Fetal Macrosomia; Risk Factors and Validity of its Diagnostic Tools | ||||
| Minia Journal of Medical Research | ||||
| Volume 31, Issue 3, July 2020, Page 407-412 PDF (375.99 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/mjmr.2022.220331 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| Ahmed R. El-Adawy; Hany H. Kamel; Hashim F. Mohammed; Hamada M. Fouly | ||||
| Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, El-Minia Faculty f Medicine | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Introductions: The term macrosomia is used to describe a newborn with an excessive birth weight. A diagnosis of fetal macrosomia can be made only by measuring birth weight after delivery; therefore, the condition is confirmed only retrospectively, ie, after delivery of the neonate. Fetal macrosomia has been defined in several different ways, including birth weight greater than 4000-4500 g or greater than 90% for gestational age. Aim of Study: Assessment of prevalence of fetal macrosomia and accuracy of its diagnostic tools in Minia Maternity University Hospital. Patients and Methods: Design of work: In our Cross sectional observational study 208 recruited women who were admitted to our hospital for CS indicated by prenatal diagnosis of fetal macrosomia .Complete evaluation of all our cases was done and fetal weight was assessed clinically and by ultrasou .Results: Prevalance of fetal macrosomia was high in Minia maternity hospital and Ultrasound evaluation of fetal weight showed better performance than the clinical method regarding absolute errors and error percentages. Ultrasound assessment had higher sensitivity and specificity in detecting fetal weight. Conclusion: The prevalence of fetal macrosomia at MMH was 5.5% Sonographic evaluation of fetal weight displayed superiority than the clinical approach as regards absolute errors and error percentages. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| macrosomia; Risk Factors; neonate | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 121 PDF Download: 568 |
||||
