Small fetuses are defined as those with an ultrasound estimated weight below a threshold, most commonly the 10th centile. The first clinically relevant step is the distinction of ‘true' fetal growth restriction (FGR), associated with signs of abnormal fetoplacental function and poorer perinatal outcome, from constitutional small-for-gestational age, with a near-normal perinatal outcome. Nowadays such a distinction should not be based solely on umbilical artery Doppler, since this index detects only early-onset severe forms. FGR should be diagnosed in the presence of any of the factors associated with a poorer perinatal outcome, including Doppler cerebroplacental ratio, uterine artery Doppler, a growth centile below the 3rd centile, and, possibly in the near future, maternal angiogenic factors. Once the diagnosis is established, differentiating into early- and late-onset FGR is useful mainly for research purposes, because it distinguishes two clear phenotypes with differences in severity, association with preeclampsia, and the natural history of fetal deterioration. As a second clinically relevant step, management of FGR and the decision to deliver aims at an optimal balance between minimizing fetal injury or death versus the risks of iatrogenic preterm delivery. We propose a protocol that integrates current evidence to classify stages of fetal deterioration and establishes follow-up intervals and optimal delivery timings, which may facilitate decisions and reduce practice variability in this complex clinical condition.

Keywords:
Fetal growth restriction update, Stage-based management protocol, Constitutional small-for-gestational age, Early-severe versus late-mild fetal growth restriction
1.
Lindqvist PG, Molin J: Does antenatal identification of small-for-gestational age fetuses significantly improve their outcome? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005;25:258-264.
2.
Gardosi J, et al: Maternal and fetal risk factors for stillbirth: population-based study. BMJ 2013;346:f108.
3.
Figueras F, et al: Predictiveness of antenatal umbilical artery Doppler for adverse pregnancy outcome in small-for-gestational-age babies according to customised birthweight centiles: population-based study. BJOG 2008;115:590-594.
4.
Skovron ML, et al: Evaluation of early third-trimester ultrasound screening for intrauterine growth retardation. J Ultrasound Med 1991;10:153-159.
5.
Richardus JH, et al: Differences in perinatal mortality and suboptimal care between 10 European regions: results of an international audit. BJOG 2003;110:97-105.
6.
Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Gyte GM: Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD007529.
7.
Soothill PW, Bobrow CS, Holmes R: Small for gestational age is not a diagnosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1999;13:225-228.
8.
Oros D, et al: Longitudinal changes in uterine, umbilical and fetal cerebral Doppler indices in late-onset small-for-gestational age fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011;37:191-195.
9.
Doctor BA, et al: Perinatal correlates and neonatal outcomes of small for gestational age infants born at term gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;185:652-659.
10.
McCowan LM, Harding JE, Stewart AW: Umbilical artery Doppler studies in small for gestational age babies reflect disease severity. BJOG 2000;107:916-925.
11.
Severi FM, et al: Uterine and fetal cerebral Doppler predict the outcome of third-trimester small-for-gestational age fetuses with normal umbilical artery Doppler. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002;19:225-228.
12.
Bahado-Singh RO, et al: The Doppler cerebroplacental ratio and perinatal outcome in intrauterine growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;180:750-756.
13.
Gramellini D, et al: Cerebral-umbilical Doppler ratio as a predictor of adverse perinatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol 1992;79:416-420.
14.
Baschat AA, Gembruch U: The cerebroplacental Doppler ratio revisited. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003;21:124-127.
15.
Ghosh GS, Gudmundsson S: Uterine and umbilical artery Doppler are comparable in predicting perinatal outcome of growth-restricted fetuses. BJOG 2009;116:424-430.
16.
Vergani P, et al: Prognostic value of uterine artery Doppler velocimetry in growth-restricted fetuses delivered near term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;187:932-936.
17.
Savchev S, et al: Estimated weight centile as a predictor of perinatal outcome in small-for-gestational-age pregnancies with normal fetal and maternal Doppler indices. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012;39:299-303.
18.
Savchev S, et al: Late-onset fetal growth restriction vs. small-for-gestational age: diagnostic criteria and classification (in preparation).
19.
Lobmaier SM, et al: Angiogenic factors versus Doppler follow-up in the prediction of adverse outcome among late pregnancy small-for-gestational-age fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013, Epub ahead of print.
20.
Sanz-Cortes M, et al: Fetal brain MRI texture analysis identifies different microstructural patterns in adequate and small for gestational age fetuses at term. Fetal Diagn Ther 2013;33:122-129.
21.
Larroque B, et al: School difficulties in 20-year-olds who were born small for gestational age at term in a regional cohort study. Pediatrics 2001;108:111-115.
22.
Crispi F, et al: Fetal growth restriction results in remodeled and less efficient hearts in children. Circulation 2010;121:2427-2436.
23.
Verkauskiene R, et al: Birth weight and long-term metabolic outcomes: does the definition of smallness matter? Horm Res 2008;70:309-315.
24.
