American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2002
The effect of mode of delivery and gestational age on neonatal outcome of the non-cephalic- presenting second twin.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Caukwell Sarah, Murphy Deirdre J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to compare the neonatal morbidity of the non-cephalic- and cephalicpresenting second twin in terms of mode of delivery and gestational age.
STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of 422 sets of twins with a cephalic-presenting first twin was performed.
RESULTS: The non-cephalic-presenting second twin was less likely to be delivered vaginally than the cephalic second twin, odds ratio 0.5 (95% CI 0.3-0.8). There were no significant differences in low Apgar scores at 5 minutes and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit for non-cephalic-presenting compared with cephalic-presenting second twins, adjusted odds ratio 1.1 (95 % CI 0.5-2.2) and 1.4 (0.8-2.6). Delivery by caesarean section was associated with increased admission to the neonatal intensive care unit for cephalic second twins, adjusted odds ratio 3.8 (1.2-12.7). Neonatal morbidity after vaginal delivery was similar for non-cephalic-presenting and cephalic-presenting second twins, particularly at lower gestational ages (24-31 weeks, Apgar score at 5 minutes <7, adjusted odds ratio 0.8 [0.1-11.3]).
CONCLUSION: Vaginal delivery for the non-cephalic-presenting second twin appears to be a reasonable management option, particularly at early gestational ages.
STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of 422 sets of twins with a cephalic-presenting first twin was performed.
RESULTS: The non-cephalic-presenting second twin was less likely to be delivered vaginally than the cephalic second twin, odds ratio 0.5 (95% CI 0.3-0.8). There were no significant differences in low Apgar scores at 5 minutes and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit for non-cephalic-presenting compared with cephalic-presenting second twins, adjusted odds ratio 1.1 (95 % CI 0.5-2.2) and 1.4 (0.8-2.6). Delivery by caesarean section was associated with increased admission to the neonatal intensive care unit for cephalic second twins, adjusted odds ratio 3.8 (1.2-12.7). Neonatal morbidity after vaginal delivery was similar for non-cephalic-presenting and cephalic-presenting second twins, particularly at lower gestational ages (24-31 weeks, Apgar score at 5 minutes <7, adjusted odds ratio 0.8 [0.1-11.3]).
CONCLUSION: Vaginal delivery for the non-cephalic-presenting second twin appears to be a reasonable management option, particularly at early gestational ages.