Risk factors for macrosomia and its clinical consequences: a study of 350,311 pregnancies
Objectives: To identify demographic risk factors for either birthweight >4 kg or over the 90th centile and to quantify the obstetric risks. Study design: Data from 350,311 completed singleton pregnancies in the North West Thames Region between 1988 and 1997 were analysed using logistic regression...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology 2003-11, Vol.111 (1), p.9-14 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Objectives: To identify demographic risk factors for either birthweight >4
kg or over the 90th centile and to quantify the obstetric risks.
Study design: Data from 350,311 completed singleton pregnancies in the North West Thames Region between 1988 and 1997 were analysed using logistic regression. Predisposing factors and pregnancy outcome were compared by birthweight 2.5–4
kg (
n=259,902) and >4
kg (
n=36,462) and 10th–90th centile (
n=279,780) and >90th centile (
n=34,937).
Results: Macrosomia defined as birthweight >90th centile was more likely in women whose BMI >30 (kg/m
2) (odds ratio (OR) 2.08; confidence intervals (CI) 1.99, 2.17), parity >4 (OR 2.20; CI 2.02, 2.40), age >40 (OR 1.22; CI 1.11, 1.35) and in women with pre-existing diabetes (OR 6.97; CI 5.36, 8.16) or who developed gestational diabetes (OR 2.77; CI 2.51, 3.07). Macrosomia defined by birthweight >4
kg was better than birthweight >90th centile at predicting morbidity and was associated with a prolonged first and second stage of labour (OR 1.57; CI 1.51, 1.63) and (OR 2.03; CI 1.88, 2.19), respectively, an increased risk of instrumental vaginal delivery (OR 1.76; CI 1.68, 1.85), third degree perineal trauma (OR 2.73; CI 2.30, 3.23), emergency caesarean section (OR 1.84; CI 1.75, 1.93), postpartum haemorrhage (OR 2.01; CI 1.93, 2.10), Apgar score |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0301-2115 1872-7654 |
DOI: | 10.1016/S0301-2115(03)00154-4 |