton es la más difundida. Desde el aparecimiento de INTERGROWTH-21st ésta se perfila como una herramienta eficaz. Nuestro objetivo fue comparar INTERGROWTH-21st y Fenton en la valoración antropométrica de prematuros. Población y Métodos: estudio transversal que analizó datos antropométricos de prematuros entre enero de 2014 a diciembre de 2016 mediante la revisión de registros. La clasificación se realizó por edad gestacional y sexo usando Fenton y se compararon con INTERGROWTH-21st categorizando los percentiles 10, 50 y 90. Se realizaron pruebas de correlación y concordancia (p < 0.05, intervalo de confianza 95%). Se mantuvieron los respectivos lineamientos éticos. Resultados: en 232 prematuros la prevalencia de peso bajo fue de 13.7% con Fenton y 15.9% con INTERGROWTH-21st y para peso elevado 2.5% y 6% respectivamente. Presentaron una concordancia de 0.7 peso y perímetro cefálico. De 194 prematuros adecuados para la edad gestacional por Fenton, INTERGROWTH-21st clasificó al 4% como bajos y altos y el resto como adecuados. Existió correlación positiva en los tres parámetros antropométricos. Tomando como estándar a INTERGROWTH-21st y como criterio a evaluar a Fenton, la especificidad fue mayor que la sensibilidad en la antropometría baja (98.4 y 78.3 peso, 98.3 y 62.5 longitud y 100 y 64.2 perímetro cefálico) y elevada (100 y 42.8 peso, 97.5 y 22.2 longitud y 96.3 y 70 perímetro cefálico). Conclusión: Fenton clasifica con menor frecuencia pesos bajos y elevados para la edad gestacional en relación a INTERGROWTH-21st.

Introduction: there is no consensus on the ideal graph to monitor the growth of premature infants; however, the Fenton graph is the most widespread. Since the appearance of the INTERGROWTH-21st chart, this is emerging as an effective tool. Our objective was to compare INTERGROWTH-21st and Fenton in the anthropometric assessment of premature infants. Population and methods: a cross-sectional study that analyzed anthropometric data of premature infants between January 2014 and December 2016 by reviewing records. The classification was made by gestational age and sex using Fenton and was compared with INTERGROWTH-21st by categorizing the 10th, 50th and 90th percentiles. Correlation and concordance tests were performed (p <0.005, 95% confidence interval). The respective ethical guidelines were maintained. Results: in 232 preterm infants the prevalence of low weight was 13.7% with Fenton and 15.9% with INTERGROWTH-21st and for high weight 2.5% and 6% respectively. Weight and cephalic perimeter presented a concordance of 0.7. Of 194 premature babies suitable for gestational age by Fenton, INTERGROWTH-21st classified 4% as low and high, the rest as adequate. There was positive correlation in the three anthropometric parameters. Taking as standard INTERGROWTH-21st and as a criterion to evaluate Fenton, the specificity was greater than the sensitivity in low anthropometry (98.4 and 78.3 weight, 98.3 and 62.5 length, 100 and 64.2 cephalic perimeter) and high (100 and 42.8 weight, 97.5 and 22.2 length, 96.3 and 70 cephalic perimeter). Conclusion: Fenton classified less frequently low and high weights for gestational age in relation to INTERGROWTH-21st.

The clinical value of INTERGROWTH-21st standard in evaluating intrauterine growth restriction / 复旦学报（医学版）

Objective To explore the application value of INTERGROWTH-21st standard evaluate intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR).We aimed at predicting IUGR with ultrasonic fetal growth measurements.Methods A prospective cohort of singleton pregnancy scanned after 28 gestational weeks was constructed.The Z-score values of growth measurements were calculated using the INTERGROWTH-21st standard.Logistic regression equation was used to establish the prediction formula.Finally,the new formula was compared with the traditional Hadlock method to predict the accuracy of IUGR.We assessed outcomes for consenting participants who attended research scans and delivered at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University.Results A total of 834 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were included.After the exclusion of 143 lost cases,565 of control cases and 126 of IUGR cases were obtained.The sensitivity,specificity,positive predictivevalue,negative predictive value,false positive rate and false negative rate of prediction model wererespectively:88.9 ％,85.4 ％,57.7 ％,97.2 ％,14.6 ％,11.1 ％.In contrast,the values of Hadlock wererespectively:81.7％,82.7％,51.2％,95.3％,17.3％,18.3％.Conclusions This study shows aprediction model of IUGR.INTERGROWTH-21st standard improved the diagnostic accuracy of IUGR,especially enhanced the positive predictive value.