214 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11127108)
1. 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]
2. Macrosomia prediction using ultrasound fetal abdominal circumference of 35 centimeters or more.
Jazayeri A; Heffron JA; Phillips R; Spellacy WN
Obstet Gynecol; 1999 Apr; 93(4):523-6. PubMed ID: 10214826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Prevention of shoulder dystocia by an ultrasound selection at the beginning of labour of foetuses with large abdominal circumference].
Maticot-Baptista D; Collin A; Martin A; Maillet R; Riethmuller D
J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2007 Feb; 36(1):42-9. PubMed ID: 17293252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. [Relationship between fetal abdominal circumference and birth weight: clinical findings in 1475 pregnancies].
Shi CY; Zhang XX; Jin YZ; Dong Y; Zhang YY; Lin L; Li XJ; Zhang BR
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2005 Nov; 40(11):732-4. PubMed ID: 16324244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Is macrosomia predictable, and are shoulder dystocia and birth trauma preventable?
Gonen R; Spiegel D; Abend M
Obstet Gynecol; 1996 Oct; 88(4 Pt 1):526-9. PubMed ID: 8841211
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Antenatal macrosomia prediction using sonographic fetal abdominal circumference in South Tunisia.
Chaabane K; Trigui K; Louati D; Kebaili S; Gassara H; Dammak A; Amouri H; Guermazi M
Pan Afr Med J; 2013; 14():111. PubMed ID: 23717725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Predicting neonatal weight of more than 4000 g using fetal abdominal circumference measurement by ultrasound at 38-40 weeks of pregnancy: a study in Iran.
Dadkhah F; Kashanian M; Bonyad Z; Larijani T
J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2013 Jan; 39(1):170-4. PubMed ID: 22690747
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A scoring system for detection of macrosomia and prediction of shoulder dystocia: a disappointment.
Chauhan SP; Lynn NN; Sanderson M; Humphries J; Cole JH; Scardo JA
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2006 Nov; 19(11):699-705. PubMed ID: 17127493
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Risk factors and clinical prediction of shoulder dystocia in non-macrosomia].
Li N; Li Q; Chang L; Liu C
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2015 Jan; 50(1):17-21. PubMed ID: 25877419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Antenatal prediction of fetal macrosomia in pregnancies affected by maternal pre-gestational diabetes.
O'Dwyer V; Russell NM; McDonnell B; Sharkey L; Mulcahy C; Higgins MF
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2022 Dec; 35(25):7412-7416. PubMed ID: 34229553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Intrapartum fetal abdominal circumference by ultrasonography for predicting fetal macrosomia.
Loetworawanit R; Chittacharoen A; Sututvoravut S
J Med Assoc Thai; 2006 Oct; 89 Suppl 4():S60-4. PubMed ID: 17726811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Different formulas, different thresholds and different performance-the prediction of macrosomia by ultrasound.
Aviram A; Yogev Y; Ashwal E; Hiersch L; Danon D; Hadar E; Gabbay-Benziv R
J Perinatol; 2017 Dec; 37(12):1285-1291. PubMed ID: 28906497
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Universal third-trimester ultrasonic screening using fetal macrosomia in the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy.
Moraitis AA; Shreeve N; Sovio U; Brocklehurst P; Heazell AEP; Thornton JG; Robson SC; Papageorghiou A; Smith GC
PLoS Med; 2020 Oct; 17(10):e1003190. PubMed ID: 33048935
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluation of fetal anthropometric measures to predict the risk for shoulder dystocia.
Burkhardt T; Schmidt M; Kurmanavicius J; Zimmermann R; Schäffer L
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Jan; 43(1):77-82. PubMed ID: 23836579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Correlation of increased fetal asymmetry with shoulder dystocia in the nondiabetic woman with suspected macrosomia.
Rajan PV; Chung JH; Porto M; Wing DA
J Reprod Med; 2009 Aug; 54(8):478-82. PubMed ID: 19769192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Accelerated fetal growth velocity across the third trimester is associated with increased shoulder dystocia risk among fetuses who are not large-for-gestational-age: A prospective observational cohort study.
MacDonald TM; Robinson AJ; Hiscock RJ; Hui L; Dane KM; Middleton AL; Kennedy LM; Tong S; Walker SP
PLoS One; 2021; 16(10):e0258634. PubMed ID: 34669758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Pregnancy outcome following ultrasound diagnosis of macrosomia.
Delpapa EH; Mueller-Heubach E
Obstet Gynecol; 1991 Sep; 78(3 Pt 1):340-3. PubMed ID: 1876361
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
