Rui-Xue Dai1, Xiu-Jie He2, Chuan-Lai Hu2,3. 1. 1 Department of Acute Infectious Diseases, Disease Control and Prevention Center of Fuyang, Fuyang, Anhui, China. 2. 2 Medical Department, Fuyang Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Fuyang, Anhui, China. 3. 3 Division of Nutrition and Food Hygiene, School of Public Health, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.
Abstract
PURPOSE: 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. METHODS: 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 I2 statistics. Publication bias was estimated from Egger's test (linear regression method) and Begg's test (rank correlation method). RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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.
PURPOSE: 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. METHODS: 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 I2 statistics. Publication bias was estimated from Egger's test (linear regression method) and Begg's test (rank correlation method). RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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.