IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0356370.html

Postnatal gestational age determination by ultrasonographic measurement of transverse cerebellar diameter: A simulation study

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea Pietravalle
  • Francesco Cavallin
  • Giovanni Putoto
  • Daniele Trevisanuto

Abstract

Background: Accurate determination of gestational age (GA) has an important role in clinical practice, especially prevention/anticipation of prematurity-related complications. In low- and middle-income countries, the availability and accuracy of the gold standard for GA determination is very limited. In fact, prenatal ultrasonography in the first trimester is strongly affected by high costs, lack of skills and poor maternal access to health service. Furthermore, the determination by Last Menstrual Period has a very low accuracy, as well as postnatal clinical tools such as the Ballard Score. Recent studies in high-income countries tested TCD measurement by cranial ultrasound for GA determination with reported acceptable accuracy. The development of technology over the years is leading to a progressive spread of cranial ultrasound also in LMICs. Objective: To assess the performance of a published equation in estimating GA using fetal TCD measurements from low-income settings. Methods: Data were simulated using available information from relevant studies conducted in LMICs. Estimated GA was calculated as GA in weeks = 0.470 × TCD in mm + 13.162. The performance was assessed using modified calibration plots and Bland-Altman plots. Pooled bias and 95% limits of agreement (LoA) were also calculated. Results: Four datasets (n = 400, 257, 450, 500) were generated based on data from relevant studies. For GA 23–32 weeks, the equation was prone to overestimate and pooled bias was 6.0 days (95% LoA −6.7 to 18.7 days). For GA 33–36 weeks, the equation was prone to underestimate in one dataset and pooled bias was −1.5 days (95% LoA −16.8 to 13.8 days). For GA 37–40 weeks, the equation showed bad calibration and pooled bias was −5.0 days (95% LoA −25.8 to 15.8 days). When extending the original interval to GA 23−40 weeks, pooled bias was 2.8 days (95% LoA −13.0 to 18.6 days). Conclusions: Within the limitations of a simulation study, our findings suggest that the TCD-based equation may provide some benefits in postnatal estimation of GA between 23–32 weeks in low-resource settings. Lower precision, yet acceptable for clinical use, may be expected beyond 32 weeks’ gestation. Future studies may validate the equation in real newborns in low-resource settings where precise GA dating is available.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea Pietravalle & Francesco Cavallin & Giovanni Putoto & Daniele Trevisanuto, 2026. "Postnatal gestational age determination by ultrasonographic measurement of transverse cerebellar diameter: A simulation study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(8), pages 1-12, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0356370
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0356370
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0356370
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0356370&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0356370?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0356370. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.