Birth Order, Gestational Age, and Risk of Delivery Related Perinatal Death in Twins: Retrospective Cohort Study

Introduction: Late preterm infants (LPIs) are infants born between 340/7 and 366/7 weeks gestation. Morbidities in these infants are commonly considered a result of prematurity; however, some research has suggested immaturity may not be the sole cause of morbidities. We hypothesize that antecedents leading to late preterm birth are associated with different patterns of morbidities and that morbidities are the result of gestational age superimposed by the underlying etiologies of preterm delivery. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of late preterm neonates born at a single tertiary care center. We examined neonatal morbidities including apnea of prematurity, hyperbilirubinemia, hypoglycemia, and the requirement for continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the risk of each morbidity associated with 3 categorized antecedents of delivery, that is, spontaneous preterm labor, preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM), and medically indicated birth. We calculated the predictive probability of each antecedent resulting in individual morbidity across gestational ages. Results: 279 LPIs were included in the study. Decreasing gestational age was associated with significantly increased risk of apnea of prematurity, hyperbilirubinemia, and requirement of CPAP. In our cohort, the risk of hypoglycemia increased with gestational age, with the greatest incidence at 360−6 weeks. There was no significant association of risk of selected morbidities and the antecedents of late preterm delivery, with or without adjustment for gestational age, multiple gestation, small for gestational age (SGA), antenatal steroids, and delivery method. Discussion and Conclusion: This study found no difference in morbidity risk related to 3 common antecedents of preterm birth in LPIs. Our research suggests that immaturity is the primary factor in determining adverse outcomes, intensified by factors resulting in prematurity.

Download Full-text

Comparison of adverse perinatal outcomes between Asians and Caucasians: a population-based retrospective cohort study in Ontario

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth ◽

10.1186/s12884-020-03467-w ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Na Zeng ◽

Erica Erwin ◽

Wendy Wen ◽

Daniel J. Corsi ◽

Shi Wu Wen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cohort Study ◽

Birth Weight ◽

Preterm Birth ◽

Cesarean Section ◽

Gestational Age ◽

Retrospective Cohort Study ◽

Retrospective Cohort ◽

Perinatal Outcomes ◽

Population Based ◽

Adverse Perinatal Outcomes

Abstract Background Racial disparities in adverse perinatal outcomes have been studied in other countries, but little has been done for the Canadian population. In this study, we sought to examine the disparities in adverse perinatal outcomes between Asians and Caucasians in Ontario, Canada. Methods We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study that included all Asian and Caucasian women who attended a prenatal screening and resulted in a singleton birth in an Ontario hospital (April 1st, 2015-March 31st, 2017). Generalized estimating equation models were used to estimate the independent adjusted relative risks and adjusted risk difference of adverse perinatal outcomes for Asians compared with Caucasians. Results Among 237,293 eligible women, 31% were Asian and 69% were Caucasian. Asians were at an increased risk of gestational diabetes mellitus, placental previa, early preterm birth (< 32 weeks), preterm birth, emergency cesarean section, 3rd and 4th degree perineal tears, low birth weight (< 2500 g, < 1500 g), small-for-gestational-age (<10th percentile, <3rd percentile), neonatal intensive care unit admission, and hyperbilirubinemia requiring treatment, but had lower risks of preeclampsia, macrosomia (birth weight > 4000 g), large-for-gestational-age neonates, 5-min Apgar score < 7, and arterial cord pH ≤7.1, as compared with Caucasians. No difference in risk of elective cesarean section was observed between Asians and Caucasians. Conclusion There are significant differences in several adverse perinatal outcomes between Asians and Caucasians. These differences should be taken into consideration for clinical practices due to the large Asian population in Canada.

Download Full-text