Impact of body weight on the outcome of pregnancy

Aljahdali, Ettedal A.

doi:10.15537/smj.2021.42.10.20210293

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study PPH was more frequent in overweight and obese women (4.0%) compared with normal BMI (2.5%) which is in line with results of Fyfe M E et al [21], Ettedal A and Aljahdal [26] and Humphrey MD [27]. Amal A. El Badawy et al [28] in their study observed that obese women have an increased risk of PPH (OR= 4.01) regardless of mode of delivery.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Predictive analysis of maternal subcutaneous fat thickness for the risk of postpartum haemorrhage

Bansal¹,

Benwal²,

Arora³

et al. 2023

Int. J. Sci. Res. Arch.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The incidence of postpartum haemorrhage has been increasing in several developed countries over the past two decades. Obese women are at increased risk of postpartum hemorrhage. Till date BMI has been used to define obesity. Maternal abdominal subcutaneous fat thickness (SCFT) can be used as a measure for central obesity and can be measured by ultrasound easily. The present study was done to find association between maternal BMI and SCFT with development of PPH and to find a cut-off value of BMI and SCFT for prediction of risk of PPH. Methods: 200 women with live singleton pregnancy of 16-18 weeks gestation were included in the study after obtaining written informed consent. Maternal abdominal subcutaneous thickness was measured by USG. All women were monitored till delivery and observed for PPH. All data were entered into MS excel sheet and analysed. Results: Mean BMI was significantly more in women who had PPH (25.85 ± 3.24 vs 22.63 ± 2.80 kg/m2, p - <0.001). Mean SCFT was significantly more in women who had PPH than in women without PPH (16.12 ± 2.75 vs 12.22 ± 3.00 mm, p - <0.001). On ROC curve analysis, SCFT above 15.7 mm (AUC=0.840) predicted PPH with a sensitivity of 85% and specificity of 86% and associated with approximately 34 times increased risk of PPH [OR 34.1; 95% CI ((7.1383 – 162.49290, p - <0.0001]. Conclusion: Maternal abdominal subcutaneous fat thickness measured at 16 to 18 weeks of pregnancy by USG is a reliable marker to identify women at risk of PPH.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Predictive analysis of maternal subcutaneous fat thickness for the risk of postpartum haemorrhage

Bansal¹,

Benwal²,

Arora³

et al. 2023

Int. J. Sci. Res. Arch.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Epidemiology of Macrosomia in Saudi Arabia: An Analysis of 12,045 Pregnancies from the Riyadh Mother and Baby Multicenter Cohort Study (RAHMA) Database

Wahabi,

Fayed,

Aleyeidi

et al. 2024

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To investigate the prevalence, risk factors, and complications associated with delivering macrosomic babies. Methods: Singleton term pregnancies (12,045) were studied. Macrosomia was categorized using the following two definitions: birthweight > 4 kg and birthweight ≥ 90th percentile (3.7 kg). Regression models were developed to identify significant risk factors for macrosomia such as maternal age, parity, pre-pregnancy body mass index, gestational weight gain, and hyperglycemia. Other models were constructed to identify the independent effect of macrosomia on outcomes such as shoulder dystocia, emergency cesarean section, stillbirth, and low APGAR scores. Results: The 50th centile birth weight of Saudi term infants is 3.18 kg; the 90th and 95th centiles were 3.70 and 3.91 kg, respectively. The prevalence of macrosomia (>4 kg) was 3.4%. The likelihood of macrosomia was associated with maternal age >40 years for newborns >4 kg, OR = 1.88, 95% CI (1.02–3.48), and maternal age < 18 for newborns ≥90th centile, OR = 5.23, 95% CI, (1.05–26.06). Regardless of the classification of macrosomia, it was associated with gestational age ≥41 weeks, parity > 4, pre-pregnancy BMI > 30, and maternal hyperglycemia. Macrosomia, using either definition, was associated with increased risk of shoulder dystocia, OR = 11.45, 95% CI (4.12–31.82) and OR = 9.65, 95% CI (3.89–23.94), and emergency CS, OR = 2.03, 95% CI (1.36–3.08) and OR = 1.77, 95% CI (1.34–1.52), for birthweight > 4 kg and ≥90th centile, respectively. Furthermore, newborns whose weights >4 kg were at greater risk to be stillborn, OR = 4.24, 95% CI (1.18–15.20), and to have low APGAR scores at birth, OR = 3.69, 95% CI (1.25–10.98). Conclusion: The risk of macrosomia among Saudi women significantly increases with maternal age, parity, gestational age, hyperglycemia, and pre-pregnancy obesity. Regardless of the definition used, delivering a macrosomic baby was associated with risks of shoulder dystocia and emergency cesarean section. Newborns (>4 kg) were at greater risk of stillbirth and low APGAR scores.

show abstract

Impact of body weight on the outcome of pregnancy

Cited by 2 publications

References 21 publications

Predictive analysis of maternal subcutaneous fat thickness for the risk of postpartum haemorrhage

Predictive analysis of maternal subcutaneous fat thickness for the risk of postpartum haemorrhage

Epidemiology of Macrosomia in Saudi Arabia: An Analysis of 12,045 Pregnancies from the Riyadh Mother and Baby Multicenter Cohort Study (RAHMA) Database

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About