PDF herunterladen
Am J Perinatol 2024; 41(06): 669-676
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1776975
SMFM Fellowship Series Article

The Relationship between Gestational Weight Gain and Cesarean Delivery among Patients undergoing Induction of Labor

Whitney R. Bender 
1   Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
2   Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia
,
Rebecca F. Hamm 
1   Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
,
Cara Dolin
1   Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
,
Lisa D. Levine 
1   Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
› Institutsangaben Funding None.
› Weitere Informationen
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objective This study aimed to determine the impact of pregnancy weight gain above National Academy of Medicine (NAM) guidelines on cesarean delivery rates following induction.

Study Design This is a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study of patients who underwent induction at a single tertiary care center between July 2017 and July 2019. Included in the primary study were patients undergoing term (≥37 weeks) labor induction with a singleton gestation, intact membranes, and unfavorable cervical examination (Bishop score of ≤6 and cervical dilation ≤ 2 cm). Eligibility for this analysis was limited to patients with a documented prenatal body mass index (BMI) < 20 weeks' gestation. The primary exposure was gestational weight gain greater than NAM guidelines (WGGG) for a patient's initial BMI category. The primary outcome was cesarean delivery for any indication.

Results Of 1,610 patients included in the original cohort, 1,174 (72.9%) met inclusion criteria for this analysis and 517 (44.0%) of these had weight gain above NAM guidelines. Of the entire cohort, 60.0% were Black and 52.7% had private insurance. In total, 160 patients (31%) with WGGG underwent cesarean compared with 127 patients (19.3%) without WGGG (p < 0.001), which equates to a 59% increased odds of cesarean when controlling for initial BMI category, parity, gestational diabetes, and indication for induction (Adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] 1.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17–2.12). Among only nulliparous patients, WGGG was associated with an increased odds of cesarean (26.4 vs. 38.2%, aOR 1.50, 95% CI 1.07–2.10). In multiparous patients, however, there was no difference in cesarean between those with and without WGGG (8.8 vs. 14.1%, aOR 1.85, 95% CI 0.96–3.58).

Conclusion This study demonstrates that weight gain above NAM guidelines is associated with more than a 50% increased odds of cesarean. Patients should be informed of this association as gestational weight gain may be a modifiable risk factor for cesarean delivery.

Key Points

  • Weight gain above NAM guidelines was associated with a 59% increased odds of cesarean delivery.

  • Nulliparous patients with weight gain above NAM guidelines are at higher risk of cesarean delivery.

  • No difference in cesarean delivery among multiparous patients regardless of gestational weight gain.

Keywords

cesarean delivery - gestational weight gain - induction of labor - labor - pregnancy - prenatal care


Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 24. August 2021

Angenommen: 22. Oktober 2023

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
16. November 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 107: Induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2009; 114 (2 Pt 1): 386-397
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Caughey AB, Cahill AG, Guise JM, Rouse DJ. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (College), Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 210 (03) 179-193
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Caughey AB, Nicholson JM, Cheng YW, Lyell DJ, Washington AE. Induction of labor and cesarean delivery by gestational age. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006; 195 (03) 700-705
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Beckmann M. Predicting a failed induction. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2007; 47 (05) 394-398
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Crane JM. Factors predicting labor induction success: a critical analysis. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2006; 49 (03) 573-584
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Crane JM, Delaney T, Butt KD, Bennett KA, Hutchens D, Young DC. Predictors of successful labor induction with oral or vaginal misoprostol. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2004; 15 (05) 319-323
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Ennen CS, Bofill JA, Magann EF, Bass JD, Chauhan SP, Morrison JC. Risk factors for cesarean delivery in preterm, term and post-term patients undergoing induction of labor with an unfavorable cervix. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2009; 67 (02) 113-117
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Gunatilake RP, Smrtka MP, Harris B. et al. Predictors of failed trial of labor among women with an extremely obese body mass index. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 209 (06) 562.e1-562.e5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Horowitz KM, Feldman D. Fetal growth restriction: risk factors for unplanned primary cesarean delivery. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2015; 28 (18) 2131-2134
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Michelson KA, Carr DB, Easterling TR. The impact of duration of labor induction on cesarean rate. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199 (03) 299.e1-299.e4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Middleton P, Shepherd E, Crowther CA. Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 5 (05) CD004945
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Parkes I, Kabiri D, Hants Y, Ezra Y. The indication for induction of labor impacts the risk of cesarean delivery. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2016; 29 (02) 224-228
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Teede HJ, Bailey C, Moran LJ. et al. Association of antenatal diet and physical activity-based interventions with gestational weight gain and pregnancy outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med 2022; 182 (02) 106-114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Institute of M, National Research Council Committee to Reexamine IOMPWG. The National Academies Collection: Reports funded by National Institutes of Health. In: Rasmussen KM, Yaktine AL. eds. Weight Gain During Pregnancy: Reexamining the Guidelines. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US) Copyright © 2009; 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Beaudrot ME, Elchert JA, DeFranco EA. Influence of gestational weight gain and BMI on cesarean delivery risk in adolescent pregnancies. J Perinatol 2016; 36 (08) 612-617
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Gawade P, Markenson G, Bsat F, Healy A, Pekow P, Plevyak M. Association of gestational weight gain with cesarean delivery rate after labor induction. J Reprod Med 2011; 56 (3-4): 95-102
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Maier JT, Schalinski E, Gauger U, Hellmeyer L. Antenatal body mass index (BMI) and weight gain in pregnancy - its association with pregnancy and birthing complications. J Perinat Med 2016; 44 (04) 397-404
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Tolcher MC, Holbert MR, Weaver AL. et al. Predicting cesarean delivery after induction of labor among nulliparous women at term. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 126 (05) 1059-1068
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Hamm RF, McCoy J, Oladuja A. et al. Maternal morbidity and birth satisfaction after implementation of a validated calculator to predict cesarean delivery during Labor induction. JAMA Netw Open 2020; 3 (11) e2025582
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman MJK, Driscoll AK. Births: final data for 2018. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2019; 68 (13) 1-47
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Grobman WA, Caughey AB. Elective induction of labor at 39 weeks compared with expectant management: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2019; 221 (04) 304-310
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Rangel Bousquet Carrilho T, , M Rasmussen K, Rodrigues Farias D. et al; Brazilian Maternal and Child Nutrition Consortium. Agreement between self-reported pre-pregnancy weight and measured first-trimester weight in Brazilian women. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2020; 20 (01) 734
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Kominiarek MA, Saade G, Mele L. et al; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) Network. Association between gestational weight gain and perinatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 2018; 132 (04) 875-881
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar