Normal range for fetal urine production rate customized by biometry

Objective The aim of this study was to develop a nomogram for fetal urine production (UPR) using biometric parameters. Methods A cross-sectional study was performed in 110 normal singleton fetuses with gestational ages ranging from 20 to 40 weeks. UPR was measured using tridimensional ultrasound (3-...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archives of gynecology and obstetrics 2013, Vol.287 (1), p.31-35
Hauptverfasser: Peixoto-Filho, Fernando Maia, de Sá, Renato Augusto Moreira, Velarde, Luis Guillermo Coca, de Castro Mocarzel, Carolina, Lopes, Laudelino Marques, Ville, Yves
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 35
container_issue 1
container_start_page 31
container_title Archives of gynecology and obstetrics
container_volume 287
creator Peixoto-Filho, Fernando Maia
de Sá, Renato Augusto Moreira
Velarde, Luis Guillermo Coca
de Castro Mocarzel, Carolina
Lopes, Laudelino Marques
Ville, Yves
description Objective The aim of this study was to develop a nomogram for fetal urine production (UPR) using biometric parameters. Methods A cross-sectional study was performed in 110 normal singleton fetuses with gestational ages ranging from 20 to 40 weeks. UPR was measured using tridimensional ultrasound (3-DUS) virtual organ computer-aided analysis. UPR (ml/h) was calculated during the filling phase using the equation, UPR = (VFB2−VFB1)/time. The values for UPR were plotted as a function of fetal biometry (femur, humerus, abdominal circumference, and head circumference and biparietal diameter) to obtain a nomogram for each parameter. Results A total of 110 normal singleton fetuses with gestational age between 20 and 40 weeks were investigated. Five of them were excluded because the image quality was insufficient for correct visualization of the bladder contour. Linear regression analysis of UPR as a function of femur, humerus, abdominal circumference, and head circumference and biparietal diameter generated curves that represents the normal range for UPR by fetal biometry, and expressed by the following equations: (1) Humerus length (HL): ln (UPR) = −5.9546 + 0.0958 × HL (mm); ( R 2  0.6422); (2) abdominal circumference: ln (UPR) = −1.0981 + 0.158 × AC (mm); ( R 2  0.6328); (3) femur length: ln (UPR) = −1.5133 + 0.0803 × FL (mm); ( R 2  0.6611); (4) biparietal diameter ln (UPR) = −7.8779 + 0.2368 × BPD−0.0012 × DBP 2 ; ( R 2  0.7066). Although BPD has the highest correlation coefficient ( R 2 0.7066) there was no statistical significant difference between the parameters investigated for UPR prediction. Conclusion The use of biometric parameters for prediction of fetal UPR seems to be useful and can avoid the necessity of building local nomograms for different populations. The same strategy should be considered to other fields in fetal medicine.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s00404-012-2516-y
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1273161841</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1273161841</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-97cbb41fb0a4af3cf21949e35645b35d817eb45544f995b2a7ba10e834ccac5d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6A7xIwYuXaiZJm-Yoi1-w6EXPIUkT6bJt1qQ91F9vlq4KgqdMmGfeGR6EzgFfA8b8JmLMMMsxkJwUUObjAZoDoyTHHOAQzbHY1bjkM3QS4xonsKrKYzQjpBKC4nKOls8-tGqTBdW928z5kDnbp_8Qms5m2-DrwfSN7xLQ28wMsfdt82nrTI-Zbnxr-zCeoiOnNtGe7d8Feru_e10-5quXh6fl7So3lJM-F9xozcBprJhy1DgCgglLi5IVmhZ1BdxqVhSMOSEKTRTXCrCtKDNGmaKmC3Q15aazPgYbe9k20djNRnXWD1EC4RRKqBgk9PIPuvZD6NJ1kpCE8LISVaJgokzwMQbr5DY0rQqjBCx3huVkWCZxcmdYjmnmYp886NbWPxPfShNAJiCmVpIaflf_n_oFkdOGGw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2261876898</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Normal range for fetal urine production rate customized by biometry</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Peixoto-Filho, Fernando Maia ; de Sá, Renato Augusto Moreira ; Velarde, Luis Guillermo Coca ; de Castro Mocarzel, Carolina ; Lopes, Laudelino Marques ; Ville, Yves</creator><creatorcontrib>Peixoto-Filho, Fernando Maia ; de Sá, Renato Augusto Moreira ; Velarde, Luis Guillermo Coca ; de Castro Mocarzel, Carolina ; Lopes, Laudelino Marques ; Ville, Yves</creatorcontrib><description>Objective The aim of this study was to develop a nomogram for fetal urine production (UPR) using biometric parameters. Methods A cross-sectional study was performed in 110 normal singleton fetuses with gestational ages ranging from 20 to 40 weeks. UPR was measured using tridimensional ultrasound (3-DUS) virtual organ computer-aided analysis. UPR (ml/h) was calculated during the filling phase using the equation, UPR = (VFB2−VFB1)/time. The values for UPR