• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

妊娠(怀孕)日期评估方法的差异对产科和新生儿结局的影响:基于人群的注册队列研究。

Discrepancy between pregnancy dating methods affects obstetric and neonatal outcomes: a population-based register cohort study.

机构信息

Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.

Region Västmanland - Uppsala University, Center for Clinical Research, Hospital of Västmanland, Västerås, Sweden.

出版信息

Sci Rep. 2018 May 2;8(1):6936. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-24894-y.

DOI:10.1038/s41598-018-24894-y
PMID:29720591
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5932022/
Abstract

To assess associations between discrepancy of pregnancy dating methods and adverse pregnancy, delivery, and neonatal outcomes, odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for discrepancy categories among all singleton births from the Medical Birth Register (1995-2010) with estimated date of delivery (EDD) by last menstrual period (LMP) minus EDD by ultrasound (US) -20 to +20 days. Negative/positive discrepancy was a fetus smaller/larger than expected when dated by US (EDD postponed/changed to an earlier date). Large discrepancy was <10 or >90 percentile. Reference was median discrepancy ±2 days. Odds for diabetes and preeclampsia were higher in pregnancies with negative discrepancy, and for most delivery outcomes in case of large positive discrepancy (+9 to +20 days): shoulder dystocia [OR 1.16 (95% CI 1.01-1.33)] and sphincter injuries [OR 1.13 (95% CI 1.09-1.17)]. Odds for adverse neonatal outcomes were higher in large negative discrepancy (-4 to -20 days): low Apgar score [OR 1.18 (95% CI 1.09-1.27)], asphyxia [OR 1.18 (95% CI 1.11-1.25)], fetal death [OR 1.47 (95% CI 1.32-1.64)], and neonatal death [OR 2.19 (95% CI 1.91-2.50)]. In conclusion, especially, large negative discrepancy was associated with increased risks of adverse perinatal outcomes.

摘要

为了评估妊娠日期评估方法差异与不良妊娠、分娩和新生儿结局之间的关联,我们计算了所有来自医学出生登记(1995-2010 年)的单胎妊娠中,根据末次月经(LMP)减去超声(US)估算的预产期(EDD)的差异类别与 -20 至 +20 天之间的比值比(OR)。当根据 US 日期胎儿比预期小/大(EDD 推迟/更改为较早日期)时,为负/正差异。大差异是指<10 或>90 百分位数。参考值为中位数差异±2 天。与负差异相比,糖尿病和子痫前期的发生风险更高,而在大正差异(+9 至 +20 天)的情况下,大多数分娩结局的风险更高:肩难产[OR 1.16(95% CI 1.01-1.33)]和括约肌损伤[OR 1.13(95% CI 1.09-1.17)]。与大负差异(-4 至-20 天)相比,不良新生儿结局的风险更高:低 Apgar 评分[OR 1.18(95% CI 1.09-1.27)]、窒息[OR 1.18(95% CI 1.11-1.25)]、胎儿死亡[OR 1.47(95% CI 1.32-1.64)]和新生儿死亡[OR 2.19(95% CI 1.91-2.50)]。总之,尤其是大的负差异与不良围产结局的风险增加相关。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ac49/5932022/a9ab775e48a0/41598_2018_24894_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ac49/5932022/a9ab775e48a0/41598_2018_24894_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ac49/5932022/a9ab775e48a0/41598_2018_24894_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Discrepancy between pregnancy dating methods affects obstetric and neonatal outcomes: a population-based register cohort study.妊娠(怀孕)日期评估方法的差异对产科和新生儿结局的影响:基于人群的注册队列研究。
Sci Rep. 2018 May 2;8(1):6936. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-24894-y.
2
Maternal and fetal characteristics affect discrepancies between pregnancy-dating methods: a population-based cross-sectional register study.母体和胎儿特征影响妊娠日期推算方法之间的差异:一项基于人群的横断面登记研究。
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017 Jan;96(1):86-95. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13034. Epub 2016 Nov 13.
3
Association Between Pregnancy and Perinatal Outcomes Among Women With Epilepsy.癫痫女性的妊娠与围产期结局之间的关联
JAMA Neurol. 2017 Aug 1;74(8):983-991. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2017.1310.
4
Maternal obesity is a potential source of error in mid-trimester ultrasound estimation of gestational age.孕妇肥胖是中孕期超声估计胎龄的一个潜在误差源。
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Jan;35(1):48-53. doi: 10.1002/uog.7502.
5
Expected day of delivery from ultrasound dating versus last menstrual period--obstetric outcome when dates mismatch.超声推算预产期与末次月经推算预产期的比较——日期不符时的产科结局
BJOG. 2008 Apr;115(5):585-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.01678.x.
6
Maternal and perinatal outcomes of extreme obesity in pregnancy.孕期极度肥胖的孕产妇及围产期结局
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2013 Jul;35(7):606-611. doi: 10.1016/S1701-2163(15)30879-3.
7
Factors That Affect Perinatal Outcomes of the Second Pregnancy of Adolescents.影响青少年第二次妊娠围产期结局的因素。
J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2016 Feb;29(1):18-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jpag.2015.05.002. Epub 2015 May 16.
8
Macrosomia: mode of delivery and pregnancy outcome.巨大儿:分娩方式与妊娠结局。
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010 May;89(5):664-9. doi: 10.3109/00016341003686099.
9
Increased risk of perinatal/neonatal death in infants who were smaller than expected at ultrasound fetometry in early pregnancy.孕早期超声测量胎儿大小小于预期的婴儿围产期/新生儿死亡风险增加。
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Jul;24(1):30-4. doi: 10.1002/uog.1082.
10
Influence of maternal, obstetric and fetal risk factors on the prevalence of birth asphyxia at term in a Swedish urban population.瑞典城市人口中母亲、产科和胎儿风险因素对足月出生时窒息患病率的影响。
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002 Oct;81(10):909-17. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0412.2002.811003.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Problems with gestational age estimation by last menstrual period and ultrasound among late antenatal care attendant women in a low-resource setting in Africa, Sudan.在非洲资源匮乏的环境下,对于晚孕期接受产前保健的妇女,末次月经和超声估计孕周存在问题,苏丹。
J Ultrasound. 2024 Mar;27(1):129-135. doi: 10.1007/s40477-023-00844-x. Epub 2024 Jan 18.
2
Newborn Skin Maturity Medical Device Validation for Gestational Age Prediction: Clinical Trial.新生儿皮肤成熟度医疗器械用于预测胎龄的验证:临床试验。
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Sep 7;24(9):e38727. doi: 10.2196/38727.
3
Transforming obstetric ultrasound into data science using eye tracking, voice recording, transducer motion and ultrasound video.

