Obstetrics and gynecology · 1999
Detection of growth-restricted fetuses in preeclampsia: a case-control study.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chauhan S P, Scardo J A, Magann E F, Devoe L D, Hendrix N W, Martin J N
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of detecting growth-restricted fetuses in women with and without preeclampsia.
METHODS: Over 2 years, parturients with reliable gestational ages, preeclampsia, and sonographic estimates of birth weights were matched (1:1) for gestational age with women without preeclampsia. Paired and unpaired t tests were used; P < .05 was significant. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.
RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-seven preeclamptic women were identified and matched. In each group, mean (+/- standard deviation [SD]) gestational age was 34.9 +/- 4.2 weeks, and 166 (57.8%) infants were born preterm. Fetal growth restriction (FGR) was significantly more common among women with preeclampsia (14.9%) than among controls (5.6%; OR 2.98, 95% CI 1.64, 5.44). The percentage of sonographic estimates within 10% of actual birth weight (57.5% versus 53.6%) was similar in the two groups (OR 1.16; 95% CI 0.84,1.62). Compared with normal growth, the mean (+/- SD) standardized absolute error was significantly higher among those with FGR regardless of group (preeclampsia 109 +/- 100 versus 158 +/- 152 g/kg; P = .009; control 117 +/- 103 versus 233 +/- 206 g/kg; P < .001). Fetal growth restriction was detected more commonly among preeclamptic women than among controls (11.6% versus 0%; OR 4.74 95% CI 0.25, 90.31). The sensitivity and positive predictive value of FGR detection were 10% and 50%, respectively, among women with preeclampsia and 0% each among controls.
CONCLUSION: Although FGR was detected more frequently in fetuses of women with preeclampsia than in those of controls, the ability to predict it with sonography remained poor.
METHODS: Over 2 years, parturients with reliable gestational ages, preeclampsia, and sonographic estimates of birth weights were matched (1:1) for gestational age with women without preeclampsia. Paired and unpaired t tests were used; P < .05 was significant. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.
RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-seven preeclamptic women were identified and matched. In each group, mean (+/- standard deviation [SD]) gestational age was 34.9 +/- 4.2 weeks, and 166 (57.8%) infants were born preterm. Fetal growth restriction (FGR) was significantly more common among women with preeclampsia (14.9%) than among controls (5.6%; OR 2.98, 95% CI 1.64, 5.44). The percentage of sonographic estimates within 10% of actual birth weight (57.5% versus 53.6%) was similar in the two groups (OR 1.16; 95% CI 0.84,1.62). Compared with normal growth, the mean (+/- SD) standardized absolute error was significantly higher among those with FGR regardless of group (preeclampsia 109 +/- 100 versus 158 +/- 152 g/kg; P = .009; control 117 +/- 103 versus 233 +/- 206 g/kg; P < .001). Fetal growth restriction was detected more commonly among preeclamptic women than among controls (11.6% versus 0%; OR 4.74 95% CI 0.25, 90.31). The sensitivity and positive predictive value of FGR detection were 10% and 50%, respectively, among women with preeclampsia and 0% each among controls.
CONCLUSION: Although FGR was detected more frequently in fetuses of women with preeclampsia than in those of controls, the ability to predict it with sonography remained poor.