were plotted as a function of fetal biometry (femur, humerus, abdominal circumference, and head circumference and biparietal diameter) to obtain a nomogram for each parameter. Results A total of 110 normal singleton fetuses with gestational age between 20 and 40 weeks were investigated. Five of them were excluded because the image quality was insufficient for correct visualization of the bladder contour. Linear regression analysis of UPR as a function of femur, humerus, abdominal circumference, and head circumference and biparietal diameter generated curves that represents the normal range for UPR by fetal biometry, and expressed by the following equations: (1) Humerus length (HL): ln (UPR) = −5.9546 + 0.0958 × HL (mm); ( R 2  0.6422); (2) abdominal circumference: ln (UPR) = −1.0981 + 0.158 × AC (mm); ( R 2  0.6328); (3) femur length: ln (UPR) = −1.5133 + 0.0803 × FL (mm); ( R 2  0.6611); (4) biparietal diameter ln (UPR) = −7.8779 + 0.2368 × BPD−0.0012 × DBP 2 ; ( R 2  0.7066). Although BPD has the highest correlation coefficient ( R 2 0.7066) there was no statistical significant difference between the parameters investigated for UPR prediction. Conclusion The use of biometric parameters for prediction of fetal UPR seems to be useful and can avoid the necessity of building local nomograms for different populations. The same strategy should be considered to other fields in fetal medicine.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0932-0067</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-0711</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00404-012-2516-y</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22899306</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Abdomen ; Abdomen - diagnostic imaging ; Abdomen - embryology ; Biometrics ; Biometry ; Cephalometry ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Diuresis ; Endocrinology ; Female ; Femur - diagnostic imaging ; Femur - embryology ; Fetus - physiology ; Fetuses ; Gestational Age ; Gynecology ; Human Genetics ; Humans ; Humerus - diagnostic imaging ; Humerus - embryology ; Maternal-Fetal Medicine ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Nomograms ; Obstetrics/Perinatology/Midwifery ; Pregnancy ; Ultrasonography, Prenatal - methods ; Urinary Bladder - diagnostic imaging ; Urinary Bladder - embryology ; Urine ; Urine - physiology</subject><ispartof>Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2013, Vol.287 (1), p.31-35</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag 2012</rights><rights>Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics is a copyright of Springer, (2012). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-97cbb41fb0a4af3cf21949e35645b35d817eb45544f995b2a7ba10e834ccac5d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-97cbb41fb0a4af3cf21949e35645b35d817eb45544f995b2a7ba10e834ccac5d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00404-012-2516-y$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00404-012-2516-y$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,41487,42556,51318</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22899306$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Peixoto-Filho, Fernando Maia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Sá, Renato Augusto Moreira</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Velarde, Luis Guillermo Coca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Castro Mocarzel, Carolina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lopes, Laudelino Marques</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ville, Yves</creatorcontrib><title>Normal range for fetal urine production rate customized by biometry</title><title>Archives of gynecology and obstetrics</title><addtitle>Arch Gynecol Obstet</addtitle><addtitle>Arch Gynecol Obstet</addtitle><description>Objective The aim of this study was to develop a nomogram for fetal urine production (UPR) using biometric parameters. Methods A cross-sectional study was performed in 110 normal singleton fetuses with gestational ages ranging from 20 to 40 weeks. UPR was measured using tridimensional ultrasound (3-DUS) virtual organ computer-aided analysis. UPR (ml/h) was calculated during the filling phase using the equation, UPR = (VFB2−VFB1)/time. The values for UPR were plotted as a function of fetal biometry (femur, humerus, abdominal circumference, and head circumference and biparietal diameter) to obtain a nomogram for each parameter. Results A total of 110 normal singleton fetuses with gestational age between 20 and 40 weeks were investigated. Five of them were excluded because the image quality was insufficient for correct visualization of the bladder contour. Linear regression analysis