Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Amniotic fluid volume in normal singleton pregnancies: modeling with quantile regression

  • Maternal-Fetal Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To develop uniform and reliable reference ranges for amniotic fluid volume (AFV) across gestation in normal singleton pregnancies using quantile regression (QR).

Methods

An analysis of true AFVs determined by dye-dilution techniques or by direct measurement at cesarean delivery in normal singleton pregnancies. AFV centiles were established by QR, a flexible semi-parametric approach of estimating rates of change across the entire distribution of AFV rather than just in the mean as is observed with standard linear regression.

Results

The study evaluated 379 women with normal singleton pregnancies between 16 and 41 weeks gestation. QR was used to determine the association between AFV and gestational age (GA). A second-order quantile regression model indicated a nonlinear relationship between AFV and gestational age at the upper centile range (≥80th percentile).

Conclusion

This study defines normative centile charts for true AFVs between 16 and 41 weeks gestation in normal singleton pregnancies using QR. This statistical approach more appropriately reflects true AFV across gestation at each centile of interest (e.g. 5th, 50th, 95th, etc.) as compared to standard linear regression.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Queenan JT, Thompson W, Whitfield CR, Shah SI (1972) Amniotic fluid volumes in normal pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 114:34–38

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Brace RA, Wolf EJ (1989) Normal amniotic fluid volume changes throughout pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 161:382–388

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Magann EF, Bass D, Chauhan SP, Young RA, Whitworth NS, Morrison JC (1997) Amniotic fluid volume in normal singleton pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol 90:524–528

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Richards FJ (1959) A flexible growth function for empirical use. J Exp Bot 10:290–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cade BS, Noon BR (2003) A gentle introduction to quantile regression for ecologist. Front Ecol Environ 1(8):412–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Koenker R, Bassett G (1978) Regression quantiles. Econometrica 46:33–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wei Y, Pere A, Koenker R, He X (2006) Quantile regression methods for reference growth curves. Stat Med 25(8):1369–1382

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Charles D, Jacoby HE (1966) Preliminary data on the use of sodium aminohippurate to determine amniotic fluid volume. Am J Obstet Gynecol 95:266–269

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Magann EF, Nolan TE, Hess LW, Martin RW, Whitworth NS, Morrison JC (1992) Measurement of amniotic fluid volume: accuracy of ultrasonography techniques. Am J Obstet Gynecol 167:1533–1537

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Horsager R, Nathan L, Leveno KJ (1994) Correlation of measured amniotic fluid volume and sonographic predictions of oligohydramnios. Obstet Gynecol 83:955–958

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Magann EF, Whitworth NS, Files JC, Terrone DA, Chauhan SP, Morrison JC (2002) Dye-dilution techniques using aminohippurate sodium: do they accurately reflect amniotic fluid volume? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 11(3):167–170

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Koenker R (2005) Quantile regression. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Peng L, Wuu J, Benatar M (2009) Developing reference data for nerve conduction studies: an application of quantile regression. Muscle Nerve 40(5):763–771

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Austin PC, Schull MJ (2003) Quantile regression: a statistical tool for out-of-hospital research. Acad Emerg Med 10(7):789–797

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Dildy GA III, Lira N, Moise KJ Jr, Riddle GD, Deter RL (1992) Amniotic fluid volume assessment: comparison of ultrasonographic estimates versus direct measurements with a dye-dilution technique in human pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 167:986–994

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Magann EF, Doherty DA, Chauhan SP, Busch FW, Mecacci F, Morrison JC (2004) How well do the amniotic fluid index and single deepest pocket indices (below the 3rd and 5th and above the 95th and 97th percentiles) predict oligohydramnios and hydramnios? Am J Obstet Gynecol 190:164–169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Chamberlain PF, Manning FA, Morrison I, Harman CR, Lange IR (1984) Ultrasound evaluation of amniotic fluid volume, I: the relationship of marginal and decreased amniotic fluid volumes to perinatal outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 150:245–249

