Background & Aim: Measurement of fetal biometry in the second and third trimesters is an important part of these examinations and biometric measurements are combined routinely in order to calculate the estimated fetal weight (EFW). EFW is a useful parameter with which to predict birth weight and outcome when it is calculated a few days before delivery. The current study aimed to test how well the WHO fetal growth charts help to monitor fetal growth in our setting.  Methods: A total of 200 women were enrolled between November 2018 and December 2019, with data collection being completed with the last childbirth in February 2020. Ninety three cases were excluded so, a total of 107 women were recruited for the analysis. The first visit were between 8+0 and 12+6 weeks, and subsequent visits for fetal biometry were scheduled at approximately 4 weekly.  Results: Mean (± SD) age of enrolled women was 29.35 (5.71) years with range between 19 and 38 year and 104 (97.2%) of cases had living babies at time of delivery while only three cases had neonatal death. Fetal sex had no effect of fetal birth weight. WHO charts and birth weight had insignificant difference as regard SGA and average for gestational age but WHO charts overestimated the frequency of LGA. Hadlock formula and birth weight had insignificant difference as regard frequency of LGA while both of them had significant difference regarding SGA and average for gestational age.
Conclusion: In case of normal fetal growth and cases with suspected growth restriction, WHO charts are better to be used while in cases with suspected macrosomia, Hadlock formula is better to be used.