Talk:Birth - Macrosomia
|About Discussion Pages|
Cite this page: Hill, M.A. (2019, June 19) Embryology Birth - Macrosomia. Retrieved from https://embryology.med.unsw.edu.au/embryology/index.php/Talk:Birth_-_Macrosomia
10 Most Recent
Note - This sub-heading shows an automated computer PubMed search using the listed sub-heading term. References appear in this list based upon the date of the actual page viewing. Therefore the list of references do not reflect any editorial selection of material based on content or relevance. In comparison, references listed on the content page and discussion page (under the publication year sub-headings) do include editorial selection based upon relevance and availability. (More? Pubmed Most Recent)
Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Diet: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Examining the Impact of Modified Dietary Interventions on Maternal Glucose Control and Neonatal Birth Weight
Diabetes Care. 2018 Jul;41(7):1346-1361. doi: 10.2337/dc18-0102.
Yamamoto JM1, Kellett JE2, Balsells M3, García-Patterson A4, Hadar E5, Solà I4,6,7, Gich I7,8,9, van der Beek EM10,11, Castañeda-Gutiérrez E12, Heinonen S13,14, Hod M5, Laitinen K15,16, Olsen SF17, Poston L18, Rueda R19, Rust P20, van Lieshout L21, Schelkle B21, Murphy HR22,23,24, Corcoy R25,26,27. Author information Abstract OBJECTIVE: Medical nutrition therapy is a mainstay of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) treatment. However, data are limited regarding the optimal diet for achieving euglycemia and improved perinatal outcomes. This study aims to investigate whether modified dietary interventions are associated with improved glycemia and/or improved birth weight outcomes in women with GDM when compared with control dietary interventions. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data from published randomized controlled trials that reported on dietary components, maternal glycemia, and birth weight were gathered from 12 databases. Data were extracted in duplicate using prespecified forms. RESULTS: From 2,269 records screened, 18 randomized controlled trials involving 1,151 women were included. Pooled analysis demonstrated that for modified dietary interventions when compared with control subjects, there was a larger decrease in fasting and postprandial glucose (-4.07 mg/dL [95% CI -7.58, -0.57]; P = 0.02 and -7.78 mg/dL [95% CI -12.27, -3.29]; P = 0.0007, respectively) and a lower need for medication treatment (relative risk 0.65 [95% CI 0.47, 0.88]; P = 0.006). For neonatal outcomes, analysis of 16 randomized controlled trials including 841 participants showed that modified dietary interventions were associated with lower infant birth weight (-170.62 g [95% CI -333.64, -7.60]; P = 0.04) and less macrosomia (relative risk 0.49 [95% CI 0.27, 0.88]; P = 0.02). The quality of evidence for these outcomes was low to very low. Baseline differences between groups in postprandial glucose may have influenced glucose-related outcomes. As well, relatively small numbers of study participants limit between-diet comparison. CONCLUSIONS: Modified dietary interventions favorably influenced outcomes related to maternal glycemia and birth weight. This indicates that there is room for improvement in usual dietary advice for women with GDM. © 2018 by the American Diabetes Association. Comment in Nutrition Therapy in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Time to Move Forward. [Diabetes Care. 2018] PMID: 29934478 DOI: 10.2337/dc18-0102
Searching for the Definition of Macrosomia through an Outcome-Based Approach
PLoS One. 2014 Jun 18;9(6):e100192. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0100192. eCollection 2014.
Ye J, Zhang L, Chen Y, Fang F, Luo Z, Zhang J.
