2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2009.04.026
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Are active labour and mode of delivery still a challenge for extremely low birth weight infants? Experience at a tertiary care hospital

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
8
1
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
2
8
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…None of the pregestational maternal diseases, obstetric complications and mode of delivery proved to be a significant risk factor of neonatal mortality of extreme prematurity in the present study, which was inconsistent with some previous studies [15, 16], but in accordance with others [8, 17]. A 5-min Apgar score ≤3 and infants with at least one major morbidity were the only two independent predictors of neonatal mortality at 7 and 28 days postpartum/discharge in the present study.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…None of the pregestational maternal diseases, obstetric complications and mode of delivery proved to be a significant risk factor of neonatal mortality of extreme prematurity in the present study, which was inconsistent with some previous studies [15, 16], but in accordance with others [8, 17]. A 5-min Apgar score ≤3 and infants with at least one major morbidity were the only two independent predictors of neonatal mortality at 7 and 28 days postpartum/discharge in the present study.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…There are conflicting data regarding the outcome of caesarean section in delivering extremely premature infants before 26 weeks’ gestation. Some studies showed that caesarean section was associated with improved neonatal survival and morbidity [4, 26], while others failed to show any survival benefit [17, 27]. Mukhopadhyay et al [27] showed that the survival rates for newborns delivered by caesarean section for fetal reasons before 26 weeks is very poor and suggested that caesarean section before 26 weeks should therefore be performed predominantly for maternal reasons only.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Barrett et al (30) reported that in twin babies with cephalic presentation at [32][33][34][35][36][37][38] +6 GW, a scheduled cesarean section has no effect on neonatal mortality and severe morbidity.…”
Section: Twin Pregnancy and Mortalitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a single-center, retrospective study conducted in Italy, it was emphasized that in the assessment performed on the 18-monthold babies (n=84) at <28 GW (40% of which were at <25 GW), cesarean section did not cause any improvement in terms of neurodevelopmental symptoms (37).…”
Section: Neurodevelopmental Prognosismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some studies suggest a reduction in stillbirth rate among periviable infants delivered by cesarean [7,12,17,22]. Other research including prospective studies evaluating long-term outcomes of neonates born at periviable gestational ages attribute little neonatal survival to delivery mode [4,18,20,27,28,30]. Despite these conflicting data, cesarean rates at extreme prematurity have increased dramatically over recent years [2,12,16,17,30].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%