Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Title abbreviation: Adv Clin Exp Med
5-Year IF – 2.0, IF – 1.9, JCI (2024) – 0.43
Scopus CiteScore – 4.3
Q1 in SJR 2024, SJR score – 0.598, H-index: 49 (SJR)
ICV – 161.00; MNiSW – 70 pts
Initial editorial assessment and first decision within 24 h

ISSN 1899–5276 (print), ISSN 2451-2680 (online)
Periodicity – monthly

Download original text (EN)

Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

2014, vol. 23, nr 5, September-October, p. 805–811

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Assessment of Foetal Age on the Basis of the Selected Dimensions of the Thorax

Jowita Woźniak1,A,B,C,D,E,F, Alicja Kędzia2,A,B,D,E,F, Krzysztof Dudek3,A,B,C,D,F

1 Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital in Wroclaw, Poland

2 Department of Normal Anatomy, Wroclaw Medical University, Poland

3 Institute of Machines Design and Operation, Technical University of Wroclaw, Poland

Abstract

Abstract
Background. The correct definition of foetal age is a substantial problem in forensic medicine, gynaecology, obstet- rics and anthropology.
Objectives. The goal of the study was the mathematical assessment of the foetal age with the use of thorax selected dimensions.
Material and Methods. The material consisted of 110 foetuses aged 4–7 months of foetal life, including 50 females in the CRL range: 80–233 mm. The following methods were incorporated: preparation, anthropological, image digital acquisition, Image J computer system measurements and statistical analysis. For each foetus the following sizes were taken: crump-rump length – CRL (v-tub), total body length – v-pl as well as brachial circumference – BC, thoracic circumference – TC and clavicular length – CLA.
Results. Six monofunctional mathematical models were elaborated: Bertalanffy growth curve, three Gompertz function based models and two exponential models to assess examined parameters increase along with t age. Model no. 3 for Gompertz function revealed the biggest consistency with v-pl measurements for every determination ratio R2  = 0.9944 for exponential model R2 = 0.9917. Multiple regression analysis was used to elaborate mathematical formula to assess the foetal age (determination factor R2 = 0.9997) with BC, TC parameters.
Conclusions. Examined parameters BC and TC were found useful in foetal age assessment in the evaluated age
range. Elaborated mathematical model can be applied in clinical practice e.g. in foetal age ultrasound determina-
tion (Adv Clin Exp Med 2014, 23, 5, 805–811).
Key words: human foetus, thorax, growth curve, gestational age.
 

References (30)

  1. Hajnowska-Cieślik K, Marecki B: A problem of fetal age estimation. Anthropol Rev 1980, 46, 181–188.
  2. Cieślik K: An attempt at construction of standards for morphological development of fetuses. Anthropol Rev 1983, 49, 41–55.
  3. Sawicki K: Prenatal “individualizes growth curve standards” and errors in fetal conception age assessment. Anthropological Review 1995, 58, 43–46.
  4. Woźniak J, Kędzia A, Dudek K: Fetal foot length-width-a new parameter in foetal age analysis. APM 2009, 15, 216–222.
  5. Woźniak J, Kędzia A, Dudek K: Mathematical assessment of foetal facial skeleton development. APM 2010, 16, 211–217.
  6. Woźniak J, Kędzia A, Dudek K: Anatomical variability of median nerve formation in human foetuses in clinical aspects. Adv Clin Exp Med 2012, 21, 735–742.
  7. Gray DJ, Gardner E: The prenatal development of the human humerus. Am J Anat 1969, 124, 431–445.
  8. Bareggi R, Grill V, Zweyer M, Sandrucci MA, Martelli AM, Narducci P, Forabosco A: On the assessment of the growth patterns in human fetal limbs: longitudinal measurements and allometric analysis. Early Hum Dev 1996, 45, 11–25.
  9. Fong K, Ohlsson A, Zalev A: Fetal thoracic circumference: a prospective cross-sectional study with real-time ultrasound. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1988, 158, 1154–1160.
  10. Achiron R, Gindes L, Zalel Y, Lipitz S, Weisz B: Threeand four-dimensional ultrasound: new methods for evaluating fetal thoracic anomalies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008, 32, 36–43.
  11. Britto IS, Tedesco GD, Herbst SR, Bussamra LC, de Andrade FM, Araujo E Jr: New anatomical landmarks to study the relationship between fetal lung area and thoracic circumference by three-dimensional ultrasonography. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2012, 25, 1927–1932.
  12. Balouet P, Hamel P, Domessent D, Allouche C, Speckel D, Barjot P, Herlicoviez M: The estimation of fetal weight by measurement of the adipose tissue of the extremities. Use in the diagnosis of hypotrophy. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 1994, 23, 64–68.
  13. Carlson MB: Human embryology and developmental biology. Mosby, St Luis 1999, 450.
  14. Tanner JM: A history of the study of human growth. Cambridge University Press 1981, 263.
  15. Degani S: Fetal biometry: clinical, pathological, and technical considerations. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2001, 3, 159–167.
  16. Hadlock FP, Deter RL, Harrist RB, Park SK: Fetal abdominal circumference as a predictor of menstrual age. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1982, 139, 367–370.
  17. Hadlock FP, Deter RL, Harrist RB, Park SK: Fetal head circumference: relation to menstrual age. AJR 1982, 138, 649–653.
  18. Matsushita K, Shinoda K, Akiyoshi T, Watanabe H: Multivariate analysis of limb long bone growth during the human prenatal period. Tohoku J Exp Med 1995, 176, 109–120.
  19. Jeanty P, Kirkpatrick C, Dramaix-Wilmet M, Struyven J: Ultrasonic evaluation of fetal limb growth. Radiology 1981, 140, 165–168.
  20. O’Brien G, Queenan JT: Growth of the ultrasound fetal femur during normal preganancy. Part I. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1981, 141, 833–837.
  21. Chitkara U, Rosenberg J, Chervenak FA, Berkowitz GS, Levine R, Fagerstrom RM, Walker B, Berkowitz RL: Prenatal sonographic assessment of the thorax: normal values. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987, 156, 1069–1074.
  22. Hadlock FP, Deter RL, Harrist RB, Park SK: Computer assisted analysis of fetal age in the third trimester using multiple fetal growth parameters. J Clin Ultrasound 1983, 11, 313–316.
  23. Chervenak FA, Skupski DW, Romero R: How accurate is fetal biometry in the assessment of fetal age? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998, 178, 678–687.
  24. Merz E, Grüssner A, Kern F: Mathematical modeling of fetal limb growth. J Clin Ultrasound 1989, 17, 179–185.
  25. Scheuer JL, Musgrave JH, Evans SP: The estimation of late fetal and perinatal age from bone lenght by linear and logarithmic regression. Ann Hum Biol 1980, 7, 257–265.
  26. Platz E, Newman R: Diagnosis of IUGR: Traditional Biometry. Seminars in Perinatology 2008, 32, 140–147.
  27. Bożiłow W, Sawicki K: Metody badań zmienności anatomicznych człowieka podczas rozwoju prenatalnego, Akademia Medyczna, Wrocław 1980, 166–167.
  28. Sztencel I, Żelawski W: The most commonly used mathematical models in the analysis of the growth of living organisms. Botanical News 1984, 28, 211–226.
  29. Seber GAF, Wild CJ: Nonlinear regression. Wiley, New York 1989, 325–365.
  30. Scammon RE, Calkins LA: The development and growth of the external dimensions of the human body in the fetal period. The University of Minesota Press, Minneapolis 1929, 367.
© Wroclaw Medical University