Risk associated with planned mode of delivery in women with obesity: a large population-based retrospective cohort study.

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Geneviève Horwood, Erica Erwin, Yanfang Guo, Brett Aston, Sara C S Souza, Laura M Gaudet
{"title":"Risk associated with planned mode of delivery in women with obesity: a large population-based retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Geneviève Horwood, Erica Erwin, Yanfang Guo, Brett Aston, Sara C S Souza, Laura M Gaudet","doi":"10.1038/s41366-024-01709-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/objective: </strong>As the pregnancy progresses, a decision about planned mode of delivery must be made. There is no consensus on optimal mode of delivery among pregnant women with obesity. We aimed to assess the risks associated with planned mode of delivery in women with obesity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This large population-based retrospective cohort study included 27472 nulliparous women with obesity who had live, singleton, and uncomplicated term gestations between April 1st 2012 and March 31st 2019. Planned mode of delivery included waiting for spontaneous labor, a plan for induction of labor, and planned non-labor cesarean section (NLCS). NLCS was defined as an elective CS that would happen before the pregnant woman goes into labor. The most common reasons for NLCS include maternal request, fetal position, and repeated CS. Adverse Outcome Index (AOI) was the primary outcome, a binary composite of 10 maternal-neonatal outcomes. Overall, maternal-specific, and neonatal-specific AOI scores were analyzed. Analyses were conducted using multivariable regression models and were stratified by each week of gestational age and by obesity class.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Planned NLCS was associated with reduced risk of overall, maternal-specific, and neonatal-specific AOI by 41% (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]: 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50-0.70), 54% (aRR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.35-0.60), and 30% (aRR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.57-0.87) respectively when compared to spontaneous labor at term gestation. There was no statistically significant difference in overall AOI when comparing planned induction of labor to spontaneous labor (aRR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.96-1.10).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Among women with obesity, NLCS may be considered as an option for planned mode of delivery due to the decreased AOI risk. However, further research on the association between NLCS and severe outcomes is needed. Shared decision making between patient and practitioner regarding plan for delivery remains paramount in the provision of quality obstetrical care.</p>","PeriodicalId":14183,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Obesity","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Obesity","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-024-01709-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/objective: As the pregnancy progresses, a decision about planned mode of delivery must be made. There is no consensus on optimal mode of delivery among pregnant women with obesity. We aimed to assess the risks associated with planned mode of delivery in women with obesity.

Methods: This large population-based retrospective cohort study included 27472 nulliparous women with obesity who had live, singleton, and uncomplicated term gestations between April 1st 2012 and March 31st 2019. Planned mode of delivery included waiting for spontaneous labor, a plan for induction of labor, and planned non-labor cesarean section (NLCS). NLCS was defined as an elective CS that would happen before the pregnant woman goes into labor. The most common reasons for NLCS include maternal request, fetal position, and repeated CS. Adverse Outcome Index (AOI) was the primary outcome, a binary composite of 10 maternal-neonatal outcomes. Overall, maternal-specific, and neonatal-specific AOI scores were analyzed. Analyses were conducted using multivariable regression models and were stratified by each week of gestational age and by obesity class.

Results: Planned NLCS was associated with reduced risk of overall, maternal-specific, and neonatal-specific AOI by 41% (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]: 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50-0.70), 54% (aRR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.35-0.60), and 30% (aRR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.57-0.87) respectively when compared to spontaneous labor at term gestation. There was no statistically significant difference in overall AOI when comparing planned induction of labor to spontaneous labor (aRR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.96-1.10).

Conclusion: Among women with obesity, NLCS may be considered as an option for planned mode of delivery due to the decreased AOI risk. However, further research on the association between NLCS and severe outcomes is needed. Shared decision making between patient and practitioner regarding plan for delivery remains paramount in the provision of quality obstetrical care.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Obesity
International Journal of Obesity 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
2.00%
发文量
221
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Obesity is a multi-disciplinary forum for research describing basic, clinical and applied studies in biochemistry, physiology, genetics and nutrition, molecular, metabolic, psychological and epidemiological aspects of obesity and related disorders. We publish a range of content types including original research articles, technical reports, reviews, correspondence and brief communications that elaborate on significant advances in the field and cover topical issues.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信