Fetal growth restriction, also known as intrauterine growth restriction, is a common complication of pregnancy that has been associated with a variety of adverse perinatal outcomes. There is a lack of consensus regarding terminology, etiology, and diagnostic criteria for fetal growth restriction, with uncertainty surrounding the optimal management and timing of delivery for the growth-restricted fetus. An additional challenge is the difficulty in differentiating between the fetus that is constitutionally small and fulfilling its growth potential and the small fetus that is not fulfilling its growth potential because of an underlying pathologic condition. The purpose of this document is to review the topic of fetal growth restriction with a focus on terminology, etiology, diagnostic and surveillance tools, and guidance for management and timing of delivery.

To determine, by expert consensus, a definition for early and late fetal growth restriction (FGR) through a Delphi procedure.A Delphi survey was conducted among an international panel of experts on FGR. Panel members were provided with 18 literature-based parameters for defining FGR and were asked to rate the importance of these parameters for the diagnosis of both early and late FGR on a 5-point Likert scale. Parameters were described as solitary parameters (parameters that are sufficient to diagnose FGR, even if all other parameters are normal) and contributory parameters (parameters that require other abnormal parameter(s) to be present for the diagnosis of FGR). Consensus was sought to determine the cut-off values for accepted parameters.A total of 106 experts were approached, of whom 56 agreed to participate and entered the first round, and 45 (80%) completed all four rounds. For early FGR (< 32 weeks), three solitary parameters (abdominal circumference (AC) < 3(rd) centile, estimated fetal weight (EFW) < 3(rd) centile and absent end-diastolic flow in the umbilical artery (UA)) and four contributory parameters (AC or EFW < 10(th) centile combined with a pulsatility index (PI) > 95(th) centile in either the UA or uterine artery) were agreed upon. For late FGR (≥ 32 weeks), two solitary parameters (AC or EFW < 3(rd) centile) and four contributory parameters (EFW or AC < 10(th) centile, AC or EFW crossing centiles by > two quartiles on growth charts and cerebroplacental ratio < 5(th) centile or UA-PI > 95(th) centile) were defined.Consensus-based definitions for early and late FGR, as well as cut-off values for parameters involved, were agreed upon by a panel of experts. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Ultrasound estimation of fetal weight is a highly influential factor in antenatal management, guiding both the timing and mode of delivery of a pregnancy. Although substantial research has investigated the most accurate ultrasound formula for calculating estimated fetal weight, current evidence indicates significant error levels. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the most accurate method, whilst identifying sources of inaccuracy in order to facilitate recommendations for future practice. Seven studies met the inclusion criteria and 11 different formulae were assessed; ultrasound calculation of fetal weight was most commonly overestimated. The Hadlock A formula produced the most accurate results, with the lowest levels of random error. Methods incorporating just two measurement parameters were inconsistent, producing large random errors across multiple studies. Key sources of inaccuracy included difficulties obtaining accurate fetal measurements in late gestation; the remainder were operator dependent, including lack of experience and insufficient training and audit. The accuracy of ultrasound estimated fetal weight has improved in the last decade, though a lack of consistency remains evident. National implementation of a rigorous audit programme would likely improve accuracy further, and increase the confidence and clinical value of the method.

The objective of this study was to compare the ultrasound‐measured inferior vena cava distensibility index (IVCdi), inferior vena cava distensibility variability (IVCdv), and inferior vena cava–to–aorta ratio (IVC/Ao) to other common methods to assess fluid status in mechanically ventilated pediatric critically ill patients. These methods include central venous pressure (CVP), percent fluid overload by weight (%FOw), and percent fluid overload by volume (%FOv).

In 2006, WHO produced international growth standards for infants and children up to age 5 years on the basis of recommendations from a WHO expert committee. Using the same methods and conceptual approach, the Fetal Growth Longitudinal Study (FGLS), part of the INTERGROWTH-21(st) Project, aimed to develop international growth and size standards for fetuses.The multicentre, population-based FGLS assessed fetal growth in geographically defined urban populations in eight countries, in which most of the health and nutritional needs of mothers were met and adequate antenatal care was provided. We used ultrasound to take fetal anthropometric measurements prospectively from 14 weeks and 0 days of gestation until birth in a cohort of women with adequate health and nutritional status who were at low risk of intrauterine growth restriction. All women had a reliable estimate of gestational age confirmed by ultrasound measurement of fetal crown-rump length in the first trimester. The five primary ultrasound measures of fetal growth--head circumference, biparietal diameter, occipitofrontal diameter, abdominal circumference, and femur length--were obtained every 5 weeks (within 1 week either side) from 14 weeks to 42 weeks of gestation. The best fitting curves for the five measures were selected using second-degree fractional polynomials and further modelled in a multilevel framework to account for the longitudinal design of the study.We screened 13,108 women commencing antenatal care at less than 14 weeks and 0 days of gestation, of whom 4607 (35%) were eligible. 4321 (94%) eligible women had pregnancies without major complications and delivered live singletons without congenital malformations (the analysis population). We documented very low maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity, confirming that the participants were at low risk of adverse outcomes. For each of the five fetal growth measures, the mean differences between the observed and smoothed centiles for the 3rd, 50th, and 97th centiles, respectively, were small: 2·25 mm (SD 3·0), 0·02 mm (3·0), and -2·69 mm (3·2) for head circumference; 0·83 mm (0·9), -0·05 mm (0·8), and -0·84 mm (1·0) for biparietal diameter; 0·63 mm (1·2), 0·04 mm (1·1), and -1·05 mm (1·3) for occipitofrontal diameter; 2·99 mm (3·1), 0·25 mm (3·2), and -4·22 mm (3·7) for abdominal circumference; and 0·62 mm (0·8), 0·03 mm (0·8), and -0·65 mm (0·8) for femur length. We calculated the 3rd, 5th 10th, 50th, 90th, 95th and 97th centile curves according to gestational age for these ultrasound measures, representing the international standards for fetal growth.We recommend these international fetal growth standards for the clinical interpretation of routinely taken ultrasound measurements and for comparisons across populations.Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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-21 Fetal Growth Standards that are available for use worldwide.Women with an accurate gestational-age assessment, who were enrolled in the prospective, international, multicenter, population-based Fetal Growth Longitudinal Study (FGLS) and INTERBIO-21 Fetal Study (FS), two components of the INTERGROWTH-21 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.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)  - 95.80076 × (AC/100)  × 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-21 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-21 Preterm Postnatal Growth Standards confirmed that preterm postnatal growth is a different biological process from intrauterine growth.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.© 2016 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Severe early‐onset fetal growth restriction is an obstetric condition with significant risks of perinatal mortality, major and minor neonatal morbidity, and long‐term health sequelae. The prognosis of a fetus is influenced by the extent of prematurity and fetal weight. Clinical care is individually adjusted. In literature, survival rates vary and studies often only include live‐born neonates with missing rates of antenatal death. This systematic review aims to summarize the literature on mortality and morbidity.