Risk of adverse perinatal outcomes in pregnancies with “small” fetuses not meeting Delphi consensus criteria for fetal growth restriction

• Published in: American journal of obstetrics and gynecology Vol. 229; no. 4; pp. 447.e1 - 447.e13
• Main Authors: Powel, Jennifer E., Chavan, Niraj R., Zantow, Emily W., Bialko, Matthew F., Farley, Lauren G., McCormick, Kellen M., Tomlinson, Tracy M.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01-10-2023
• Subjects: constitutionally small; Doppler ultrasound; estimated fetal weight; guideline validation; intrauterine growth restriction; perinatal morbidity and mortality; placental insufficiency; predictive accuracy; small for gestational age; small for gestational age; placental insufficiency; intrauterine growth restriction; predictive accuracy; constitutionally small; estimated fetal weight; guideline validation; Doppler ultrasound; perinatal morbidity and mortality
• ISSN: 0002-9378; 1097-6868; 1097-6868
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2023.04.037

Previous research endeavors examining the association between clinical characteristics, sonographic indices, and the risk of adverse perinatal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction have been hampered by a lack of agreement regarding its definition. In 2016, a consensus definition was reached by an international panel of experts via the Delphi procedure, but as it currently stands, this has not been endorsed by all professional organizations.
This study aimed to assess whether an independent association exists between estimated fetal weight and/or abdominal circumference of <10th percentile and adverse perinatal outcomes when consensus criteria for growth restriction are not met.
Data were derived from a passive prospective cohort of singleton nonanomalous pregnancies at a single academic tertiary care institution (2010–2022) that fell into 3 groups: (1) consecutive fetuses that met the Delphi criteria for fetal growth restriction, (2) small-for-gestational-age fetuses that failed to meet the consensus criteria, and (3) fetuses with birthweights of 20th to 80th percentile randomly selected as an appropriately grown (appropriate-for-gestational-age) comparator group. This nested case-control study used 1:1 propensity score matching to adjust for confounders among the 3 groups: fetal growth restriction cases, small-for-gestational-age cases, and controls. Our primary outcome was a composite: perinatal demise, 5-minute Apgar score of <7, cord pH of ≤7.10, or base excess of ≥12. Pregnancy characteristics with a P value of <.2 on univariate analyses were considered for incorporation into a multivariable model along with fetal growth restriction and small-for-gestational-age to evaluate which outcomes were independently predictive of adverse perinatal outcomes.
Overall, 2866 pregnancies met the inclusion criteria. After propensity score matching, there were 2186 matched pairs, including 511 (23%), 1093 (50%), and 582 (27%) patients in the small-for-gestational-age, appropriate-for-gestational-age, and fetal growth restriction groups, respectively. Moreover, 210 pregnancies (10%) were complicated by adverse perinatal outcomes. None of the pregnancies with small-for-gestational-age OR appropriate-for-gestational-age fetuses resulted in perinatal demise. Twenty-three of 511 patients (5%) in the small-for-gestational-age group had adverse outcomes based on 5-minute Apgar scores and/or cord gas results compared with 77 of 1093 patients (7%) in the appropriate-for-gestational-age group (odds ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.39–1.00). Furthermore, 110 of 582 patients (19%) with fetal growth restriction that met the consensus criteria had adverse outcomes (odds ratio, 3.08; 95% confidence interval, 2.25–4.20), including 34 patients with perinatal demise or death before discharge. Factors independently associated with increased odds of adverse outcomes included chronic hypertension, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and early-onset fetal growth restriction. Small-for-gestational age was not associated with the primary outcome after adjustment for 6 other factors included in a model predicting adverse perinatal outcomes. The bias-corrected bootstrapped area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the model was 0.72 (95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.74). The bias-corrected bootstrapped area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for a 7-factor model predicting adverse perinatal outcomes was 0.72 (95% confidence interval, 0.66–0.74).
This study found no evidence that fetuses with an estimated fetal weight and/or abdominal circumference of 3rd to 9th percentile that fail to meet the consensus criteria for fetal growth restriction (based on Doppler waveforms and/or growth velocity of ≥32 weeks) are at increased risk of adverse outcomes. Although the growth of these fetuses should be monitored closely to rule out evolving growth restriction, most cases are healthy constitutionally small fetuses. The management of these fetuses in the same manner as those with suspected pathologic growth restriction may result in unnecessary antenatal testing and increase the risk of iatrogenic complications resulting from preterm or early term delivery of small fetuses that are at relatively low risk of adverse perinatal outcomes.