Validation of gestational age determination from ultrasound or a metabolic gestational age algorithm using exact date of conception in a cohort of newborns conceived using assisted reproduction technologies.

backgroundAccurate estimates of gestational age in pregnancy are important for the provision of optimal care. Although current guidelines generally recommend estimating gestational age via first-trimester ultrasound measurement of crown-rump length, error associated with this method can range from 3 to 8 days of gestation. In pregnancies resulting from assisted reproductive technology, estimated due date can be calculated on the basis of the age of the embryo and the date of embryo transfer, arguably providing the most accurate estimates possible. We have developed and extensively validated statistical models to estimate gestational age postnatally using metabolomic markers from blood samples in combination with clinical and demographic data. These models have shown high accuracy compared with first-trimester ultrasound, the recommended method for estimating gestational age in spontaneous pregnancies. We hypothesized that gestational age derived from date and stage of embryo at transfer in newborns conceived using assisted reproduction therapy would provide the most accurate reference standard possible to evaluate and compare the accuracy of both first-trimester ultrasound and metabolomic model-based gestational dating.

objectiveThis study aimed to validate both first-trimester ultrasound dating and postnatal metabolomic gestational age estimation models against gestational age derived from date and stage of embryo at transfer in a cohort of newborns conceived via assisted reproductive technology, both overall and in important subgroups of interest (preterm birth, small for gestational age, and multiple birth). STUDY

designThis was a retrospective cohort study of infants born in Ontario, Canada between 2015 and 2017 and captured in the provincial birth registry. Spontaneous conceptions were randomly partitioned into a model derivation sample (80%) and a test sample (20%) for model validation. A cohort of assisted conceptions resulting from fresh embryo transfers was derived to evaluate the accuracy of both ultrasound and model-based gestational dating. Postnatal gestational age estimation models were developed with multivariable linear regression using elastic-net regularization. Gestational age estimates from dating ultrasound and from postnatal metabolomic models were compared with date of embryo transfer reference gestational age in the independent test cohorts. Accuracy was quantified by calculating mean absolute error and the square root of mean squared error.

resultsOur model derivation cohort included 202,300 spontaneous conceptions, and the testing cohorts included 50,735 spontaneous conceptions and 1924 assisted conceptions. In the assisted conception cohort, first-trimester dating ultrasound was accurate to within approximately ±1.5 days compared with date of embryo transfer reference overall (mean absolute error, 0.21 [95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.23]). When compared with gestational age derived from date of embryo transfer, the metabolomic estimation models were accurate to within approximately ±5 days overall (0.79 [0.76-0.81] weeks). When ultrasound was used as the reference in validating the metabolomic model, the mean absolute error was slightly higher overall (0.81 [0.78-0.84] weeks). In general, the accuracy of gestational age estimates derived from ultrasound or metabolomic models was highest in term infants and lower in preterm and small-for-gestational-age newborns.

conclusionOur findings support the accuracy of ultrasound as a gestational age dating tool. They also support the potential utility of metabolic gestational age dating algorithms in settings where ultrasound or other accurate methods of estimating gestational age are not available because of lack of infrastructure or specialized training (eg, low-income countries). However, the accuracy of metabolomic model-based dating was generally lower than that of ultrasound.