Maternal and fetal outcomes of large fetus delivery: A comparative study

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Jun 10, 2011
Download
pdf
Vol. 89 No. 6 (2011): Issue Jun 2011

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Chiraz El Fekih
Mechaal Mourali
Nadia Ouerdiane
Seddik Oueslati
Amine Hadj Hassine
Mounira Chaabène
Nabil Ben Zineb

Abstract

Aim : To review the deliveries of macrosomic babies, weighing over than 4000g and their obstetrical and neonatal outcomes.
Methods: Retrospective study involving a total of 209 deliveries at term of macrosomic babies between Marsh 2006 and February 2007 in the Maternity Hospital of Mahmoud ELMATRI, Tunis. The study concerned risk factors, mode of delivery and the incidence of maternal and perinatal complications.We compared data in the study group to a control group of normal weight infants delivered at the same period.
Results: Macrosomia occurred in 9.2% of all deliveries. The main risk factors of macrosomia were maternal age over 30 years (p=0,017), multiparty (p<0.001), diabetes mellitus (p=0.012) and prolonged term of delivery (p=0.02). These risk factors were statistically significant compared to control group. Caesarian
delivery was achieved in 24.4% in macrosomy group and in 13.7% in control group (p=0,003) the major part occurred during labor.
Among vaginal deliveries in macrosomia group, shoulder dystocia was noted in 1,9%, fetal respiratory failure and admission in intensive care unit was noted in 4,8% of the cases and hypoglycemia complicated 15,8% of deliveries. Maternal complications were dominated by post partum hemorrhage documented in 1.2% of the cases and perineal tears noted in 8,2% of vaginal deliveries.
Conclusion: Vaginal delivery is the most frequent mode of delivery for a fetus weighing in excess of 4 kg and vaginal delivery should be attempted in the absence of contraindications and there is no need for elective systematic caesarian. However, shoulder dystocia remains the main complication of vaginal delivery for macrosomic fetuses and requires experienced obstetricians to manage these deliveries

Keywords:

Macrosomy, Diabetes, Cesarean section, Shoulder dystocia

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

References

  1. Essel JK, Opai-Tetteh ET. Macrosomia-maternal and fetal risk factors. S Afr Med J 1995; 85:43-46.
  2. Ehrenberg HM, Mercer BM, Catalano PM. The influence of obesity and diabetes on the prevalence of Macrosomia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191:964-8.
  3. Silverman BL, Rizzo T, Green OC, et al. Long-term prospective evaluation of offspring of diabetic mothers. Diabetes 1991; 40:121-5.
  4. Yang X, Zhang H, Dong L, Yu S, Guo Z, Hsu-Hage BH. The effect of glucose levels on fetal birth weight: a study of Chinese gravidas in Tianjin, China. J Diabetes Complications. 2004; 18: 37-41.
  5. Langer O. Fetal Macrosomia:etiologic factors. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2000;43: 283-97.
  6. Di cianni G, Benzi L, Bottomne P, et al. Neonatal outcomes and obstetric complications in women with gestational diabetes: effects of maternal body mass index. Int J Obes Relat metab Disord 1996; 20:445-9.
  7. Berkus MD, Conway D, Langer O. The large fetus. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1999; 42:766-784.
  8. Boyd M, Usher R, Mc Lean F. Fetal Macrosomia: Prediction, risks, proposed management. Obstet Gynecol 1983; 61:715-7.
  9. Sulik SM, Greenwald JL. Evaluation and Management of Post date Pregnancy. Am Fam Physician 1994; 49:1177-92.
  10. Sacks D.A. Fetal macrosomia and gestational diabetes:what's the problem? .Obstet Gynecol 1993;81:775-81.
  11. Madsen H, Ditzel J. The influence of maternal weight, smoking, vascular complications and glucose regulation on the birth weight of infants of type 1 diabetic women. Eur J Obst Gynecol Reprod Bio 1991; 39:175-79.
  12. Wiznitzer A, Furman B, Zuili I, Shany S, Reece EA, Mazor M. Cord leptin level and fetal macrosomia. Obstet Gynecol. 1996; 5:707-13.
  13. Johnson J.W., Longmate J.A, Frentzen B. Excessive maternal weight gain and pregnancy out come. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 167: 353-70.
  14. Spellacy WN, Miller S, Winegar A, Peterson PQ. Macrosomiamaternal characteristics and infant complication .Obstet Gynecol 1985;66:158-63.
  15. Berard J., Dufour P., Vinatier D., et al macrosomia: risk factors and outcome. A study of the outcome concerning 100cases >4500 g. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1998; 77:51-59.
  16. Persson B., Stangenberg M., Lunell N.O., Brodin U., Holmberg N.G, Vaclavinkova V. Prediction of size of infants at birth by measurement of symphysis fundus height. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1986; 93: 206-11.
  17. Lipscomb K.R., Gregory K, Shaw K. The outcome of macrosomic infants weighing at least 4500 grams: LosAngeles County + University of Southern California experience. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 85:558-64.
  18. Rydhstrom H, Ingermarsson I. The extremely large fetus— antenatal identification, risks and proposed management. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1989;68:59-63.
  19. Panel P, de Meens J.B., Yanoulopoulos B., Deshayes M, Magnin G. Delivery of large infants. Management and results of 198 cases. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod : 1991. 20, 729-36.
  20. Diani F, Moscatelli C., Toppano B, Turinetto A. Fetal macrosomia and mode of delivery. Minerva Ginecologica 1995;47:77-82.
  21. Diani F, Venanzi S., Zanconato G., Murari S., Moscatelli C, Turinetto A. Fetal macrosomia and management ofdelivery. Clini Exp Obstet Gynecol 1997; 24:212-14.
  22. Lim JH, Tan BC, Jammal AE, Symonds EMJ. Delivery of macrosomic babies:management and outcomes of 330 cases. Obstet Gynaecol 2002; 22: 370-4.
  23. Rasmussen B.R, Mosgaard K.E. Macrosomia: Diagnosis, delivery and complications. Ugeskr Laeger 1993;155:3185-90
  24. Boulet SL, Salihu HM, Alexander GR. Mode of delivery and birth outcomes of macrosomic infants. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2004; 24: 622-9.
  25. Chauhan SP, Lynn NN, Sanderson M, Humphries J, Cole JH, Scardo JA. A scoring system for detection of Macrosomia and prediction of shoulder dystocia: A disappointment. J Matern Fetal Med 2006; 19: 699-705.
  26. Bahar AM. Risk factors and fetal outcomes in cases of shoulder dystocia compared with normal deliveries of a similar birth weight. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1996; 103: 868-72.