Talk:Birth - Macrosomia
| About Discussion Pages |
|---|
Glossary Links
Cite this page: Hill, M.A. (2026, October 19) Embryology Birth - Macrosomia. Retrieved from https://embryology.med.unsw.edu.au/embryology/index.php/Talk:Birth_-_Macrosomia |
2011
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.
PMID 21501437
2010
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.
Abstract
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.
PMID 20034003
see also PMID 20373483