Lackman F, et al: Fetal umbilical cord oxygen values and birth to placental weight ratio in relation to size at birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;185:674-682.
25.
Crovetto F, et al: Performance of first-trimester integrated screening for early and late small for gestational age newborns. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013 (E-pub ahead of print).
26.
Turan OM, et al: Progression of Doppler abnormalities in intrauterine growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008;32:160-167.
27.
Hecher K, et al: Monitoring of fetuses with intrauterine growth restriction: a longitudinal study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001;18:564-570.
28.
Baschat AA, et al: Predictors of neonatal outcome in early-onset placental dysfunction. Obstet Gynecol 2007;109:253-261.
29.
Cruz-Martinez R, et al: Changes in myocardial performance index and aortic isthmus and ductus venosus Doppler in term, small-for-gestational age fetuses with normal umbilical artery pulsatility index. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011;38:400-405.
30.
Kady S, Gardosi J: Perinatal mortality and fetal growth restriction. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2004;18:397-410.
31.
Figueras F, et al: Small-for-gestational-age fetuses with normal umbilical artery Doppler have suboptimal perinatal and neurodevelopmental outcome. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2008;136:34-38.
32.
Van Vliet EO, et al: Placental pathology and long-term neurodevelopment of very preterm infants. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012;206:489.e1-7.
33.
Chan PY, et al: The long-term effects of prematurity and intrauterine growth restriction on cardiovascular, renal, and metabolic function. Int J Pediatr 2010;2010:280402.
34.
Spinillo A, et al: Placental histopathological correlates of umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry in pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction. Prenat Diagn 2012;32:1263-1272.
35.
Llurba E, et al: Emergence of late-onset placental dysfunction: relationship to the change in uterine artery blood flow resistance between the first and third trimesters. Am J Perinatol 2013;30:505-512.
36.
Savchev S, et al: Evaluation of an optimal gestational age cut-off for the definition of early- and late-onset fetal growth restriction. Fetal Diagn Ther 2013, Epub ahead of print.
37.
Ferrazzi E, et al: Temporal sequence of abnormal Doppler changes in the peripheral and central circulatory systems of the severely growth-restricted fetus. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002;19:140-146.
38.
Cosmi E, et al: Doppler, cardiotocography, and biophysical profile changes in growth-restricted fetuses. Obstet Gynecol 2005;106:1240-1245.
39.
Thornton JG, et al: Infant well-being at 2 years of age in the Growth Restriction Intervention Trial (GRIT): multicentred randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004;364:513-520.
40.
GRIT Study Group: A randomised trial of timed delivery for the compromised preterm fetus: short-term outcomes and bayesian interpretation. BJOG 2003;110:27-32.
41.
Cruz-Lemini M, et al: Risk of perinatal death in early-onset intrauterine growth restriction according to gestational age and cardiovascular Doppler indices: a multicenter study. Fetal Diagn Ther 2012;32:116-122.
42.
Eixarch E, et al: Neurodevelopmental outcome in 2-year-old infants who were small-for-gestational age term fetuses with cerebral blood flow redistribution. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008;32:894-899.
43.
Hershkovitz R, et al: Fetal cerebral blood flow redistribution in late gestation: identification of compromise in small fetuses with normal umbilical artery Doppler. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000;15:209-212.
44.
Cruz-Martinez R, et al: Fetal brain Doppler to predict cesarean delivery for non-reassuring fetal status in term small-for-gestational-age fetuses. Obstet Gynecol 2011;117:618-626.
45.
Boers KE, et al: Neonatal morbidity after induction vs. expectant monitoring in intrauterine growth restriction at term: a subanalysis of the DIGITAT RCT. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012;206:344.e1-7.
46.
Boers KE, et al: Induction versus expectant monitoring for intrauterine growth restriction at term: randomised equivalence trial (DIGITAT). BMJ 2010;341:c7087.
47.
Oros D, et al: Middle versus anterior cerebral artery Doppler for the prediction of perinatal outcome and neonatal neurobehavior in term small-for-gestational-age fetuses with normal umbilical artery Doppler. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010;35:456-461.
48.
Arbeille P, et al: Assessment of the fetal PO2 changes by cerebral and umbilical Doppler on lamb fetuses during acute hypoxia. Ultrasound Med Biol 1995;21:861-870.
49.
Cruz-Martinez R, et al: Longitudinal brain perfusion changes in near-term small-for-gestational-age fetuses as measured by spectral Doppler indices or by fractional moving blood volume. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203:42.e1-6.
50.
Roza SJ, et al: What is spared by fetal brain-sparing? Fetal circulatory redistribution and behavioral problems in the general population. Am J Epidemiol 2008;168:1145-1152.
51.
Figueroa-Diesel H, et al: Doppler changes in the main fetal brain arteries at different stages of hemodynamic adaptation in severe intrauterine growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007;30:297-302.
52.
Dubiel M, Gunnarsson GO, Gudmundsson S: Blood redistribution in the fetal brain during chronic hypoxia. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002;20:117-121.
