1 Department of Acute Infectious Diseases, Disease Control and Prevention Center of Fuyang, Fuyang, Anhui, China.
2 Medical Department, Fuyang Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Fuyang, Anhui, China.
Child Obes. 2019 Apr;15(3):149-155. doi: 10.1089/chi.2018.0258. Epub 2019 Feb 7.
The aim of our meta-analysis was to explore whether advanced maternal age (AMA) is regarded as an important risk factor for predicting macrosomia or not.
Three databases were systematically reviewed and reference lists of relevant articles were checked. Meta-analysis of published cohort studies was done comparing whether AMA was associated with macrosomia and adjusting for potential confounding factors. Calculations of pooled estimates were conducted in random-effects models. Heterogeneity was tested by using chi-square test and I statistics. Publication bias was estimated from Egger's test (linear regression method) and Begg's test (rank correlation method).
Twelve cohort studies met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis showed that AMA was associated with macrosomia as an important risk factor. The adjusted odds ratio calculated for 12 studies (compared aged 35-39 years to aged <30 years) was 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.25-1.60) for random-effect model and 6 studies (compared aged ≥40 years to aged <30 years) was 1.40, 95% CI (1.02-1.78) for random-effect model. There was no indication of a publication bias either from the result of Egger's test or Begg's test.
Regardless of the underlying mechanism, our finding indicated that AMA should be considered as an important risk factor for macrosomia. To adequately evaluate the clinical evolution of AMA, the effect of AMA on macrosomia need to be carefully assessed and monitored.
本荟萃分析旨在探讨高龄产妇(AMA)是否被视为预测巨大儿的重要危险因素。
系统检索了三个数据库,并检查了相关文章的参考文献列表。对已发表的队列研究进行荟萃分析,比较 AMA 是否与巨大儿有关,并调整潜在的混杂因素。使用随机效应模型计算汇总估计值。使用卡方检验和 I 统计量检验异质性。使用 Egger 检验(线性回归法)和 Begg 检验(秩相关法)估计发表偏倚。
符合纳入标准的有 12 项队列研究。荟萃分析表明,AMA 是巨大儿的一个重要危险因素。对 12 项研究(比较 35-39 岁与<30 岁)进行调整后,计算得出的优势比为 1.42,95%置信区间(CI)为 1.25-1.60;对 6 项研究(比较≥40 岁与<30 岁)进行调整后,计算得出的优势比为 1.40,95%CI 为 1.02-1.78。Egger 检验和 Begg 检验均未提示存在发表偏倚。
无论潜在机制如何,我们的研究结果表明,AMA 应被视为巨大儿的重要危险因素。为了充分评估 AMA 的临床演变,需要仔细评估和监测 AMA 对巨大儿的影响。