Mode of delivery and the survival of macrosomic infants in the United States, 1995-1999

被引:19
作者
Boulet, Sheree L.
Salihu, Hamisu M.
Alexander, Greg R.
机构
[1] Univ Alabama Birmingham, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Mat & Child Hlth, Birmingham, AL 35294 USA
[2] Ctr Dis Control & Prevent, Natl Ctr Birth Defects & Dev Disabil, Atlanta, GA USA
[3] Univ Med & Dent New Jersey, Robert Wood Johnson Med Sch, Piscataway, NJ USA
[4] Univ S Florida, Lawton & Rhea Chiles Ctr Healthy Mothers & Babies, Tampa, FL USA
来源
BIRTH-ISSUES IN PERINATAL CARE | 2006年 / 33卷 / 04期
关键词
macrosomia; neonatal mortality; cesarean section;
D O I
10.1111/j.1523-536X.2006.00119.x
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
Background: Although increases in perinatal mortality risk associated with fetal macrosomia are well documented, the optimal route of delivery for fetuses with suspected macrosomia remains controversial. The objective of this investigation was to assess the risk of neonatal death among macrosomic infants delivered vaginally compared with those delivered by cesarean section. Methods: Data were derived from the U.S. 1995-1999 Linked Live Birth-Infant Death Cohort files and term (37-44 wk), single live births to United States resident mothers selected. A proportional hazards model was used to analyze the risk of neonatal death associated with cesarean delivery among 3 categories of macrosomic infants (infants weighing 4,000-4,499 g; 4,500-4,999 g; and 5,000+ g). Results: After controlling for maternal characteristics and complications, the adjusted hazard ratio for neonatal death associated with cesarean delivery among the 3 categories of macrosomic infants was 1.40, 1.30, and 0.85. Conclusions: Although cesarean delivery may reduce the risk of death for the heaviest infants (5,000+ g), the relative benefit of this intervention for macrosomic infants weighing 4,000-4,999 g remains debatable. Thus, policies in support of prophylactic cesarean delivery for suspected fetal macrosomia may need to be reevaluated.
引用
收藏
页码:278 / 283
页数:6
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
Alexander GR, 1996, PUBLIC HEALTH REP, V111, P408
[2]  
American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, 2000, ACOG PRACTICE B, V22
[3]   Obstetric outcome of excessively overgrown fetuses (≥5000 g):: a case-control study [J].
Anoon, SS ;
Rizk, DEE ;
Ezimokhai, M .
JOURNAL OF PERINATAL MEDICINE, 2003, 31 (04) :295-301
[4]   The large fetus [J].
Berkus, MD ;
Conway, D ;
Langer, O .
CLINICAL OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1999, 42 (04) :766-784
[5]  
Boulet Sheree L, 2005, J Perinatol, V25, P569
[6]   Macrosomic births in the United States: Determinants, outcomes, and proposed grades of risk [J].
Boulet, SL ;
Alexander, GR ;
Salihu, HM ;
Pass, M .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2003, 188 (05) :1372-1378
[7]   Suspicion and treatment of the macrosomic fetus: A review [J].
Chauhan, SP ;
Grobman, WA ;
Gherman, RA ;
Chauhan, VB ;
Chang, G ;
Magann, EF ;
Hendrix, NW .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2005, 193 (02) :332-346
[8]  
CUNNINGHAM GF, 1997, WILLIAMS OBSTETRICS
[9]   Birth weight as a predictor of brachial plexus injury [J].
Ecker, JL ;
Greenberg, JA ;
Norwitz, ER ;
Nadel, AS ;
Repke, JT .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1997, 89 (05) :643-647
[10]   Maternal complications of fetal macrosomia [J].
Ferber, A .
CLINICAL OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2000, 43 (02) :335-339