MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4400297275 · doi:10.1093/humrep/deae108.1072

P-752 Association between obesity in women with multiple gestations and adverse obstetric outcomes: a study of an American population database with over 136,000 unique deliveries

2024· article· en· W4400297275 sur OpenAlexaff
Naomi Suissa, M Dahan, Haitham Baghlaf, Ahmad Badeghiesh

Notice bibliographique

RevueHuman Reproduction · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueBirth, Development, and Health
Établissements canadiensMcGill University Health Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineGestationObstetricsPopulationPregnancyObesityDatabaseEnvironmental healthInternal medicineComputer scienceBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Study question The purpose of this study is to compare obese and non-obese women with multiple pregnancies to determine the effects on pregnancy, delivery, and neonatal outcomes. Summary answer Obesity and multiple gestations are independent risk factors for adverse obstetric outcomes. Combined, obesity in multiple gestation increases risk of maternal, delivery, and neonatal complications. What is known already Obesity is a pandemic and multiple pregnancies are a known consequence of assisted reproductive technologies. Obese women (body mass index [BMI] >30kg/m2) are at higher risk of hypertensive disorders, gestational diabetes, fetal growth complications, stillbirth, preterm birth, labour complications, caesarean deliveries, wound infection, venous thromboembolism, and adverse neonatal outcomes. Multiple gestation is associated with greater obstetric risks, including miscarriage, preterm birth, gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorders, operative delivery, postpartum hemorrhage, congenital anomalies, and fetal growth restriction. The combined effects are not well-established. Study design, size, duration We conducted a retrospective population-based study utilizing data collected between 2004 and 2014 inclusively, from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-Nationwide Inpatient Sample. We evaluated deliveries using the international classification of diseases [ICD], ninth edition, clinical modification codes for delivery-related discharge diagnosis and birth-related procedural diagnosis. All women with a diagnosis of multiple pregnancies were selected. They were subsequently divided based on the ICD-9 code for obesity. A total of 137,303 multiple pregnancies were analyzed. Participants/materials, setting, methods Within the 137,303 multiple pregnancies, 130,542 (95%) were non-obese, while 6,761 (5%) were obese. An initial analysis was performed to identify the prevalence of obesity in women with multiple pregnancies. We then compared baseline clinical and demographic characteristics between women with obesity to those without obesity using chi-squared tests. Subsequently, binary logistic regression analyses were conducted to explore comparisons between the obese and non-obese groups while adjusting for the potential confounding effects. Main results and the role of chance Over the 11-year study period, there was a statistically significant increase in prevalence of obesity for women with multiple gestations (p < 0.0001). The obese group was at higher risk of pregnancy-induced hypertension (adjusted odd’s ratio [aOR]=1.89, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.77-2.02), gestational hypertension (aOR=1.84, CI = 1.65-2.05), preeclampsia (aOR=1.68, CI = 1.55-1.81), preeclampsia or eclampsia superimposed on pre-existing hypertension (aOR=1.86, CI = 1.58-2.20), gestational diabetes mellitus (aOR=2.65, CI = 2.44-2.87), and placenta previa (aOR=0.57, CI = 0.39-0.85). They were more likely to have preterm premature rupture of membranes (aOR=1.19, CI = 1.06-1.34), chorioamnionitis (aOR=1.24, CI = 1.03-1.51), caesarean sections (aOR=1.28, CI = 1.18-1.38), wound complications (aOR=1.65, CI = 1.31-2.08), and transfusions (aOR=0.77, CI = 0.67-0.89). They were less likely to have small for gestational age neonates (aOR=0.88, CI = 0.79-0.97), though more likely to have neonates with congenital anomalies (aOR=1.56, CI = 1.16-2.10). Conversely, for certain factors, the outcomes were similar between obese and non-obese women with multiple gestation including rates of eclampsia (p = 0.07), abruptio placenta (p = 0.82), hysterectomy (p = 0.36), postpartum hemorrhage (p = 0.08), maternal death (p = 0.98), maternal infection (p = 0.10), deep vein thrombosis (p = 0.17), pulmonary embolism (p = 0.75), venous thromboembolism (p = 0.15), disseminated intravascular coagulation (p = 0.85) and intrauterine fetal demise (p = 0.52). Limitations, reasons for caution The database is retrospective and relies on hospitals reporting elevated body mass index, which may not always be consistently recognized, potentially resulting in an underestimation of the total number of obese women. However, this only stands to support the increased risks detected in this study as being legitimate. Wider implications of the findings We addresses a significant gap in the literature by simultaneously exploring the impacts of multiple pregnancies and maternal obesity on obstetric complications. This can guide clinical practice, encouraging single embryo transfer in obese women undergoing in-vitro fertilization and tailored care for obese patients with multiple pregnancies, anticipating the associated risks. Trial registration number not applicable

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,008
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,028
Tête enseignante GPT0,316
Écart entre enseignants0,288 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHuman ReproductionMême sujetBirth, Development, and HealthTravaux en français237 207