Maternal and neonatal outcomes at delivery in nulliparous women with advanced maternal age.

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth Pub Date : 2025-03-11 DOI:10.1186/s12884-025-07289-6
Achuo Ascensius Ambe Mforteh, Abigail Kra-Friedman, Gilad Karavani, Hila Hochler, Michal Lipschuetz, Ronit Calderon-Margalit, Joshua I Rosenbloom
{"title":"Maternal and neonatal outcomes at delivery in nulliparous women with advanced maternal age.","authors":"Achuo Ascensius Ambe Mforteh, Abigail Kra-Friedman, Gilad Karavani, Hila Hochler, Michal Lipschuetz, Ronit Calderon-Margalit, Joshua I Rosenbloom","doi":"10.1186/s12884-025-07289-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The age at first delivery is rising leading to an increasing proportion of women with advanced maternal age (AMA) which is defined as greater than or equal to 35 years at time of delivery. Previous studies have associated AMA with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes leading to an arbitrary increased rate of cesarean sections amongst AMA women without clear medical indications.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the associations between AMA and adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes in nulliparous women in a large cohort.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Our retrospective cohort study looked at 44,295 nulliparous women (39,496 < 35years and 4,799 ≥ 35years) with term singleton gestation who delivered in the obstetrical units of Hadassah Medical Organization in Jerusalem, Israel, between 2003 and 2017. Data on maternal characteristics and outcomes, and neonatal outcomes were extracted from the electronic database. Outcomes were compared between women with AMA and women < 35 using Chi square, Fisher exact and t-tests. Multivariable logistic regressions estimated odds ratios (OR) for outcomes, controlling for confounders. We reported two-sided p-values, adjusted odds ratio (aOR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Women with AMA were more likely to have c-sections compared to women < 35 years in the whole study population (aOR:2.29, 95% CI: 2.13-2.47, p < 0.0001) including women having inductions (aOR:1.38, 95% CI:1.25-1.53, p < 0.0001). Self-requested c-sections were significantly higher among women with AMA (16.8% vs. 2.8%, OR:6.9, 95% CI:5.5-8.8). AMA did not increase the risk of postpartum hemorrhage (aOR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.72-0.94) and decreased likelihood of instrumental delivery (aOR:0.81, 95% CI: 0.73-0.89, p < 0.0001). Fewer women with AMA had 3rd- and 4th-degree tears (0.35% for ≥ 35years vs. 0.71% for < 35 years, RR:0.50, 95% CI:0.29-0.87, p = 0.012). Women with AMA were more than three times likely to have an intrauterine fetal demise (RR:3.53, 95% CI:2.54-4.90, p < 0.0001), but were not more likely to have low neonatal 5-minute APGAR scores (RR:0.79, 95% CI: 0.43-1.46, p value:0.44) or NICU admissions (RR:0.84, 95% CI: 0.61-1.17, p = 0.30).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Management of nulliparous AMA patients should be based on obstetric considerations and not solely on AMA status. Shared decision making is preferred to reduce the risks associated with AMA.</p>","PeriodicalId":9033,"journal":{"name":"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth","volume":"25 1","pages":"270"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11899165/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-025-07289-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The age at first delivery is rising leading to an increasing proportion of women with advanced maternal age (AMA) which is defined as greater than or equal to 35 years at time of delivery. Previous studies have associated AMA with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes leading to an arbitrary increased rate of cesarean sections amongst AMA women without clear medical indications.

Objective: To determine the associations between AMA and adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes in nulliparous women in a large cohort.

Methods: Our retrospective cohort study looked at 44,295 nulliparous women (39,496 < 35years and 4,799 ≥ 35years) with term singleton gestation who delivered in the obstetrical units of Hadassah Medical Organization in Jerusalem, Israel, between 2003 and 2017. Data on maternal characteristics and outcomes, and neonatal outcomes were extracted from the electronic database. Outcomes were compared between women with AMA and women < 35 using Chi square, Fisher exact and t-tests. Multivariable logistic regressions estimated odds ratios (OR) for outcomes, controlling for confounders. We reported two-sided p-values, adjusted odds ratio (aOR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results: Women with AMA were more likely to have c-sections compared to women < 35 years in the whole study population (aOR:2.29, 95% CI: 2.13-2.47, p < 0.0001) including women having inductions (aOR:1.38, 95% CI:1.25-1.53, p < 0.0001). Self-requested c-sections were significantly higher among women with AMA (16.8% vs. 2.8%, OR:6.9, 95% CI:5.5-8.8). AMA did not increase the risk of postpartum hemorrhage (aOR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.72-0.94) and decreased likelihood of instrumental delivery (aOR:0.81, 95% CI: 0.73-0.89, p < 0.0001). Fewer women with AMA had 3rd- and 4th-degree tears (0.35% for ≥ 35years vs. 0.71% for < 35 years, RR:0.50, 95% CI:0.29-0.87, p = 0.012). Women with AMA were more than three times likely to have an intrauterine fetal demise (RR:3.53, 95% CI:2.54-4.90, p < 0.0001), but were not more likely to have low neonatal 5-minute APGAR scores (RR:0.79, 95% CI: 0.43-1.46, p value:0.44) or NICU admissions (RR:0.84, 95% CI: 0.61-1.17, p = 0.30).

Conclusions: Management of nulliparous AMA patients should be based on obstetric considerations and not solely on AMA status. Shared decision making is preferred to reduce the risks associated with AMA.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
高龄产妇分娩时的产妇和新生儿结局。
背景:首次分娩年龄的增加导致高龄产妇(AMA)的比例增加,高龄产妇的定义是分娩时大于或等于35岁。先前的研究已将AMA与不良的孕产妇和新生儿结局联系起来,导致AMA妇女在没有明确医学指征的情况下任意增加剖宫产率。目的:在一项大型队列研究中,确定AMA与未分娩妇女不良孕产妇和新生儿结局之间的关系。方法:我们的回顾性队列研究调查了44,295名未产妇女(39,496名)。结果:与女性相比,患有AMA的女性更有可能进行剖腹产。结论:未产AMA患者的管理应基于产科考虑,而不仅仅是AMA状态。共同决策是减少AMA相关风险的首选方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.50%
发文量
845
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of pregnancy and childbirth. The journal welcomes submissions on the biomedical aspects of pregnancy, breastfeeding, labor, maternal health, maternity care, trends and sociological aspects of pregnancy and childbirth.
期刊最新文献
Impact of Community Midwifery Care (CMC) on maternal and neonatal wellbeing in postnatal period: a qualitative study. Effectiveness of a lifestyle intervention for pregnant women with abnormal glucose metabolism in early pregnancy (EAGM): protocol for a multicentre, open-labelled, two-arm, pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Association between maternal BMI and success of labor induction with oral misoprostol: a cohort study. Quality of intrapartum care assessed by women with fear of birth who received care in a midwifery continuity model in a rural area of Sweden- a longitudinal cohort study. Exploring sources of social support during pregnancy- a qualitative study in rural southern India.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1