The evaluation of gestational age concerning placental thickness and fetal parameters using ultrasonography
Main Article Content
Abstract
The ultrasound parameters are very important factors for the estimation of gestational age (GS) decreases as pregnancy advances in age. Therefore, it is essential to reconnoiter other parameters that may complement the established fetal biometric parameters in predicting GS, especially in late pregnancy. The main objective of this study is to determine the relationship between GS and sonographic placental thickness (PL) as well as fetal parameters for the second (21-30 weeks) and third trimesters (31-40 weeks) using regression analysis. The mean scores for PL, GS, and weight of fetal were found 2.56±0.38 cm, 165.15±15.60 days and 654.31±266.68 gm respectively for 21-30 weeks. Similarly mean scores were found to correspond to fetal parameters for 31-40 weeks. The relationship between GA (Y) in days and PT & BPD in cm. In the 21-30 weeks, and GS 21-30 weeks = 146.36+7.70PL 21-30 weeks = 74.03+15.8BPD 21-30weeks. The relationship between GS and fetal parameters (BPD, AC, FL, etc.) are obtained as follows: GS 21-30 weeks=124.96+1.49BPD-0.34HC+0.54AC-0.61FL-1.2PL+0.05Weight. Gestational age has been estimated using two regression lines, first using three variables and second using all fetal parameters. It has been observed that Gestational age can be estimated accurately using all fetal parameters for both periods (21-30 & 31-40 weeks).
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
References
1. Agwuna KK, Eze CU, Ukoha PO, Umeh UA. Relationship between sonographic placental thickness and gestational age in normal singleton fetuses in Enugu, Southeast Nigeria. Ann Med Health Sci Res 6 (3) 35-40 (2016). (https://doi.org/10.4103/amhsr.amhsr_457_15).
2. Anupama Jain, Ganesh Kumar, Agarwal U, Kharakwal S. Placental thickness- a sonographic indicator of the gestational age. Jou of Obst and Gyne of India 51 (3) 48-49 (2001). https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Jou%20of%20Obst%20and%20Gyne%20of%20India&title=Placental%20thickness-%20a%20sonographic%20indicator%20of%20the%20gestational%20age&author=Jain%20Anupama&author=Kumar%20Ganesh&author=U%20Agarwal&author=S%20Kharakwal&volume=51&issue=3&publication_year=2001&pages=48-49&
3. Batista, A. M., & Prataviera, F. Regression models applied to rhizosphere data: A bibliometric review. Brazilian Journal of Biometrics, 42(3), 245–259 (2004). https://doi.org/10.28951/bjb.v42i3.692
4. Hoddick WK, Mahony BS, Callen PW, Filly RA. Placental thickness. J Ultrasound Med 4, 479 82 (1985) (DOI: 10.7863/jum.1985.4.9.479)
5. Hanretty KP. Obstetrics Illustrated. 6th ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 9 12 (2003). http://lib.iu.edu.kh:9090/newgenlibctxt/View?From=Library&CatId=8911&OwnLibId=1&LibraryId=1
6. Karki DB, Sharmqa UK, Rauniyar RK. Study of the accuracy of commonly used fetal parameters for estimation of gestational age. JNMA J Nepal Med Assoc 45 233 7. PMID: 17189967, (2006). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17189967
7. Karthikeyan, T., Subramaniam, R. K., WMS Johnson, WMS., and Prabhu K , Placental Thickness & its Correlation to Gestational Age & Foetal Growth Parameters- A Cross-Sectional Ultrasonographic Study, Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, 6(10) 1732-1735 (2012). (DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2012/4867.2652).
8. Mital P, Hooja N, Mehndiratta K. Placental thickness: A sonographic parameter for estimating gestational age of the fetus. Indian J Radiol Imaging 12, 553 4 (2002). (DOI:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20164347).
9. Ohagwu CC, Abu PO, Ezeokeke UO, Ugwa AC. Relationship between placental thickness and growth parameters in normal Nigerian fetuses. African Journal of Biotechnology 8(2), 133-38 (2009a). ( Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/AJB).
10. Ohagwu CC, Oshiotse Abu P, Effiong Udoh B. Placental thickness: A sonographic indicator of gestational age in normal singleton pregnancies in Nigerian women. Internet Journal of Medical Update. 4(2), 9-14 (2009b). (http://www.akspublication.com/ijmu).
11. Ohagwu CC, Abu PO, Ezeokeke UO, and Ugwu AC. Relationship between placental thickness and growth parameters in normal Nigerian fetuses. World Applied Sciences Journal 4(6), 864 868 (2008).
12. Rudy ES. Diagnostic Ultrasound Applied to Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley Publishers, 91 111 (2000).
13. Robinson HP. Sonar measurements of fetal crown-rump length as a means of assessing maturity in the first trimester of pregnancy. Br Med J, 4, 28 31(1973). (doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.4.5883.28)
14. Weerakkody Y., Placental thickness. Obstet Gynaecol Radiopaedia 16, 67 70 (2001).