BACKGROUND: Macrosomia has been defined in various ways by obstetricians and researchers. The purpose of the present study was to search for a definition of macrosomia through an outcome-based approach. METHODS: In a study of 30,831,694 singleton term live births and 38,053 stillbirths in the U.S. Linked Birth-Infant Death Cohort datasets (1995-2004), we compared the occurrence of stillbirth, neonatal death, and 5-min Apgar score less than four in subgroups of birthweight (4000-4099 g, 4100-4199 g, 4200-4299 g, 4300-4399 g, 4400-4499 g, 4500-4999 g vs. reference group 3500-4000 g) and birthweight percentile for gestational age (90th-94th percentile, 95th-96th, and ≥97th percentile, vs. reference group 75th-90th percentile). RESULTS: There was no significant increase in adverse perinatal outcomes until birthweight exceeded the 97th percentile. Weight-specific odds ratios (ORs) elevated substantially to 2 when birthweight exceeded 4500 g in Whites. In Blacks and Hispanics, the aORs exceeded 2 for 5-min Apgar less than four when birthweight exceeded 4300 g. For vaginal deliveries, the aORs of perinatal morbidity and mortality were larger for most of the subgroups, but the patterns remained the same. CONCLUSIONS: A birthweight greater than 4500 g in Whites, or 4300 g in Blacks and Hispanics regardless of gestational age is the optimal threshold to define macrosomia. A birthweight greater than the 97th percentile for a given gestational age, irrespective of race is also reasonable to define macrosomia. The former may be more clinically useful and simpler to apply.
Prediction and prevention of the macrosomic fetus
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2012 Jun;162(2):125-30. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.03.005. Epub 2012 Mar 27.
Walsh JM, McAuliffe FM. Source UCD Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Medicine and Medical Science, University College Dublin, National Maternity Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. email@example.com
Fetal macrosomia is associated with significant maternal and neonatal morbidity. In the long term, infants who are large for gestational age are more likely than other infants to be obese in childhood, adolescence and early adulthood, and are inherently at higher risk of cardiovascular and metabolic complications in adulthood. With over one billion adults in the world now overweight and more than 600 million clinically obese, preventing the vicious cycle effect of fetal macrosomia and childhood obesity is an increasingly pertinent issue. Fetal growth is determined by a complex interplay of various genetic and environmental influences. Consequently the prediction of pregnancies at risk of pathological overgrowth is difficult. Many risk factors for fetal macrosomia, such as maternal obesity and advanced maternal age, are also conversely associated with intrauterine growth restriction. Sonographic detection of fetal macrosomia is notoriously fraught with difficulties, with dozens of formulas for estimated fetal weight proposed but few with sufficient sensitivity to alter clinical practice. This calls into question policies of elective delivery based on projected estimated fetal weight cut-offs alone. More recently the identification of markers of fetal adiposity and maternal serum biomarkers are being investigated to improve the antenatal detection of the large for gestational age fetus. Prevention of fetal macrosomia is entirely dependent upon correct identification of those at risk. Maternal weight, gestational weight gain and glycaemic control are the risk factors for fetal macrosomia that are most amenable to intervention, and have potential maternal health benefits beyond pregnancy and childbirth. The ideal method of optimising maternal weight and glucose homeostasis is yet to be elucidated, though a number of promising advances are recently being reported. In this review we outline the contemporary evidence for the prediction and prevention of fetal macrosomia, which is indeed a contemporary dilemma. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
Occurrence of fetal macrosomia rate and its maternal and neonatal complications: a 5-year cohort study
ISRN Obstet Gynecol. 2012;2012:353791. doi: 10.5402/2012/353791. Epub 2012 Nov 14.
Najafian M, Cheraghi M. Source Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, School of Medicine, Ahwaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahwaz 61357-15794, Iran. Abstract Background. Macrosomia is defined as an infant's birth weight of more than 4000 g at term which is to different maternal and neonatal complications. Several studies have been done on factors influencing risk of macrosomia, but there is lack of information and study in our country regarding macrosomia complications. Objective. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of macrosomia and its complications. Method. A cohort study was conducted from 2007 to 2011 at Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, Razi Hospital in Ahvaz city, Iran. All pregnant mothers who were referred to Obstetrics and Gynecology Department for delivery were included in this study. The total number of 201,102 pregnant mothers was recruited and divided into case and control groups after delivery (macrosomia (case) and normal weight infants (control) groups). Results. Out of total deliveries (201,102), there were 1800 macrosomia, (9%). Gestational diabetes, maternal obesity (BMI), maternal aged and positive history of previous macrosomia were the major risk factors for macrosomia which were compared with the normal weight infant groups (P < 0.001 for all parameters). Neonatal complications associated with macrosomia included humerus-clavicle fractures and arm-brachial plexus injury which were significant compared to the control group (P < 0.001 for all parameters). Conclusion. The macrosomia is potentially dangerous for the mother and the neonate. It is important to recognize the suspected fetal macrosomia to prevent its risk factors and complications. There is a need to provide all delivery facilities and care services to prevent and reduce the maternal and neonatal macrosomia complications.
