373 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10871470)
1. Correctly identifying the macrosomic fetus: improving ultrasonography-based prediction.
Sokol RJ; Chik L; Dombrowski MP; Zador IE
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2000 Jun; 182(6):1489-95. PubMed ID: 10871470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Screening efficacy of the subcutaneous tissue width/femur length ratio for fetal macrosomia in the non-diabetic pregnancy.
Rotmensch S; Celentano C; Liberati M; Malinger G; Sadan O; Bellati U; Glezerman M
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 1999 May; 13(5):340-4. PubMed ID: 10380299
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Incorporating sonographic cheek-to-cheek diameter, biparietal diameter and abdominal circumference improves weight estimation in the macrosomic fetus.
Abramowicz JS; Robischon K; Cox C
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 1997 Jun; 9(6):409-13. PubMed ID: 9239827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Estimators of birth weight in pregnant women requiring insulin: a comparison of seven sonographic models.
McLaren RA; Puckett JL; Chauhan SP
Obstet Gynecol; 1995 Apr; 85(4):565-9. PubMed ID: 7898834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Intrapartum fetal subcutaneous tissue/femur length ratio: an ultrasonographic clue to fetal macrosomia.
Santolaya-Forgas J; Meyer WJ; Gauthier DW; Kahn D
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1994 Oct; 171(4):1072-5. PubMed ID: 7943073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Ultrasound macrosomic fetal weight estimation formula using maternal weight measurements].
Murlewska J; Pietryga M; Wender-Ozegowska E
Ginekol Pol; 2011 Feb; 82(2):114-8. PubMed ID: 21574483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Sonographic prediction of macrosomia in pregnancies complicated by maternal diabetes: finding the best formula.
Shmueli A; Salman L; Hadar E; Aviram A; Bardin R; Ashwal E; Gabbay-Benziv R
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2019 Jan; 299(1):97-103. PubMed ID: 30327863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Abnormal growth patterns in diabetes in pregnancy: a longitudinal study.
Langer O; Kozlowski S; Brustman L
Isr J Med Sci; 1991; 27(8-9):516-23. PubMed ID: 1960050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Macrosomia: a new formula for optimized fetal weight estimation.
Hart NC; Hilbert A; Meurer B; Schrauder M; Schmid M; Siemer J; Voigt M; Schild RL
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2010 Jan; 35(1):42-7. PubMed ID: 20034003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Large cross-sectional area of the umbilical cord as a predictor of fetal macrosomia.
Cromi A; Ghezzi F; Di Naro E; Siesto G; Bergamini V; Raio L
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2007 Nov; 30(6):861-6. PubMed ID: 17960667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Prediction of fetal macrosomia by single ultrasonic fetal biometry.
Chen CP; Chang FM; Chang CH; Lin YS; Chou CY; Ko HC
J Formos Med Assoc; 1993 Jan; 92(1):24-8. PubMed ID: 8099822
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of fundal height measurement and sonographically measured fetal abdominal circumference in the prediction of high and low birth weight at term.
Kayem G; Grangé G; Bréart G; Goffinet F
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2009 Nov; 34(5):566-71. PubMed ID: 19582801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The relation between fetal abdominal circumference and birthweight: findings in 3512 pregnancies.
Smith GC; Smith MF; McNay MB; Fleming JE
Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1997 Feb; 104(2):186-90. PubMed ID: 9070136
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Use of femur length/abdominal circumference ratio in detecting the macrosomic fetus.
Hadlock FP; Harrist RB; Fearneyhough TC; Deter RL; Park SK; Rossavik IK
Radiology; 1985 Feb; 154(2):503-5. PubMed ID: 3880915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Macrosomia in postdates pregnancies: the accuracy of routine ultrasonographic screening.
Pollack RN; Hauer-Pollack G; Divon MY
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1992 Jul; 167(1):7-11. PubMed ID: 1442959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Fetal abdominal circumference measurements of 35 and 38 cm as predictors of macrosomia. A risk factor for shoulder dystocia.
Gilby JR; Williams MC; Spellacy WN
J Reprod Med; 2000 Nov; 45(11):936-8. PubMed ID: 11127108
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The birth weight of macrosomia influence the accuracy of ultrasound estimation of fetal weight at term.
Song J; Liu J; Liu L; Jiang Y; Zheng H; Ke H; Yang L; Zhang Z
J Clin Ultrasound; 2022 Sep; 50(7):967-973. PubMed ID: 35716368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Fetal weight estimation in gestational diabetic pregnancies: comparison between conventional and three-dimensional fractional thigh volume methods using gestation-adjusted projection.
Pagani G; Palai N; Zatti S; Fratelli N; Prefumo F; Frusca T
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Jan; 43(1):72-6. PubMed ID: 23494762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A comparison of single versus multiple growth ultrasonographic examinations in predicting birth weight.
Hedriana HL; Moore TR
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1994 Jun; 170(6):1600-4; discussion 1604-6. PubMed ID: 8203416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Accuracy of sonographic estimation of fetal weight before induction of labor in diabetic pregnancies and pregnancies with suspected fetal macrosomia.
Ben-Haroush A; Yogev Y; Mashiach R; Hod M; Meisner I
J Perinat Med; 2003; 31(3):225-30. PubMed ID: 12825478
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
