Personalized stratification of pregnancy care for small for gestational age neonates from biophysical markers at midgestation.

BACKGROUND: Antenatal identification of pregnancies at high risk of delivering small for gestational age neonates may improve the management of the condition and reduce the associated adverse perinatal outcomes. In a series of publications, we have developed a new competing-risks model for small for gestational age prediction, and we demonstrated that the new approach has a superior performance to that of the traditional methods. The next step in shaping the appropriate management of small for gestational age is the timely assessment of these high-risk pregnancies according to an antenatal stratification plan. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to demonstrate the stratification of pregnancy care based on individual patient risk derived from the application of the competing-risks model for small for gestational age that combines maternal factors with sonographic estimated fetal weight and uterine artery pulsatility index at midgestation. STUDY DESIGN: This was a prospective observational study of 96,678 singleton pregnancies undergoing routine ultrasound examination at 19 to 24 weeks of gestation, which included recording of estimated fetal weight and measurement of uterine artery pulsatility index. The competing-risks model for small for gestational age was used to create a patient-specific stratification curve capable to define a specific timing for a repeated ultrasound examination after 24 weeks. We examined different stratification plans with the intention of detecting approximately 80%, 85%, 90%, and 95% of small for gestational age neonates with birthweight <3rd and <10th percentiles at any gestational age at delivery until 36 weeks; all pregnancies would be offered a routine ultrasound examination at 36 weeks. RESULTS: The stratification of pregnancy care for small for gestational age can be based on a patient-specific stratification curve. Factors from maternal history, low estimated fetal weight, and increased uterine artery pulsatility index shift the personalized risk curve toward higher risks. The degree of shifting defines the timing for assessment for each pregnancy. If the objective of our antenatal plan was to detect 80%, 85%, 90%, and 95% of small for gestational age neonates at any gestational age at delivery until 36 weeks, the median (range) proportions (percentages) of population examined per week would be 3.15 (1.9-3.7), 3.85 (2.7-4.5), 4.75 (4.0-5.4), and 6.45 (3.7-8.0) for small for gestational age <3rd percentile and 3.8 (2.5-4.6), 4.6 (3.6-5.4), 5.7 (3.8-6.4), and 7.35 (3.3-9.8) for small for gestational age <10th percentile, respectively. CONCLUSION: The competing-risks model provides an effective personalized continuous stratification of pregnancy care for small for gestational age which is based on individual characteristics and biophysical marker levels recorded at the midgestation scan.