本文引用的文献

1
Committee Opinion No 700: Methods for Estimating the Due Date.委员会意见 700:预产期估计方法。
Obstet Gynecol. 2017 May;129(5):e150-e154. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002046.
2
Duration of second stage of labor and instrumental delivery as risk factors for severe perineal lacerations: population-based study.第二产程时长及器械助产作为严重会阴裂伤的危险因素:基于人群的研究
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 Feb 21;17(1):72. doi: 10.1186/s12884-017-1251-6.
3
Menstrual Cycle Irregularity and Metabolic Disorders: A Population-Based Prospective Study.
利用眼动追踪、语音记录、探头运动和超声视频将产科超声转化为数据科学。
Sci Rep. 2021 Jul 8;11(1):14109. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-92829-1.
4
Could Subtle Obstetrical Brachial Plexus Palsy Be Related to Unilateral B Glenoid Osteoarthritis?轻微的产科臂丛神经麻痹会与单侧肩胛骨关节盂骨关节炎有关吗?
J Clin Med. 2021 Mar 12;10(6):1196. doi: 10.3390/jcm10061196.
5
Preterm disparities between foreign and Swedish born mothers depend on the method used to estimate gestational age. A Swedish population-based register study.出生时胎龄估计方法不同,外国母亲与瑞典本地母亲的早产儿比例存在差异:一项基于人群的瑞典注册研究
PLoS One. 2021 Feb 22;16(2):e0247138. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247138. eCollection 2021.
6
Agreement between antenatal gestational age by ultrasound and clinical records at birth: A prospective cohort in the Brazilian Amazon.超声产前孕周与出生时临床记录的一致性:巴西亚马孙地区的前瞻性队列研究。
PLoS One. 2020 Jul 14;15(7):e0236055. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236055. eCollection 2020.
7
Adherence to Swedish national pregnancy dating guidelines and management of discrepancies between pregnancy dating methods: a survey study.遵循瑞典国家妊娠日期指南和处理妊娠日期方法差异:一项调查研究。
Reprod Health. 2019 Jul 4;16(1):95. doi: 10.1186/s12978-019-0760-3.
月经周期不规律与代谢紊乱:一项基于人群的前瞻性研究。
PLoS One. 2016 Dec 16;11(12):e0168402. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0168402. eCollection 2016.
4
Effects of ultrasound pregnancy dating on neonatal morbidity in late preterm and early term male infants: a register-based cohort study.超声孕周测定对晚期早产儿和早期足月儿男婴新生儿发病率的影响:一项基于登记的队列研究。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016 Oct 31;16(1):335. doi: 10.1186/s12884-016-1129-z.
5
Maternal and fetal characteristics affect discrepancies between pregnancy-dating methods: a population-based cross-sectional register study.母体和胎儿特征影响妊娠日期推算方法之间的差异:一项基于人群的横断面登记研究。
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017 Jan;96(1):86-95. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13034. Epub 2016 Nov 13.
6
Should serial fetal biometry be used in all pregnancies?是否应在所有妊娠中都采用系列胎儿生物测量?
Lancet. 2015 Nov 21;386(10008):2038-2040. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00148-8. Epub 2015 Sep 7.
7
Screening for fetal growth restriction with universal third trimester ultrasonography in nulliparous women in the Pregnancy Outcome Prediction (POP) study: a prospective cohort study.妊娠结局预测(POP)研究中对未生育女性进行孕晚期常规超声检查以筛查胎儿生长受限:一项前瞻性队列研究。
Lancet. 2015 Nov 21;386(10008):2089-2097. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00131-2. Epub 2015 Sep 7.
8
Prediction of small-for-gestational-age neonates: screening by biophysical and biochemical markers at 19-24 weeks.小于胎龄儿的预测:孕19 - 24周时通过生物物理和生化标志物进行筛查。
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Oct;46(4):437-45. doi: 10.1002/uog.14904. Epub 2015 Sep 2.
9
First-trimester crown-rump length affects birth size symmetrically.孕早期头臀长度对称地影响出生体重。
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2015;28(17):2070-3. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2014.978278. Epub 2014 Nov 11.
10
Internal validity of the Swedish Maternal Health Care Register.瑞典孕产妇保健登记册的内部效度
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Aug 30;14:364. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-364.