53.
Baschat AA, Gembruch U, Harman CR: The sequence of changes in Doppler and biophysical parameters as severe fetal growth restriction worsens. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001;18:571-577.
54.
Hecher K, et al: Fetal venous, intracardiac, and arterial blood flow measurements in intrauterine growth retardation: relationship with fetal blood gases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;173:10-15.
55.
Schwarze A, et al: Qualitative venous Doppler flow waveform analysis in preterm intrauterine growth-restricted fetuses with ARED flow in the umbilical artery - correlation with short-term outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005;25:573-579.
56.
Baschat AA, et al: Qualitative venous Doppler waveform analysis improves prediction of critical perinatal outcomes in premature growth-restricted fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003;22:240-245.
57.
Bilardo CM, et al: Relationship between monitoring parameters and perinatal outcome in severe, early intrauterine growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004;23:119-125.
58.
Morris RK, et al: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the test accuracy of ductus venosus Doppler to predict compromise of fetal/neonatal wellbeing in high-risk pregnancies with placental insufficiency. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2010;152:3-12.
59.
Fouron JC, et al: The relationship between an aortic isthmus blood flow velocity index and the postnatal neurodevelopmental status of fetuses with placental circulatory insufficiency. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;192:497-503.
60.
Fouron JC, et al: Relationship between flow through the fetal aortic isthmus and cerebral oxygenation during acute placental circulatory insufficiency in ovine fetuses. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;181:1102-1107.
61.
Makikallio K, Jouppila P, Rasanen J: Retrograde aortic isthmus net blood flow and human fetal cardiac function in placental insufficiency. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003;22:351-357.
62.
Del Rio M, et al: Doppler assessment of the aortic isthmus and perinatal outcome in preterm fetuses with severe intrauterine growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008;31:41-47.
63.
Figueras F, et al: Monitoring of fetuses with intrauterine growth restriction: longitudinal changes in ductus venosus and aortic isthmus flow. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009;33:39-43.
64.
Evertson LR, et al: Antepartum fetal heart rate testing. I. Evolution of the nonstress test. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1979;133:29-33.
65.
Pattison N, McCowan L: Cardiotocography for antepartum fetal assessment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000:CD001068.
66.
Dawes GS, Redman CW: Automated analysis of the FHR: evaluation? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992;167:1912-1914.
67.
Grivell RM, et al: Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD007863.
68.
Bracero LA, Morgan S, Byrne DW: Comparison of visual and computerized interpretation of nonstress test results in a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;181:1254-1258.
69.
Manning FA, et al: Fetal assessment based on fetal biophysical profile scoring. VIII. The incidence of cerebral palsy in tested and untested perinates. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;178:696-706.
70.
Manning FA, et al: Fetal biophysical profile score. VI. Correlation with antepartum umbilical venous fetal pH. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993;169:755-763.
71.
Miller DA, Rabello YA, Paul RH: The modified biophysical profile: antepartum testing in the 1990s. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;174:812-817.
72.
Kaur S, et al: Biophysical profile in the treatment of intrauterine growth-restricted fetuses who weigh <1,000 g. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008;199:264.e1-4.
73.
Alfirevic Z, Neilson JP: Biophysical profile for fetal assessment in high risk pregnancies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000:CD000038.
74.
Chauhan SP, et al: Perinatal outcome and amniotic fluid index in the antepartum and intrapartum periods: a meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;181:1473-1478.
75.
Gulmezoglu AM, Hofmeyr GJ: Plasma volume expansion for suspected impaired fetal growth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000;CD000167.
76.
Gulmezoglu AM, Hofmeyr GJ: Betamimetics for suspected impaired fetal growth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001;CD000036.
77.
Laurin J, Persson PH: The effect of bedrest in hospital on fetal outcome in pregnancies complicated by intrauterine growth retardation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1987;66:407-411.
78.
Say L, Gulmezoglu AM, Hofmeyr GJ: Maternal nutrient supplementation for suspected impaired fetal growth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;CD000148.
79.
Say L, Gulmezoglu AM, Hofmeyr GJ: Maternal oxygen administration for suspected impaired fetal growth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;CD000137.
80.
Jacobsson B, et al: Cerebral palsy and intrauterine growth restriction: a population-based case-control study. BJOG 2008;115:1250-1255.
81.
Gardosi J: GRIT: concern about external validity. Lancet 2005;365:384; author reply 385.
82.
Van Wyk L, et al: Effects on (neuro)developmental and behavioral outcome at 2 years of age of induced labor compared with expectant management in intrauterine growth-restricted infants: long-term outcomes of the DIGITAT trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012;206:406.e1-7.
83.
Jozwiak M, et al: Mechanical methods for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012:CD001233.
84.
McCowan LM, et al: A pilot randomized controlled trial of two regimens of fetal surveillance for small-for-gestational-age fetuses with normal results of umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000;182:81-86.
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel
2014
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.