Prediction of large-for-gestational age at 36 weeks' gestation: two-dimensional ultrasound vs three-dimensional ultrasound vs magnetic resonance imaging

Objective To compare the performance of two-dimensional ultrasound (2D-US), three-dimensional ultrasound (3D-US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 36 weeks' gestation in predicting the delivery of a large-for-gestational-age (LGA) neonate, defined as birth weight >= 95th percentile, in patients at high and low risk for macrosomia. Methods This was a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study conducted between January 2017 and February 2019. Women with a singleton pregnancy at 36 weeks' gestation underwent 2D-US, 3D-US and MRI within 15 min for estimation of fetal weight. Weight estimations and birth weight were plotted on a growth curve to obtain percentiles for comparison. Participants were considered high risk if they had at least one of the following risk factors: diabetes mellitus, estimated fetal weight >= 90th percentile at the routine third-trimester ultrasound examination, obesity (prepregnancy body mass index >= 30 kg/m(2)) or excessive weight gain during pregnancy. The outcome was the diagnostic performance of each modality in the prediction of birth weight >= 95th percentile, expressed as the area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values. Results A total of 965 women were included, of whom 533 (55.23%) were high risk and 432 (44.77%) were low risk. In the low-risk group, the AUCs for birth weight >= 95th percentile were 0.982 for MRI, 0.964 for 2D-US and 0.962 for 3D-US; pairwise comparisons were non-significant. In the high-risk group, the AUCs were 0.959 for MRI, 0.909 for 2D-US and 0.894 for 3D-US. A statistically significant difference was noted between MRI and both 2D-US (P = 0.002) and 3D-US (P = 0.002), but not between 2D-US and 3D-US (P = 0.503). In the high-risk group, MRI had the highest sensitivity (65.79%) compared with 2D-US (36.84%, P = 0.002) and 3D-US (21.05%, P < 0.001), whereas 3D-US had the highest specificity (98.99%) compared with 2D-US (96.77%, P = 0.005) and MRI (96.97%, P = 0.004). Conclusions At 36 weeks' gestation, MRI has better performance compared with 2D-US and 3D-US in predicting birth weight >= 95th percentile in patients at high risk for macrosomia, whereas the performance of 2D-US and 3D-US is comparable. For low-risk patients, the three modalities perform similarly. (c) 2023 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.