International estimated fetal weight standards of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project.

OBJECTIVE: Estimated fetal weight (EFW) and fetal biometry are complementary measures used to screen for fetal growth disturbances. Our aim was to provide international EFW standards to complement the INTERGROWTH-21st Fetal Growth Standards that are available for use worldwide. METHODS: Women with an accurate gestational-age assessment, who were enrolled in the prospective, international, multicenter, population-based Fetal Growth Longitudinal Study (FGLS) and INTERBIO-21st Fetal Study (FS), two components of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project, had ultrasound scans every 5 weeks from 9-14 weeks' until 40 weeks' gestation. At each visit, measurements of fetal head circumference (HC), biparietal diameter, occipitofrontal diameter, abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL) were obtained blindly by dedicated research sonographers using standardized methods and identical ultrasound machines. Birth weight was measured within 12 h of delivery by dedicated research anthropometrists using standardized methods and identical electronic scales. Live babies without any congenital abnormality, who were born within 14 days of the last ultrasound scan, were selected for inclusion. As most births occurred at around 40 weeks' gestation, we constructed a bootstrap model selection and estimation procedure based on resampling of the complete dataset under an approximately uniform distribution of birth weight, thus enriching the sample size at extremes of fetal sizes, to achieve consistent estimates across the full range of fetal weight. We constructed reference centiles using second-degree fractional polynomial models. RESULTS: Of the overall population, 2404 babies were born within 14 days of the last ultrasound scan. Mean time between the last scan and birth was 7.7 (range, 0-14) days and was uniformly distributed. Birth weight was best estimated as a function of AC and HC (without FL) as log(EFW) = 5.084820 - 54.06633 × (AC/100)3 - 95.80076 × (AC/100)3 × log(AC/100) + 3.136370 × (HC/100), where EFW is in g and AC and HC are in cm. All other measures, gestational age, symphysis-fundus height, amniotic fluid indices and interactions between biometric measures and gestational age, were not retained in the selection process because they did not improve the prediction of EFW. Applying the formula to FGLS biometric data (n = 4231) enabled gestational age-specific EFW tables to be constructed. At term, the EFW centiles matched those of the INTERGROWTH-21st Newborn Size Standards but, at < 37 weeks' gestation, the EFW centiles were, as expected, higher than those of babies born preterm. Comparing EFW cross-sectional values with the INTERGROWTH-21st Preterm Postnatal Growth Standards confirmed that preterm postnatal growth is a different biological process from intrauterine growth. CONCLUSIONS: We provide an assessment of EFW, as an adjunct to routine ultrasound biometry, from 22 to 40 weeks' gestation. However, we strongly encourage clinicians to evaluate fetal growth using separate biometric measures such as HC and AC, as well as EFW, to avoid the minimalist approach of focusing on a single value. © 2016 Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Standardisation of neonatal clinical practice.

The International Fetal and Newborn Growth Consortium for the 21(st) Century (INTERGROWTH-21(st) ) is a large-scale, population-based, multicentre project involving health institutions from eight geographically diverse countries, which aims to assess fetal, newborn and preterm growth under optimal conditions. Given the multicentre nature of the project and the expected number of preterm births, it is vital that all centres follow the same standardised clinical care protocols to assess and manage preterm infants, so as to ensure maximum validity of the resulting standards as indicators of growth and nutrition with minimal confounding. Moreover, it is well known that evidence-based clinical practice guidelines can reduce the delivery of inappropriate care and support the introduction of new knowledge into clinical practice. The INTERGROWTH-21(st) Neonatal Group produced an operations manual, which reflects the consensus reached by members of the group regarding standardised definitions of neonatal morbidities and the minimum standards of care to be provided by all centres taking part in the project. The operational definitions and summary management protocols were developed by consensus through a Delphi process based on systematic reviews of relevant guidelines and management protocols by authoritative bodies. This paper describes the process of developing the Basic Neonatal Care Manual, as well as the morbidity definitions and standardised neonatal care protocols applied across all the INTERGROWTH-21(st) participating centres. Finally, thoughts about implementation strategies are presented.

The objectives, design and implementation of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project.

INTERGROWTH-21(st) is a multicentre, multiethnic, population-based project, being conducted in eight geographical areas (Brazil, China, India, Italy, Kenya, Oman, UK and USA), with technical support from four global specialised units, to study growth, health and nutrition from early pregnancy to infancy. It aims to produce prescriptive growth standards, which conceptually extend the World Health Organization (WHO) Multicentre Growth Reference Study (MGRS) to cover fetal and newborn life. The new international standards will describe: (1) fetal growth assessed by clinical and ultrasound measures; (2) postnatal growth of term and preterm infants up to 2 years of age; and (3) the relationship between birthweight, length and head circumference, gestational age and perinatal outcomes. As the project has selected healthy cohorts with no obvious risk factors for intrauterine growth restriction, these standards will describe how all fetuses and newborns should grow, as opposed to traditional charts that describe how some have grown at a given place and time. These growth patterns will be related to morbidity and mortality to identify levels of perinatal risk. Additional aims include phenotypic characterisation of the preterm and impaired fetal growth syndromes and development of a prediction model, based on multiple ultrasound measurements, to estimate gestational age for use in pregnant women without access to early/frequent antenatal care.

Caesarean section without medical indications is associated with an increased risk of adverse short-term maternal outcomes: the 2004-2008 WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health.

BACKGROUND: There is worldwide debate about the appropriateness of caesarean sections performed without medical indications. In this analysis, we aim to further investigate the relationship between caesarean section without medical indication and severe maternal outcomes. METHODS: This is a multicountry, facility-based survey that used a stratified multistage cluster sampling design to obtain a sample of countries and health institutions worldwide. A total of 24 countries and 373 health facilities participated in this study. Data collection took place during 2004 and 2005 in Africa and the Americas and during 2007 and 2008 in Asia. All women giving birth at the facility during the study period were included and had their medical records reviewed before discharge from the hospital. Univariate and multilevel analysis were performed to study the association between each group's mode of delivery and the severe maternal and perinatal outcome. RESULTS: A total of 286,565 deliveries were analysed. The overall caesarean section rate was 25.7% and a total of 1.0 percent of all deliveries were caesarean sections without medical indications, either due to maternal request or in the absence of other recorded indications. Compared to spontaneous vaginal delivery, all other modes of delivery presented an association with the increased risk of death, admission to ICU, blood transfusion and hysterectomy, including antepartum caesarean section without medical indications (Adjusted Odds Ratio (Adj OR), 5.93, 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI), 3.88 to 9.05) and intrapartum caesarean section without medical indications (Adj OR, 14.29, 95% CI, 10.91 to 18.72). In addition, this association is stronger in Africa, compared to Asia and Latin America. CONCLUSIONS: Caesarean sections were associated with an intrinsic risk of increased severe maternal outcomes. We conclude that caesarean sections should be performed when a clear benefit is anticipated, a benefit that might compensate for the higher costs and additional risks associated with this operation.