Skip to main content
Log in

Intrauterine Wachstumsrestriktion

Teil I. Klassifikation, Pathogenese und Diagnose

Intrauterine growth restriction

I. Classification, pathogenetic mechanisms, and diagnosis

  • CME Weiterbildung • Zertifizierte Fortbildung
  • Published:
Der Gynäkologe Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Der Begriff „intrauterine Wachstumsrestriktion“ (IUGR) bedeutet, dass Feten ihr genetisches Wachstumspotenzial in utero nicht erreicht haben. Differenzialdiagnostisch abzugrenzen sind SGA („small for gestational age“)-Feten (Abdomenumfang oder Schätzgewicht <10. Perzentile) von IUGR (SGA-Fet mit pathologischem Doppler der A. umbilicalis)-Feten. Nur etwa 50% der SGA-Feten haben eine IUGR, etwa 25% der IUGR-Kinder weisen ein Geburtsgewicht >10. Perzentile auf. Das intrauterine Wachstum wird durch genetische Einflüsse und elterliche, fetale sowie plazentare Umgebungsfaktoren reguliert. In mehr als 50% der Fälle von IUGR besteht eine Assoziation mit anamnestischen und/oder klinischen Risikofaktoren. Die Diagnose beruht auf der Biometrie. Allerdings beträgt deren Sensitivität in Low-risk-Kollektiven nur 30–40%. Zur erweiterten Diagnostik gehören obligat die Doppler-Sonographie und die ausführliche Sonographie zwecks Fehlbildungsausschluss, optional eine Infektionsserologie und die Karyotypisierung.

Abstract

The term “intrauterine growth restriction” (IUGR) defines fetuses who fail to realize their genetically endowed growth potential. Small for gestational age (SGA) fetuses (abdominal circumference or estimated fetal weight below the 10th percentile) have to be distinguished from IUGR fetuses (SGA fetuses having abnormal umbilical artery Doppler). About 50% of SGA fetuses also have IUGR. The birth weight of 25% of IUGR fetuses is above the 10th percentile. Fetal growth is regulated by genetic and environmental factors of parental, fetal, and placental origin. In more than 50% of cases, IUGR is associated with risk factors (medical history, clinical findings). The diagnosis relies on fetal biometry; however, the sensitivity in low-risk groups is only 30–40%. Diagnostic procedures should always include Doppler sonography of the fetomaternal circulation, detailed assessment of the fetal organs by ultrasound, and, optionally, serological examinations to exclude infections and determine the karyotype.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1

Literatur

  1. Arbuckle TE, Wilkins R, Gregory J, Shermann (1993) Birth weight percentiles by gestational age in Canada. Obstet Gynecol 81: 39–48

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Alexander GR, Himes JH, Kaufman RB et al. (1996) A United States national reference for fetal growth. Obstet Gynecol 87: 163–168

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Baschat AA (2006) Fetal growth restriction. In: James DK, Steer PJ, Weiner CP, Gonik B (eds) High-risk pregnancy – management options, 3rd edn. Saunders-Elsevier, Philadelphia, pp 241–260

  4. Chauhan SP, Magann EF (2006) Screening for fetal growth restriction. Clin Obstet Gynecol 49: 284–294

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Clausson B, Gardosi J, Francis A, Cnattingius S (2001) Perinatal outcome in SGA births defined by customised versus population-based birthweight standards Br J Obstet Gynaecol 108: 830–834

    Google Scholar 

  6. Crombach G, Tandu-Umba B (2001) Intrauterine Wachstumsretardierung. Gynäkologe 34: 42–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Dashe JS, McIntire DD, Lucas MJ, Leveno KL (2000) Effects of symmetric and asymmetric fetal growth on pregnancy outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 96: 321–327

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. David C, Tagliavini G, Pilu G et al. (1996) Receiver-operator characteristic curves for the ultrasonic prediction of small-for-gestational-age fetuses in low-risk pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 174: 1037–1042

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Doubilet PM, Benson CB, Nadel AS, Ringer SA (1997) Improved birth weight table for neonates developed from gestations dated by early sonography. J Ultrasound Med 16: 241–249

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Fang S (2005) Management of preterm infants with intrauterine growth restriction. Early Hum Dev 81: 889–900

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Gardosi J, Chang A, Kalyan B et al. (1992) Customised antenatal growth charts. Lancet 339: 283–287

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Goldenberg RL, Cliver SP (1997) Small for gestational age and intrauterine growth restriction: Definitions and standards. Clin Obstet Gynecol 40: 704–714