Maternal serum adiponectin at 11 to 13 weeks of gestation in the prediction of macrosomia
Prenat Diagn. 2011 May;31(5):479-83. doi: 10.1002/pd.2723. Epub 2011 Mar 10.
Nanda S, Akolekar R, Sarquis R, Mosconi AP, Nicolaides KH. Source Harris Birthright Research Centre for Fetal Medicine, King's College Hospital, London, UK. Abstract OBJECTIVE: To examine the potential role of maternal serum level of adiponectin in the first trimester of pregnancy in the prediction of neonatal macrosomia. METHODS: Maternal serum adiponectin concentration was measured in a case-control study of singleton pregnancies at 11 to 13 weeks' gestation, which included 50 cases that subsequently delivered macrosomic neonates with birth weight above the 95th percentile for gestation at delivery and 300 controls who delivered appropriate for gestational age neonates. The median multiple of the median (MoM) serum adiponectin in the two outcome groups was compared and the bivariate Gaussian distributions were simulated in a screened population of 33 344 pregnancies to estimate the performance of screening for macrosomia by a combination of maternal characteristics and obstetric history with serum adiponectin. RESULTS: In the macrosomic group the median serum adiponectin [0.82, interquartile range (IQR): 0.56-1.02 MoM] was significantly lower than in the non-macrosomic controls (1.02, IQR: 0.70-1.29 MoM; p = 0.001). The estimated detection rate of macrosomia, at fixed false positive rate of 10%, from maternal characteristics and obstetric history was 34.6% and this increased to 38.2% with the addition of serum adiponectin. CONCLUSION: Maternal serum adiponectin at 11 to 13 weeks is a useful biomarker for early prediction of macrosomia. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Effect of screening and management of diabetes during pregnancy on stillbirths
BMC Public Health. 2011 Apr 13;11 Suppl 3:S2.
Syed M, Javed H, Yakoob MY, Bhutta ZA. Source Division of Women & Child Health, The Aga Khan University, Stadium Road, PO Box 3500, Karachi, Pakistan. Abstract BACKGROUND: Diabetes during pregnancy is associated with significant risk of complications to the mother, fetus and newborn. We reviewed the potential impact of early detection and control of diabetes mellitus during pregnancy on stillbirths for possible inclusion in the Lives Saved Tool (LiST). METHODS: A systematic literature search up to July 2010 was done to identify all published randomized controlled trials and observational studies. A standardized data abstraction sheet was employed and data were abstracted by two independent authors. Meta-analyses were performed with different sub-group analyses. The analyses were graded according to the CHERG rules using the adapted GRADE criteria and recommendations made after assessing the overall quality of the studies included in the meta-analyses. RESULTS: A total of 70 studies were selected for data extraction including fourteen intervention studies and fifty six observational studies. No randomized controlled trials were identified evaluating early detection of diabetes mellitus in pregnancy versus standard screening (glucose challenge test between 24th to 28th week of gestation) in pregnancy. Intensive management of gestational diabetes (including specialized dietary advice, increased monitoring and tailored dietary therapy) during pregnancy (3 studies: 3791 participants) versus conventional management (dietary advice and insulin as required) was associated with a non-significant reduction in the risk of stillbirths (RR 0.20; 95% CI: 0.03-1.10) ('moderate' quality evidence). Optimal control of serum blood glucose versus sub-optimal control was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of perinatal mortality (2 studies, 5286 participants: RR = 0.40, 95% CI 0.25- 0.63), but not stillbirths (3 studies, 2469 participants: RR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.14-1.88). Preconception care of diabetes (information about need for optimization of glycemic control before pregnancy, assessment of diabetes complications, review of dietary habits, intensification of capillary blood glucose self-monitoring and optimization of insulin therapy) versus none (3 studies: 910 participants) was associated with a reduction in perinatal mortality (RR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.14 -0.60). Using the Delphi process for estimating effect size of optimal diabetes recognition and management yielded a median effect size of 10% reduction in stillbirths. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes, especially pre-gestational diabetes with its attendant vascular complications, is a significant risk factor for stillbirth and perinatal death. Our review highlights the fact that very few studies of adequate quality are available that can provide estimates of the effect of screening for aid management of diabetes in pregnancy on stillbirth risk. Using the Delphi process we recommend a conservative 10% reduction in the risk of stillbirths, as a point estimate for inclusion in the LiST.