of UPR as a function of femur, humerus, abdominal circumference, and head circumference and biparietal diameter generated curves that represents the normal range for UPR by fetal biometry, and expressed by the following equations: (1) Humerus length (HL): ln (UPR) = −5.9546 + 0.0958 × HL (mm); ( R 2  0.6422); (2) abdominal circumference: ln (UPR) = −1.0981 + 0.158 × AC (mm); ( R 2  0.6328); (3) femur length: ln (UPR) = −1.5133 + 0.0803 × FL (mm); ( R 2  0.6611); (4) biparietal diameter ln (UPR) = −7.8779 + 0.2368 × BPD−0.0012 × DBP 2 ; ( R 2  0.7066). Although BPD has the highest correlation coefficient ( R 2 0.7066) there was no statistical significant difference between the parameters investigated for UPR prediction. Conclusion The use of biometric parameters for prediction of fetal UPR seems to be useful and can avoid the necessity of building local nomograms for different populations. The same strategy should be considered to other fields in fetal medicine.</description><subject>Abdomen</subject><subject>Abdomen - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Abdomen - embryology</subject><subject>Biometrics</subject><subject>Biometry</subject><subject>Cephalometry</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Diuresis</subject><subject>Endocrinology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Femur - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Femur - embryology</subject><subject>Fetus - physiology</subject><subject>Fetuses</subject><subject>Gestational Age</subject><subject>Gynecology</subject><subject>Human Genetics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Humerus - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Humerus - embryology</subject><subject>Maternal-Fetal Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Nomograms</subject><subject>Obstetrics/Perinatology/Midwifery</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Ultrasonography, Prenatal - methods</subject><subject>Urinary Bladder - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Urinary Bladder - embryology</subject><subject>Urine</subject><subject>Urine - physiology</subject><issn>0932-0067</issn><issn>1432-0711</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6A7xIwYuXaiZJm-Yoi1-w6EXPIUkT6bJt1qQ91F9vlq4KgqdMmGfeGR6EzgFfA8b8JmLMMMsxkJwUUObjAZoDoyTHHOAQzbHY1bjkM3QS4xonsKrKYzQjpBKC4nKOls8-tGqTBdW928z5kDnbp_8Qms5m2-DrwfSN7xLQ28wMsfdt82nrTI-Zbnxr-zCeoiOnNtGe7d8Feru_e10-5quXh6fl7So3lJM-F9xozcBprJhy1DgCgglLi5IVmhZ1BdxqVhSMOSEKTRTXCrCtKDNGmaKmC3Q15aazPgYbe9k20djNRnXWD1EC4RRKqBgk9PIPuvZD6NJ1kpCE8LISVaJgokzwMQbr5DY0rQqjBCx3huVkWCZxcmdYjmnmYp886NbWPxPfShNAJiCmVpIaflf_n_oFkdOGGw</recordid><startdate>2013</startdate><enddate>2013</enddate><creator>Peixoto-Filho, Fernando Maia</creator><creator>de Sá, Renato Augusto Moreira</creator><creator>Velarde, Luis Guillermo Coca</creator><creator>de Castro Mocarzel, Carolina</creator><creator>Lopes, Laudelino Marques</creator><creator>Ville, Yves</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2013</creationdate><title>Normal range for fetal urine production rate customized by biometry</title><author>Peixoto-Filho, Fernando Maia ; de Sá, Renato Augusto Moreira ; Velarde, Luis Guillermo Coca ; de Castro Mocarzel, Carolina ; Lopes, Laudelino Marques ; Ville, Yves</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-97cbb41fb0a4af3cf21949e35645b35d817eb45544f995b2a7ba10e834ccac5d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Abdomen</topic><topic>Abdomen - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Abdomen - embryology</topic><topic>Biometrics</topic><topic>Biometry</topic><topic>Cephalometry</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Diuresis</topic><topic>Endocrinology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Femur - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Femur - embryology</topic><topic>Fetus - physiology</topic><topic>Fetuses</topic><topic>Gestational Age</topic><topic>Gynecology</topic><topic>Human Genetics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Humerus - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Humerus - embryology</topic><topic>Maternal-Fetal Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Nomograms</topic><topic>Obstetrics/Perinatology/Midwifery</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Ultrasonography, Prenatal - methods</topic><topic>Urinary Bladder - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Urinary Bladder - embryology</topic><topic>Urine</topic><topic>Urine - physiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Peixoto-Filho, Fernando Maia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Sá, Renato Augusto Moreira</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Velarde, Luis