Objective: Estimated fetal weight (EFW) and fetal biometry are complementary measures used to screen for fetal growth disturbances. Our aim was to provide international EFW standards to complement the INTERGROWTH‐21^st Fetal Growth Standards that are available for use worldwide.Methods: Women with an accurate gestational‐age assessment, who were enrolled in the prospective, international, multicenter, population‐based Fetal Growth Longitudinal Study (FGLS) and INTERBIO‐21^st Fetal Study (FS), two components of the INTERGROWTH‐21^st Project, had ultrasound scans every 5 weeks from 9–14 weeks' until 40 weeks' gestation. At each visit, measurements of fetal head circumference (HC), biparietal diameter, occipitofrontal diameter, abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL) were obtained blindly by dedicated research sonographers using standardized methods and identical ultrasound machines. Birth weight was measured within 12 h of delivery by dedicated research anthropometrists using standardized methods and identical electronic scales. Live babies without any congenital abnormality, who were born within 14 days of the last ultrasound scan, were selected for inclusion. As most births occurred at around 40 weeks' gestation, we constructed a bootstrap model selection and estimation procedure based on resampling of the complete dataset under an approximately uniform distribution of birth weight, thus enriching the sample size at extremes of fetal sizes, to achieve consistent estimates across the full range of fetal weight. We constructed reference centiles using second‐degree fractional polynomial models.Results: Of the overall population, 2404 babies were born within 14 days of the last ultrasound scan. Mean time between the last scan and birth was 7.7 (range, 0–14) days and was uniformly distributed. Birth weight was best estimated as a function of AC and HC (without FL) as log(EFW) = 5.084820 − 54.06633 × (AC/100)³ − 95.80076 × (AC/100)³ × log(AC/100) + 3.136370 × (HC/100), where EFW is in g and AC and HC are in cm. All other measures, gestational age, symphysis–fundus height, amniotic fluid indices and interactions between biometric measures and gestational age, were not retained in the selection process because they did not improve the prediction of EFW. Applying the formula to FGLS biometric data (n = 4231) enabled gestational age‐specific EFW tables to be constructed. At term, the EFW centiles matched those of the INTERGROWTH‐21^st Newborn Size Standards but, at < 37 weeks' gestation, the EFW centiles were, as expected, higher than those of babies born preterm. Comparing EFW cross‐sectional values with the INTERGROWTH‐21^st Preterm Postnatal Growth Standards confirmed that preterm postnatal growth is a different biological process from intrauterine growth.Conclusions: We provide an assessment of EFW, as an adjunct to routine ultrasound biometry, from 22 to 40 weeks' gestation. However, we strongly encourage clinicians to evaluate fetal growth using separate biometric measures such as HC and AC, as well as EFW, to avoid the minimalist approach of focusing on a single value. © 2016 Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Charts of size at birth are used to assess the postnatal growth of preterm babies on the assumption that extrauterine growth should mimic that in the uterus. The INTERGROWTH-21(st) Project assessed fetal, newborn, and postnatal growth in eight geographically defined populations, in which maternal health care and nutritional needs were met. From these populations, the Fetal Growth Longitudinal Study selected low-risk women starting antenatal care before 14 weeks' gestation and monitored fetal growth by ultrasonography. All preterm births from this cohort were eligible for the Preterm Postnatal Follow-up Study, which included standardised anthropometric measurements, feeding practices based on breastfeeding, and data on morbidity, treatments, and development. To construct the preterm postnatal growth standards, we selected all live singletons born between 26 and before 37 weeks' gestation without congenital malformations, fetal growth restriction, or severe postnatal morbidity. We did analyses with second-degree fractional polynomial regression models in a multilevel framework accounting for repeated measures. Fetal and neonatal data were pooled from study sites and stratified by postmenstrual age. For neonates, boys and girls were assessed separately. From 4607 women enrolled in the study, there were 224 preterm singleton births, of which 201 (90%) were enrolled in the Preterm Postnatal Follow-up Study. Variance component analysis showed that only 0·2% and 4·0% of the total variability in postnatal length and head circumference, respectively, could be attributed to between-site differences, justifying pooling the data from all study sites. Preterm growth patterns differed from those for babies in the INTERGROWTH-21(st) Newborn Size Standards. They overlapped with the WHO Child Growth Standards for term babies by 64 weeks' postmenstrual age. Our data have yielded standards for postnatal growth in preterm infants. These standards should be used for the assessment of preterm infants until 64 weeks' postmenstrual age, after which the WHO Child Growth Standards are appropriate. Size-at-birth charts should not be used to measure postnatal growth of preterm infants. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

When a mother’s milk is unavailable, the best alternative is donor milk (DM). Milk delivered to Human Milk Banks should be pasteurized in order to inactivate the microbial agents that may be present. Currently, pasteurization, performed at 62.5 °C for 30 min (Holder Pasteurization, HoP), is recommended for this purpose in international guidelines. Several studies have been performed to investigate the effects of HoP on the properties of DM. The present paper has the aim of reviewing the published papers on this topic, and to provide a comparison of the reported variations of biologically-active DM components before and after HoP. This review was performed by searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL and Cochrane Library databases. Studies that clearly identified the HoP parameters and compared the same DM samples, before and after pasteurization, were focused on. A total of 44 articles satisfied the above criteria, and were therefore selected. The findings from the literature report variable results. A possible explanation for this may be the heterogeneity of the test protocols that were applied. Moreover, the present review spans more than five decades, and modern pasteurizers may be able to modify the degradation kinetics for heat-sensitive substances, compared to older ones. Overall, the data indicate that HoP affects several milk components, although it is difficult to quantify the degradation degree. However, clinical practices demonstrate that many beneficial properties of DM still persist after HoP.