Back to Search
Start Over
Adverse neonatal outcome in twin pregnancy complicated by small‐for‐gestational age: twin vs singleton reference charts
- Source :
- Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. 59:377-384
- Publication Year :
- 2022
- Publisher :
- Wiley, 2022.
-
Abstract
- The use of twin-specific vs singleton growth charts in the assessment of twin pregnancy has been controversial. The aim of this study was to assess whether a diagnosis of small-for-gestational age (SGA) made using twin-specific estimated-fetal-weight (EFW) and birth-weight (BW) charts is associated more strongly with adverse neonatal outcomes in twin pregnancies, compared with when the diagnosis is made using singleton charts.This was a cohort study of twin pregnancies delivered at St George's Hospital, London, between January 2007 and May 2020. Twin pregnancies complicated by intrauterine death of one or both twins, fetal aneuploidy or major abnormality, twin-twin transfusion syndrome or twin anemia-polycythemia sequence and those delivered before 32 weeks' gestation, were excluded. SGA was defined as EFW or BW below the 10A total of 1329 twin pregnancies were identified, of which 913 (1826 infants) were included in the analysis. Of these pregnancies, 723 (79.2%) were dichorionic and 190 (20.8%) were monochorionic. Using the singleton charts, 33.3% and 35.7% of pregnancies were classified as SGA based on EFW and BW, respectively. The corresponding values were 5.9% and 5.6% when using the twin-specific charts. Classification as SGA based on EFW using the twin charts was associated significantly with composite adverse neonatal outcome (odds ratio (OR), 4.78 (95% CI, 1.47-14.7); P = 0.007), as compared with classification as appropriate-for-gestational age (AGA). However, classification as SGA based on EFW using the singleton standard was not associated significantly with composite adverse neonatal outcome (OR, 1.36 (95% CI, 0.63-2.88); P = 0.424). Classification as SGA based on EFW using twin-specific standards provided a significantly better model fit than did using the singleton standard (likelihood ratio test, P 0.001). When twin-specific charts were used, classification as SGA based on BW was associated significantly with a 9.3 times increased odds of composite adverse neonatal outcome (OR, 9.27 (95% CI, 2.86-30.0); P 0.001). Neonates classified as SGA according to the singleton BW standard but not according to the twin-specific BW standards had a significantly lower rate of composite adverse neonatal outcome than did AGA twins (OR, 0.24 (95% CI, 0.07-0.66); P = 0.009).The singleton charts classified one-third of twins as SGA, both prenatally and postnatally. Infants classified as SGA according to the twin-specific charts, but not those classified as SGA according to the singleton charts, had a significantly increased risk of adverse neonatal outcome compared with infants classified as AGA. This study provides further evidence that twin-specific charts perform better than do singleton charts in the prediction of adverse neonatal outcome in twin pregnancies. The use of these charts may reduce misclassification of twins as SGA and improve identification of those that are truly growth restricted. © 2021 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
- Subjects :
- medicine.medical_specialty
Percentile
Gestational Age
Infant, Newborn, Diseases
Ultrasonography, Prenatal
Cohort Studies
Pregnancy
medicine
Birth Weight
Humans
Twin Anemia-Polycythemia Sequence
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging
reproductive and urinary physiology
Twin Pregnancy
Retrospective Studies
Fetal Growth Retardation
Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
Singleton
business.industry
Obstetrics
Infant, Newborn
Pregnancy Outcome
Obstetrics and Gynecology
General Medicine
medicine.disease
female genital diseases and pregnancy complications
Fetal Weight
Reproductive Medicine
Infant, Small for Gestational Age
Pregnancy, Twin
Gestation
Small for gestational age
Female
business
Cohort study
Subjects
Details
- ISSN :
- 14690705 and 09607692
- Volume :
- 59
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....c97b1bcf7d7137a6fa22dadc6495975d
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.23764