Guillermo Coca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Castro Mocarzel, Carolina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lopes, Laudelino Marques</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ville, Yves</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Archives of gynecology and obstetrics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Peixoto-Filho, Fernando Maia</au><au>de Sá, Renato Augusto Moreira</au><au>Velarde, Luis Guillermo Coca</au><au>de Castro Mocarzel, Carolina</au><au>Lopes, Laudelino Marques</au><au>Ville, Yves</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Normal range for fetal urine production rate customized by biometry</atitle><jtitle>Archives of gynecology and obstetrics</jtitle><stitle>Arch Gynecol Obstet</stitle><addtitle>Arch Gynecol Obstet</addtitle><date>2013</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>287</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>31</spage><epage>35</epage><pages>31-35</pages><issn>0932-0067</issn><eissn>1432-0711</eissn><abstract>Objective The aim of this study was to develop a nomogram for fetal urine production (UPR) using biometric parameters. Methods A cross-sectional study was performed in 110 normal singleton fetuses with gestational ages ranging from 20 to 40 weeks. UPR was measured using tridimensional ultrasound (3-DUS) virtual organ computer-aided analysis. UPR (ml/h) was calculated during the filling phase using the equation, UPR = (VFB2−VFB1)/time. The values for UPR were plotted as a function of fetal biometry (femur, humerus, abdominal circumference, and head circumference and biparietal diameter) to obtain a nomogram for each parameter. Results A total of 110 normal singleton fetuses with gestational age between 20 and 40 weeks were investigated. Five of them were excluded because the image quality was insufficient for correct visualization of the bladder contour. Linear regression analysis of UPR as a function of femur, humerus, abdominal circumference, and head circumference and biparietal diameter generated curves that represents the normal range for UPR by fetal biometry, and expressed by the following equations: (1) Humerus length (HL): ln (UPR) = −5.9546 + 0.0958 × HL (mm); ( R 2  0.6422); (2) abdominal circumference: ln (UPR) = −1.0981 + 0.158 × AC (mm); ( R 2  0.6328); (3) femur length: ln (UPR) = −1.5133 + 0.0803 × FL (mm); ( R 2  0.6611); (4) biparietal diameter ln (UPR) = −7.8779 + 0.2368 × BPD−0.0012 × DBP 2 ; ( R 2  0.7066). Although BPD has the highest correlation coefficient ( R 2 0.7066) there was no statistical significant difference between the parameters investigated for UPR prediction. Conclusion The use of biometric parameters for prediction of fetal UPR seems to be useful and can avoid the necessity of building local nomograms for different populations. The same strategy should be considered to other fields in fetal medicine.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>22899306</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00404-012-2516-y</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0932-0067
ispartof Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2013, Vol.287 (1), p.31-35
issn 0932-0067
1432-0711
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1273161841
source MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings
subjects Abdomen
Abdomen - diagnostic imaging
Abdomen - embryology
Biometrics
Biometry
Cephalometry
Cross-Sectional Studies
Diuresis
Endocrinology
Female
Femur - diagnostic imaging
Femur - embryology
Fetus - physiology
Fetuses
Gestational Age
Gynecology
Human Genetics
Humans
Humerus - diagnostic imaging
Humerus - embryology
Maternal-Fetal Medicine
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Nomograms
Obstetrics/Perinatology/Midwifery
Pregnancy
Ultrasonography, Prenatal - methods
Urinary Bladder - diagnostic imaging
Urinary Bladder - embryology
Urine
Urine - physiology
title Normal range for fetal urine production rate customized by biometry
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T22%3A13%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Normal%20range%20for%20fetal%20urine%20production%20rate%20customized%20by%20biometry&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20gynecology%20and%20obstetrics&rft.au=Peixoto-Filho,%20Fernando%20Maia&rft.date=2013&rft.volume=287&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=31&rft.epage=35&rft.pages=31-35&rft.issn=0932-0067&rft.eissn=1432-0711&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00404-012-2516-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1273161841%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2261876898&rft_id=info:pmid/22899306&rfr_iscdi=true