Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Benson, C. B.
Right arrow Articles by Saltzman, D. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Benson, C. B.
Right arrow Articles by Saltzman, D. H.

Radiology, Vol 160, 415-417, Copyright © 1986 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Intrauterine growth retardation: predictive value of US criteria for antenatal diagnosis

CB Benson, PM Doubilet and DH Saltzman

We critically analyzed published data on proposed sonographic criteria for intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR) to determine the positive and negative predictive values of the criteria. The data were drawn from 21 studies and encompassed nine distinct criteria for which the sensitivity and specificity could be determined. Predictive values were computed using Bayes theorem, based on an IUGR prevalence rate of 10%. Seven of the nine criteria had positive predictive values of less than 50%, indicating that a fetus with an abnormal test result according to any of these criteria is more likely to be normal than growth retarded. The best criterion involves the ratio of head circumference to abdominal circumference, but even with this criterion, fully 38% of fetuses with abnormal test result will not be growth retarded. We conclude that none of the proposed criteria allows a confident antenatal diagnosis of IUGR to be made. Future prospective studies may reveal new criteria, or combinations of existing ones, that are highly predictive for this condition.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Obstet GynecolHome page
A. R. Jacobs, K. Demissie, N. J. Jain, and W. L. Kinzler
Birth Weight Discordance and Adverse Fetal and Neonatal Outcomes Among Triplets in the United States
Obstet. Gynecol., May 1, 2003; 101(5): 909 - 914.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Ultrasound MedHome page
R. Smith-Bindman, P. W. Chu, J. Ecker, V. A. Feldstein, R. A. Filly, and P. Bacchetti
Adverse Birth Outcomes in Relation to Prenatal Sonographic Measurements of Fetal Size
J. Ultrasound Med., April 1, 2003; 22(4): 347 - 356.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1986 by the Radiological Society of North America.