Birth-weight prediction by two- and three-dimensional ultrasound imaging
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Apr;35(4):426-33.
Bennini JR, Marussi EF, Barini R, Faro C, Peralta CF. Source Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center for Integral Assistance to Women's Health, State University of Campinas Medical School, Campinas, Brazil.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the accuracies of birth-weight predicting models derived from two-dimensional (2D) ultrasound parameters and from total fetal thigh volumes measured by three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound imaging; and to compare the performances of these formulae with those of previously published equations. METHODS: A total of 210 patients were evaluated to create a formula-generating group (n = 150) and a prospective-validation group (n = 60). Polynomial regression analysis was performed on the first group to generate one equation based on 2D ultrasound measurements, one based on fetal thigh volume measured by the multiplanar technique (ThiM) and one based on fetal thigh volume obtained by the Virtual Organ Computer-aided AnaLysis (VOCAL()) method (ThiV). Paired-samples t-tests with Bonferroni adjustments were used to compare the performances of these equations in the formula-finding and the prospective-validation groups. The same approach was used to compare the accuracies of the new 2D and 3D formulae with those of both original and modified 2D equations from previous publications, as well as the 3D model reported by Chang et al. RESULTS: The formulae with the best fit for the prediction of birth weight were: estimated fetal weight (EFW) = - 562.824 + 11.962x AC x FDL + 0.009 x BPD(2)x AC(2) (where AC is abdominal circumference, FDL is femur diaphysis length and BPD is biparietal diameter), EFW = 1033.286 + 12.733 x ThiM, and EFW = 1025.383 + 12.775 x ThiV. For both the formula-generating and the prospective-validation groups, there were no significant differences between the accuracies of the new 2D and 3D models in the prediction of birth weight. When applied to our population, the performances of the modified and original versions of the previously published 2D equations and the performance of the original 3D formula reported by Chang et al. were all significantly worse than our models. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that the greatest sources of discrepancy in estimation of birth weight are the phenotypic differences among patients used to create each of the formulae mentioned in this study. Our data reinforce the need for customized birth-weight prediction formulae, regardless of whether 2D or 3D measurements are employed. Copyright 2009 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Macrosomia: a new formula for optimized fetal weight estimation
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Jan;35(1):42-7.
Hart NC, Hilbert A, Meurer B, Schrauder M, Schmid M, Siemer J, Voigt M, Schild RL. Source Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Diakonische Dienste Henriettenstiftung, Hannover, Germany. Erratum in Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Feb;37(2):254.
OBJECTIVES: To develop and test a specific formula for estimating weight in the macrosomic fetus. METHODS: Ultrasound estimations of fetal weight were carried out within 1 week of delivery in 424 singleton fetuses with a birth weight of > or = 4000 g. Exclusion criteria were multiple pregnancy, intrauterine death and major structural or chromosomal anomalies. Stepwise regression modeling was used to derive a prediction formula with birth weight as the dependent variable and maternal booking weight and fetal biometric measurements as independent parameters. After a new formula for estimated fetal weight (EFW) had been developed in a formula-finding group (n = 284), it was compared with commonly used weight equations (evaluation group, n = 140). RESULTS: The new formula (log(e)EFW = 7.6377445039 + 0.0002951035 x maternal weight + 0.0003949464 x head circumference + 0.0005241529 x abdominal circumference + 0.0048698624 x femur length) proved to be superior to established equations, with the smallest mean error (mean +/- SD, -10 +/- 202 g), the smallest mean percentage error (mean +/- SD, -0.03 +/- 4.6%) and the lowest mean absolute percentage error (3.69 (range, 0.05-13.57)%) when studied in the evaluation group. With the new formula, 77.9% of estimates fell within +/- 5% of the actual weight at birth, 97.1% within +/- 10%, and 100% within +/- 15% and +/- 20%. CONCLUSIONS: The new formula allows better weight estimation in the macrosomic fetus. Comment in Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Apr;35(4):503-4; author reply 504-5.
see also PMID 20373483