Donald School Journal of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Register      Login

VOLUME 4 , ISSUE 4 ( October-December, 2010 ) > List of Articles


Role of Fetal Thigh Circumference in Estimation of Birth Weight by Ultrasound

Sonal Grover, Krishna Dahiya, Jyotsna Sen, Nirmala Duhan

Keywords : Fetal thigh circumference,Ultrasound,Birth weight

Citation Information : Grover S, Dahiya K, Sen J, Duhan N. Role of Fetal Thigh Circumference in Estimation of Birth Weight by Ultrasound. Donald School J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010; 4 (4):461-465.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10009-1168

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-09-2011

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2010; The Author(s).



To evaluate the accuracy and usefulness of predicting birth weight by measuring fetal thigh circumference by ultrasound and to compare with other conventional methods like Johnson's and Hadlock's.


In 100 pregnant women, ultrasonic measurements of mid-thigh circumference, along with BPD, FL and AC were done within 48 hours before delivery. Birth weights were estimated by Johnson's clinical method, Hadlock's and Vintzileos’ method. Statistical analysis of various ultrasound birth weight formulae in different weight categories was done and compared with each other, and also with clinical method.


In the present study, Vintzileos’ method was found to be better than Johnson's and Hadlock's in predicting birth weight in the categories < 2500 gm, and 2500 to 3000 gm. Between 3000 and 3500 gm, it was better than Johnson's method, while the results were comparable to Hadlock's method. In the category > 3500 gm, all three methods were comparable to each other, however it could be because of the small sample size involved (n = 6).


Incorporating fetal thigh circumference measurements along with biparietal diameter, femur length and abdominal circumference, significantly improved the accuracy of birth weight estimations by ultrasound. There was a good correlation between ultrasound measurements and actual postnatal measurements of thigh circumference (r2 = 0.71).

PDF Share
  1. Re-evaluation of clinical estimation of fetal weight: A comparison with ultrasound. J Obstet Gynecol 1990;10:199-201.
  2. Parous patients’ estimate of birth weight in post term pregnancy. J Perinatol 1995;15:192-94.
  3. Accuracy of estimating fetal weight by abdominal palpation. J Reprod Med 1972;9:58-60.
  4. Sonographic estimation of fetal weight. The value of femur length in addition to head and abdomen measurements. Radiology 1984;150:535-40.
  5. Estimation of fetal weight with the use of head, body, and femur measurements: A prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985;151:333-37.
  6. Fetal weight estimation formulas with head, abdominal, femur, and thigh circumference measurements. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987;157:410-14.
  7. Estimation of fetal weight using longitudinal menstruation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1954;68:891.
  8. Ultrasound fetal thigh-calf circumferences and gestational age-independent fetal ratios in normal pregnancy. J Ultrasound Med 1985:4:287.
  9. Birth weight prediction by three dimensional ultrasonography: Fractional limb volume. J Ultrasound Med 2001;20:1283-92.
  10. Fetal weight prediction by thigh volume measurement with three-dimensional ultrasonography. Obstet Gynecol 2002;96:157-61.
  11. Thigh Circumference in assessing malnutrition in preschool children. Indian Pediatrics 1988;25:255-57.
  12. Comparison of malnourished children selected by weight-for-age, mid-upper-arm circumference, and maximum thigh circumference. J Trop Pediatrics 1986;32:190-95.
  13. Prediction of birth weight using fetal thigh and upper arm volumes by three dimensional ultrasonography in a Brazilian population. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2010 May;23(5):393-98.
  14. A systematic review of the ultrasound estimation of fetal weight. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Jan;25(1):80-89.
  15. Three-dimensional ultrasound-assessed fetal thigh volumetry in predicting birth weight. Obstet Gynecol 1997;90(3):331-39.
  16. Estimate of birth weight using two- and three-dimensional ultrasonography. Rev Assoc Med Bras 2010;56(2):204-08.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.