Am J Perinatol 2024; 41(S 01): e2195-e2201
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1770706
Original Article

The Association between Fetal Growth Restriction and Maternal Morbidity

Authors

  • Yara Hage Diab

    1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, Virginia
  • Juliana G. Martins

    1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, Virginia
  • George Saade

    1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, Virginia
  • Tetsuya Kawakita

    1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, Virginia

Funding The data included in this paper were obtained from the Consortium on Safe Labor, supported by the Intramural Research Program of Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health (NIH) through contract number: HHSN267200603425C. This project was funded in part with Federal funds (grant no.: UL1TR000101, previously UL1RR031975) from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), NIH, through the Clinical and Translational Science Awards Program (CTSA), a trademark of Department of Health and Human Services, part of the Roadmap Initiative, “Re-Engineering the Clinical Research Enterprise.”
Preview

Abstract

Objective This study aimed to compare adverse maternal outcomes between pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction (FGR) and those without FGR.

Study Design This was a secondary analysis of the data from the Consortium on Safe Labor, which was conducted from 2002 to 2008 in 12 clinical centers with 19 hospitals across 9 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists districts. We included singleton pregnancies without any maternal comorbidities or placenta abnormalities. We compared the outcomes of individuals with FGR with individuals without FGR. Our primary outcome was severe maternal morbidity. Our secondary outcome included various adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to obtain adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), adjusting for confounders. Missing values for maternal age and body mass index were imputed.

Results Of 199,611 individuals, 4,554 (2.3%) had FGR and 195,057 (97.7%) did not have FGR. Compared with the individuals without FGR, individuals with FGR had increased odds of severe maternal morbidity (0.6 vs. 1.3%; aOR: 1.97 [95% CI: 1.51–2.57]), cesarean delivery (27.7 vs. 41.2%; aOR: 2.31 [95% CI: 2.16–2.48]), pregnancy-associated hypertension (8.3 vs. 19.2%; aOR: 2.76 [95% CI: 2.55–2.99]), preeclampsia without severe features (3.2 vs. 4.7%; aOR: 1.45 [95% CI: 1.26–1.68]), preeclampsia with severe features (1.4 vs. 8.6%; aOR: 6.04 [95% CI: 5.39–6.76]), superimposed preeclampsia (18.3 vs. 30.2%; aOR: 1.99 [95% CI: 1.53–2.59]), neonatal intensive care unit admission (9.7 vs. 28.4%; aOR: 3.53 [95% CI: 3.28–3.8]), respiratory distress syndrome (2.2 vs. 7.7%; aOR: 3.57 [95% CI: 3.15–4.04]), transient tachypnea of the newborn (3.3 vs. 5.4%; aOR: 1.62 [95% CI: 1.40–1.87]), and neonatal sepsis (2.1 vs. 5.5%; aOR: 2.43 [95% CI: 2.10–2.80]).

Conclusion FGR was associated with increased odds of severe maternal outcomes in addition to adverse neonatal outcomes.

Key Points

  • FGR is associated with cesarean section.

  • FGR is not associated with severe maternal morbidity.

  • FGR is related to pregnancy-associated hypertension.

  • FGR is associated with neonatal morbidity.

Notes

Institutions involved in the CSL include, in alphabetical order: Baystate Medical Center, Springfield, MA; Cedars-Sinai Medical Center Burnes Allen Research Center, Los Angeles, CA; Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; Georgetown University Hospital, MedStar Health, Washington, DC; Indiana University Clarian Health, Indianapolis, IN; Intermountain Healthcare and the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Maimonides Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY; MetroHealth Medical Center, Cleveland, OH; Summa Health System, Akron City Hospital, Akron, OH; The EMMES Corporation, Rockville, MD (Data Coordinating Center); University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL; University of Miami, Miami, FL; and University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX. The named authors alone are responsible for the views expressed in this manuscript, which does not necessarily represent the decisions or the stated policy of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Principal Investigator: T.S.


Supplementary Material



Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 24. März 2022

Angenommen: 23. Mai 2023

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
26. Juni 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

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