Comparison of adverse perinatal outcomes in late-onset fetal growth restriction with Delphi procedure consensus criteria

The problem of the management of fetal growth restriction (FGR) is in lack of gold standard. Several experts established a consensus definition of FGR through Delphi procedure, while few studies focus on the perinatal outcomes among sub-types of late-onset FGR diagnosed by Delphi procedure consensus criteria. To compare the adverse perinatal outcomes in different subgroups of late-onset FGR according to the Delphi procedure consensus criteria. A retrospective study was conducted between 2013 and 2020 including late-onset FGR diagnosed by Delphi consensus: Group 1, estimated fetal weight (EFW) or abdominal circumference (AC)<3rd centile; Group 2, EFW or AC<10th centile and umbilical artery pulsatility index (UA-PI) > 95th centile; Group 3, EFW or AC<10th centile and EFW or AC crossing centiles > 2 quartiles on growth centiles; Group 4, EFW or AC crossing centiles > 2 quartiles on growth centiles and UA-PI > 95th centile. Adverse perinatal outcomes (APOs) of 1071 late-onset FGR, including cesarean or instrumental delivery for non-reassuring fetal status, acidosis, neonatal hyperbilirubinemia, respiratory problems, and any adverse perinatal outcome, were compared with appropriate gestational age (AGA) group (Group 5, n = 515) as adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). 1071 subjects with late-onset FGR were included, 371(34.6%), 67(6.3%), 516(48.2%), and 117(10.9%) were classified into four groups respectively according to Delphi standard. All mortalities occurred in fetuses with an EFW < 3rd percentile. Compared with Group 5, Group 1 showed the highest risk concerning any APOs (aOR = 4.91, 95% CI: 3.53–6.84), acidosis (aOR = 5.81, 95% CI: 2.96–11.37), neonatal hyperbilirubinemia (aOR = 4.71, 95% CI: 3.30–6.71) and respiratory problems (aOR = 3.65, 95% CI: 2.31–5.77) in the multivariable-adjusted model. As the risk of APOs in Group 2 (aOR = 2.60, 95% CI: 1.44–4.73) and Group 3 (aOR = 1.55, 95% CI = 1.11–2.16) followed, we did not find an increasing APOs risk in Group 4 (aOR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.49–1.58). According to the Delphi consensus, the morbidity was inconsistent among different types of late-onset FGR. EFW or AC < 3rd percentile presented the highest risk of APOs. Compared with AGAs, Group 4 was not associated with an increasing risk of APOs. Further study is needed to develop protocols for the risk-stratification management of late-onset FGR.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Published
2026-03-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-026-08991-9
Primary Topic
Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of adverse perinatal outcomes in late-onset fetal growth restriction with Delphi procedure consensus criteria

Xirong Xiao, Min Yuan, YANG ZHANG, Jianqiao Luo
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies
article

Comparison of adverse perinatal outcomes in late-onset fetal growth restriction with Delphi procedure consensus criteria

Xirong Xiao, Min Yuan, YANG ZHANG, Jianqiao Luo
article en

Abstract

The problem of the management of fetal growth restriction (FGR) is in lack of gold standard. Several experts established a consensus definition of FGR through Delphi procedure, while few studies focus on the perinatal outcomes among sub-types of late-onset FGR diagnosed by Delphi procedure consensus criteria. To compare the adverse perinatal outcomes in different subgroups of late-onset FGR according to the Delphi procedure consensus criteria. A retrospective study was conducted between 2013 and 2020 including late-onset FGR diagnosed by Delphi consensus: Group 1, estimated fetal weight (EFW) or abdominal circumference (AC)<3rd centile; Group 2, EFW or AC<10th centile and umbilical artery pulsatility index (UA-PI) > 95th centile; Group 3, EFW or AC<10th centile and EFW or AC crossing centiles > 2 quartiles on growth centiles; Group 4, EFW or AC crossing centiles > 2 quartiles on growth centiles and UA-PI > 95th centile. Adverse perinatal outcomes (APOs) of 1071 late-onset FGR, including cesarean or instrumental delivery for non-reassuring fetal status, acidosis, neonatal hyperbilirubinemia, respiratory problems, and any adverse perinatal outcome, were compared with appropriate gestational age (AGA) group (Group 5, n = 515) as adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). 1071 subjects with late-onset FGR were included, 371(34.6%), 67(6.3%), 516(48.2%), and 117(10.9%) were classified into four groups respectively according to Delphi standard. All mortalities occurred in fetuses with an EFW < 3rd percentile. Compared with Group 5, Group 1 showed the highest risk concerning any APOs (aOR = 4.91, 95% CI: 3.53–6.84), acidosis (aOR = 5.81, 95% CI: 2.96–11.37), neonatal hyperbilirubinemia (aOR = 4.71, 95% CI: 3.30–6.71) and respiratory problems (aOR = 3.65, 95% CI: 2.31–5.77) in the multivariable-adjusted model. As the risk of APOs in Group 2 (aOR = 2.60, 95% CI: 1.44–4.73) and Group 3 (aOR = 1.55, 95% CI = 1.11–2.16) followed, we did not find an increasing APOs risk in Group 4 (aOR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.49–1.58). According to the Delphi consensus, the morbidity was inconsistent among different types of late-onset FGR. EFW or AC < 3rd percentile presented the highest risk of APOs. Compared with AGAs, Group 4 was not associated with an increasing risk of APOs. Further study is needed to develop protocols for the risk-stratification management of late-onset FGR.

BMC Pregnancy and ChildbirthVol. 26(1)
Shaoxing City Women and Children Hospital (CN), Suzhou Municipal Hospital (CN), Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University (CN)
National Natural Science Foundation of China, Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 38%
Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.