الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 106 |  |  |
| | | from | 106 | | |
Abstract
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 (8 lb 13 oz to 9 lb 15 oz) or greater than 90% for gestational age. According to National Vital Statistics Report for U.S. Births in 2015, approximately 7% of infants had birth weight >4,000g, 1% had birth weight greater than 4,500g, and 0.1% had birth weight greater than 5,000g.
Our study aimed to assessment of prevalence of fetal macrosomia and accuracy of its diagnostic tools in Minia Maternity University Hospital.
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 ultrasound .
Our results were obtained from statistical analysis of our data using SPSS.
The studied women had an age of 31.63±4.97 years (19-42)
, Parity of 3.45±1.75deliveries(1-8) and there was a strong association between fetal macrosomia and maternal age greater than 30 years 135(81.3%) and high parity134(80.7%) , Advanced maternal age and high parity should be considered as important risk factors for macrosomia.
A gestational age of studied women were 40.05±1.63weeks , Most of them were postdate 134(80.7%)
The studied women BMI (kg/m2) 31.98±5.28, Most of them were overweight 135(81.3%)
By routine screening of DM most of studied women were diadetic 114(68.7%) cases of macrosomic baby were of diabetic mother.
Previous history of macrosomia likely contributes to macrosomia 120(72.3%). The high male to female ratio in the macrosomic group was reported131(78.9%) but polyhydraminos not frequently associated with fetal macrosomia (46.4%) .
In our study, both clinical and ultrasound fetal weight estimates and the actual birth weight revealed that both estimates are significantly higher the actual birth weight. In addition, it was shown that clinical estimate is significantly higher than ultrasound estimate
The discrepancy between different studies may be due to different body mass indexes of the studied women , polyhydraminos and not awareness of pre pregnancy weight
As regard absolute error and mean error percentages, it was found that comparing clinical and ultrasound methods showed significantly higher mean absolute error and mean error percentages in the clinical method297.60±185.44 and7.42±4.98 respectively
As regard accuracy of our diagnostic tools ( clinical and US methods ) we found lower AUC , sensitivity and specificity in clinical methods 0.622, 74.4%,39.1% respectively and 0.781, 86.7%,67.1% in our US method respectively
Absolute error and error percentages in all methods were higher in overweight women, postdate and diabetic mothers.
Finally we recommend pre gestational control of obesity and diabetes mellitus and to depend on US more than clinical methods in estiamation of fetal weight.