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Gribbin C, Thornton J (2006) Critical evaluation of fetal assessment methods. In: James DK, Steer PJ, Weiner CP, Gonik B (eds) High-risk pregnancy – management options. Saunders–Elsevier, Philadelphia, 3rd ed, pp 229–239

  14. Hoffman HJ, Stark CR, Lundin FE, Ashbrook JD (1974) Analysis of birth weight, gestational age, and fetal viability in US births, 1968 Obstet Gynecol Surv 29: 651–681

  15. Huppertz B, Peeters LLH (2005) Vascular biology in implantation and placentation. Angiogenesis 8: 157–167

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Jahn A, Razun O, Berle P (1998) Routine screening for intrauterine growth retardation in Germany: Low sensitivy and questionable benefit for diagnosed cases. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 77:643–648

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Leeson S, Aziz (1997) Customised fetal growth assessment. Br J Obstet Gynecol 104: 648–651

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lubchenco LO, Hansman C, Dressler M, Boyd E (1963) Intrauterine growth as estimated from liveborn birth-weight data at 24 to 42 weeks of gestation. Pediatrics 32: 793–800

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Maulik D (2006) Fetal growth compromise: Definitions, standards, and classification. Clin Obstet Gynecol 49: 214–218

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Maulik D, Evans JF, Ragolia L (2006) Fetal growth restriction: Pathogenic mechanisms. Clin Obstet Gynecol 49: 219–227

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Maulik D (2006) Fetal growth restriction: The etiology. Clin Obstet Gynecol 49: 228–235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. McIntire DD, Bloom SL, Casey BM, Leveno KJ (1999) Birth weight in relation to morbidity and mortality among newborn infants. N Engl J Med 340: 1234–1238

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Miller HC, Hassanein K (1971) Diagnosis of impaired fetal growth in newborn infants. Pediatrics 48: 511–522

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Ott WJ (2006) Sonographic diagnosis of fetal growth restriction. Clin Obstet Gynecol 49: 295–307

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pallotto EK, Kilbride HW (2006) Perinatal outcome and later implications of intrauterine growth restriction Clin Obstet Gynecol 49: 257–269

    Google Scholar 

  26. Resnik, R, Creasy RK Intrauterine growth restriction. In: Creasy RK, Resnik R, Iams JD (eds) Maternal-fetal medicine – principles and practice. Saunders, Philadelphia, 5th edn, pp 495–512

  27. Rumboldt AR, Crowther CA, Haslam RR et al. (2006) Vitamins C and E and the risks of preeclampsia and perinatal complications. N Engl J Med 354: 1796–1806

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Salafia CM, Charles AK (2006) Placenta and fetal growth restriction. Clin Obstet Gynecol 49: 236–256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Schneider H, Schneider KTM (2006) Intrauterine Wachstumsretardierung (IUGR) In: Schneider H, Husslein P, Schneider KTM (Hrsg) Geburtshilfe. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokio, 3. Auf. S 523–546

  30. Sebire NJ, Talbert DG (2001) The dynamic placenta: A closer look at the pathophysiology of placental hemodynamics in uteroplacental compromise. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 18:557–561

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Soothill PW, Bobrow CS, Holmes S (1999) Small for gestational age ist not a diagnosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 13: 225–228

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Voigt M, Schneider KTM, Jährig K (1996) Analyse des Geburtengutes des Jahrgangs 1992 der BRD. Teil 1: Neue Perzentilmaße für die Körpergewichte Neugeborener. Geburtsh Frauenheilkd 56: 550–558

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Voigt M, Schneider KTM, Jährig K (1997) Analyse des Geburtengutes des Jahrgangs 1992 der BRD. Teil 2: Mehrdimensionale Zusammenhänge zwischen Alter, Körpergewicht und Körperhöhe der Mutter und dem Geburtsgewicht. Geburtsh Frauenheilkd 57: 246–255

    Google Scholar 

  34. Whittle MJ (1999) The management of intrauterine growth restriction In: Rodeck CH, Whittle MJ (eds) Fetal medicine – basic science and clinical practice. Churchill Livingstone, London, pp 773–784

  35. Williams RL, Creasy RK, Cunningham GC et al. (1982) Fetal growth and perinatal viability in California. Obstet Gynecol 59: 624–632

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Winick M (1971) Cellular changes during placental and fetal growth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 109: 166–176

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Zhang J, Bowes WA (1995) Birth-weight-for-gestational-age patterns by race, sex and parity in the United States Population. Obstet Gynecol 86: 200–208

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Keine Angaben

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Crombach.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Crombach, G. Intrauterine Wachstumsrestriktion. Gynäkologe 40, 891–902 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-007-2057-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-007-2057-9

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation