Head Circumference and Cognitive Outcome in IUGR:A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/saludcyt2024.1350Keywords:
Head Circumference, Fetal Growth Restriction, Cognitive Impairment, Intellectual Disability, Learning DisabilitiesAbstract
Introduction In intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), variation of head circumference (HC) and impaired cognitive function have been reported.
Objective To analyze HC and cognitive scores of IUGR vs. normal growth fetus (NGF).
Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted based on the published articles in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Sciences, and ProQuest (2003/1/1–2023/12/31) using PRISMA guidelines and RevMan 5.4. The quality assessment of each article was conducted using the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). The study protocol was registered with the CRD42024547189 number in PROSPERO.
Results The final articles included are 4 (155 IUGR, 375 NGF). Pooled results from the random-effects model showed that there was a significant difference in head circumference in IUGR (n = 155) vs. NGF (n = 375) of term + preterm [SMD= -0.42, 95% CI= -0.62 to -0.21, P < 0.0001; I2 = 0%, P = 0.79]; and IUGR (n = 128) vs. NGF (n = 326) of preterm newborns only [SMD= - 0.44, 95% CI= -0.67 to -0.21, P<0.0001; I2 = 0%, P = 0.67]. The Bayley-III cognitive scales between IUGR (n = 94) vs. NGF (n = 292) [SMD = - 0.30, 95% CI = - 0.66 to 0.07, P = 0.11; I2 = 28%, P = 0.24].
Conclusion Although there was a significant difference in the head circumference between IUGR and NGF, there were no considerable differences in cognitive achievement. These might be due to a successful effort during the catch-up period, when malnutrition and other factors are addressed
References
1. Sharma D, Shastri S, Sharma P. Intrauterine Growth Restriction: Antenatal and Postnatal Aspects. Clin Med Insights Pediatr. 2016;10:CMPed.S40070.
2. Gordijn SJ, Beune IM, Thilaganathan B, Papageorghiou A, Baschat AA, Baker PN, et al. Consensus definition of fetal growth restriction: a Delphi procedure. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;48(3):333–9.
3. Lees CC, Stampalija T, Baschat A, da Silva Costa F, Ferrazzi E, Figueras F, et al. ISUOG Practice Guidelines: diagnosis and management of small-for-gestational-age fetus and fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020;56(2):298–312.
4. Hasmasanu MG, Bolboaca SD, Baizat MI, Drugan TC, Zaharie GC. Neonatal short-term outcomes in infants with intrauterine growth restriction. Saudi Med J. 2015;36(8):947–53.
5. Malhotra A, Allison BJ, Castillo-Melendez M, Jenkin G, Polglase GR, Miller SL. Neonatal morbidities of fetal growth restriction: Pathophysiology and impact. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019;10(FEB):1–18.
6. Zamojska J, Niewiadomska-Jarosik K, Kierzkowska B, Gruca M, Wosiak A, Smolewska E. Lipid Profile in Children Born Small for Gestational Age. Nutrients. 2023;15(22).
7. Shrivastava D, Master A. Fetal Growth Restriction. J Obstet Gynecol India [Internet]. 2020;70(2):103–10. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-019-01278-4
8. Miller SL, Huppi PS, Mallard C. The consequences of fetal growth restriction on brain structure and neurodevelopmental outcome. J Physiol. 2016;594(4):807–23.
9. Kalanjati VP, Wixey JA, Miller SM, Colditz PB, Bjorkman ST. GABAA receptor expression and white matter disruption in intrauterine growth restricted piglets. Int J Dev Neurosci [Internet]. 2017;59:1–9. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdevneu.2017.02.004
10. Hartkopf J, Schleger F, Keune J, Wiechers C, Pauluschke-Froehlich J, Weiss M, et al. Impact of intrauterine growth restriction on cognitive and motor development at 2 years of age. Front Physiol. 2018;9(SEP):1–7.
11. Vollmer B, Edmonds CJ. School age neurological and cognitive outcomes of fetal growth retardation or small for gestational age birth weight. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019;10(MAR).
12. Sacchi C, De Carli P, Mento G, Farroni T, Visentin S, Simonelli A. Socio-emotional and cognitive development in intrauterine growth restricted (IUGR) and typical development infants: Early interactive patterns and underlying neural correlates. Rationale and methods of the study. Front Behav Neurosci. 2018;12(December):1–11.
13. Guellec I, Marret S, Baud O, Cambonie G, Lapillonne A, Roze JC, et al. Intrauterine growth restriction, head size at birth, and outcome in very preterm infants. J Pediatr [Internet]. 2015;167(5):975-981.e2. Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84945457054&doi=10.1016%2Fj.jpeds.2015.08.025&partnerID=40&md5=47c9af0a5cff905f2540de727f568b68
14. Radaelli G, Leal-Conceição E, Neto FK, Taurisano MRG, Majolo F, Bruzzo FTK, et al. Motor and cognitive outcomes of neonates with low birth weight in Brazil: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2023;81(2):186–200.
15. Hermena S, Assaf A, Donaldson O. Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis: Are Muscle Transfers a Satisfactory Treatment Option to Restore Shoulder Abduction in Delayed Adult Brachial Plexus Injuries? Cureus. 2021;13(1):1–10.
16. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt P, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The prisma 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Med Flum. 2021;57(4):444–65.
17. Endrinikapoulos A, Afifah DN, Mexitalia M, Andoyo R, Hatimah I, Nuryanto N. Study of the importance of protein needs for catch-up growth in Indonesian stunted children: a narrative review. SAGE Open Med. 2023;11.
18. Hendra FN, Helder MN, Ruslin M, Van Cann EM, Forouzanfar T. A network meta-analysis assessing the effectiveness of various radical and conservative surgical approaches regarding recurrence in treating solid/multicystic ameloblastomas. Sci Rep [Internet]. 2023;13(1):1–10. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-32190-7
19. Wells G, Shea B, O’Connell D, Peterson J. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Ottawa, Ottawa Hosp Res Inst [Internet]. 2000; Available from: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp
20. Von Hippel PT. The heterogeneity statistic I2 can be biased in small meta-analyses. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015;15(1):1–8.
21. Dettori JR, Norvell DC, Chapman JR. Fixed-Effect vs Random-Effects Models for Meta-Analysis: 3 Points to Consider. Glob Spine J. 2022;12(7):1624–6.
22. Morsing E, Åsard M, Ley D, Stjernqvist K, Maršál K. Cognitive function after intrauterine growth restriction and very preterm birth. Pediatrics. 2011;127(4).
23. Jensen RB, Juul A, Larsen T, Mortensen EL, Greisen G. Cognitive ability in adolescents born small for gestational age: Associations with fetal growth velocity, head circumference and postnatal growth. Early Hum Dev [Internet]. 2015;91(12):755–60. Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84983122754&doi=10.1016%2Fj.earlhumdev.2015.08.014&partnerID=40&md5=61e7352d9be5821c9a368b5fd4123885
24. Brembilla G, Righini A, Scelsa B, Lista G, Balestriero M, Cesari E, et al. Neuroimaging and neurodevelopmental outcome after early fetal growth restriction: NEUROPROJECT-FGR. Pediatr Res. 2021 Oct;90(4):869–75.
25. Sacchi C, O’Muircheartaigh J, Batalle D, Counsell SJ, Simonelli A, Cesano M, et al. Neurodevelopmental Outcomes following Intrauterine Growth Restriction and Very Preterm Birth. J Pediatr [Internet]. 2021;238:135-144.e10. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2021.07.002
26. Naganos S, Ueno K, Horiuchi J, Saitoe M. Learning defects in Drosophila growth restricted chico mutants are caused by attenuated adenylyl cyclase activity. Mol Brain [Internet]. 2016;9(1):1–10. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13041-016-0217-3
27. Anderson PJ, Burnett A. Assessing developmental delay in early childhood — concerns with the Bayley-III scales. Clin Neuropsychol [Internet]. 2017;31(2):371–81. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2016.1216518
28. Torras-Mañá M, Guillamón-Valenzuela M, Ramírez-Mallafré A, Brun-Gasca C, Fornieles-Deu A. Usefulness of the Bayley scales of infant and toddler development, third edition, in the early diagnosis of language disorder. Psicothema. 2014;26(3):349–56.
29. Ballot DE, Ramdin T, Rakotsoane D, Agaba F, Davies VA, Chirwa T, et al. Use of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition, to Assess Developmental Outcome in Infants and Young Children in an Urban Setting in South Africa. Int Sch Res Not. 2017;2017:1–5.
30. Watkins MW, Canivez GL, Dombrowski SC, McGill RJ, Pritchard AE, Holingue CB, et al. Long-term stability of Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–fifth edition scores in a clinical sample. Appl Neuropsychol Child. 2022;11(3):422–8.
31. Gomez R, Vance A, Watson SD. Structure of the Wechsler intelligence scale for children - Fourth edition in a group of children with ADHD. Front Psychol. 2016;7(MAY):1–11.
32. Canivez GL, Watkins MW, Good R, James K, James T. Construct validity of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Fourth UK Edition with a referred Irish sample: Wechsler and Cattell–Horn–Carroll model comparisons with 15 subtests. Br J Educ Psychol. 2017;87(3):383–407.
33. Abdelhamid GSM, Bassiouni MGA, Gómez-Benito J. Assessing cognitive abilities using the wais-iv: An item response theory approach. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(13).
34. Cicinelli G, Nobile E, Brighenti S, Bari S, Tonella E, Aresi A, et al. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Adults - Fourth Edition profiles of adults with autism spectrum disorder. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2022;31.
35. Merz ZC, Van Patten R, Hurless N, Grant A, McGrath AB. Furthering the Understanding of Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition Factor Structure in a Clinical Sample. Appl Neuropsychol [Internet]. 2021;28(1):12–23. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2019.1585351
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Galih Indra Permana, Viskasari Pintoko Kalanjati, Rimbun Rimbun, Abdurachman Abdurachman (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