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Morris JM, Thompson K, Smithey J et al (2003) The usefulness of ultrasound assessment of amniotic fluid in predicting adverse outcome in prolonged pregnancy: a prospective blinded observational study. BJOG 110:989–994

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Magann EF, Sanderson M, Martin JN, Chauhan S (2000) The amniotic fluid index, single deepest pocket, and two-diameter pocket in normal human pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 182:1581–1588

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rutherford SE, Phelan JP, Smith CV, Jacobs N (1987) The four-quadrant assessment of amniotic fluid volume: an adjunct to antepartum fetal heart rate testing. Obstet Gynecol 70:353–356

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Baron C, Morgan MA, Garite TJ (1995) The amniotic fluid volume assessed intrapartum on perinatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 173:167–174

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Moore TR, Cayle JE (1990) The amniotic fluid index in normal human pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 162:1168–1174

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Casey BM, McIntire DD, Bloom SL et al (2000) Pregnancy outcomes after antepartum diagnosis of oligohydramnios at or beyond 34 weeks’ gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 182:909–912

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Magann EF, Perry KG Jr, Chauhan SP, Anfanger PJ, Whitworth NS, Morrison JC (1997) The accuracy of ultrasound evaluation of amniotic fluid volume in singleton pregnancies: the effect of operator experience and ultrasound interpretative technique. J Clin Ultrasound 25:249–253

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Magann EF, Morton ML, Nolan TE, Martin JN Jr, Whitworth NS, Morrison JC (1994) Comparative efficacy of two sonographic measurements for the detection of aberrations in the amniotic fluid volume and the effects of amniotic fluid volume on pregnancy outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 83:959–962

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Chamberlain PF, Manning FA, Morrison I, Harman CR, Lange IR (1984) Ultrasound evaluation of amniotic fluid volume II. The relationship of increased amniotic fluid volume of perinatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 150:250–254

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Carlson DE, Platt LD, Medearis AL, Horenstein J (1990) Quantifiable polyhydramnios: diagnosis and management. Obstet Gynecol 75:989–993

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Phelen JP, Ahn MO, Smith CV, Rutherford SE, Anderson E (1987) Amniotic fluid index measurements during pregnancy. J Reprod Med 32:601–604

    Google Scholar 

  29. Artes PH, Crabb DP (2010) Estimating normative limits of Heidelberg Retina Tomograph optic disc rim area with quantile regression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 51(1):355–361

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Chitty LS, Altman DG (2003) Charts of fetal size: kidney and renal pelvis measurements. Prenat Diagn 23(11):891–897

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Royston P, Wright EM (1998) How to construct ‘normal ranges’ for fetal variables. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 11(1):30–38

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Cade BS, Terrell JW, Schrodeder RL (1999) Estimating effects of limiting factors with regression quantiles. Ecology 80:311–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Koenker R, Bassett G (1978) Regression quantiles. Econometrica 46:33–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Donna G Eastham, BA, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Arkansas for the Medical Sciences for her editing of the manuscript.

Conflict of interest

The authors have no financial interest with any company in relation to this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, 4301 W. Markham St. Slot # 518, Little Rock, 72205, AR, USA

    Adam T. Sandlin, Courtney L. Sick, Patrick M. Lang & Everett F. Magann

  2. Department of Biostatistics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA

    Songthip T. Ounpraseuth & Horace J. Spencer

Authors
  1. Adam T. Sandlin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Songthip T. Ounpraseuth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Horace J. Spencer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Courtney L. Sick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Patrick M. Lang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Everett F. Magann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Everett F. Magann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sandlin, A.T., Ounpraseuth, S.T., Spencer, H.J. et al. Amniotic fluid volume in normal singleton pregnancies: modeling with quantile regression. Arch Gynecol Obstet 289, 967–972 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-013-3087-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-013-3087-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation