Roshan J Selvaratnam1,2, Euan M Wallace1,2, Sophie Treleaven2, Stuart B Hooper1, Peter G Davis3, Mary-Ann Davey1,2. 1. The Ritchie Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 2. Safer Care Victoria, Department of Health and Human Services, Victorian Government, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 3. Newborn Research Centre, The Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
AIM: Timely delivery of fetal growth restriction (FGR) is a balance between avoiding stillbirth and minimising prematurity. We sought to assess the neonatal outcomes for babies suspected of FGR, both true and false positives. METHODS: This population cohort study examined all singleton births in Victoria, Australia from 2000 to 2017 (n = 1 231 415). Neonatal morbidities associated with neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission were assessed for babies born ≥32 weeks' with severe FGR (<3rd centile) and babies with birthweight ≥10th centile who were iatrogenically delivered for suspected FGR. RESULTS: Babies with severe FGR iatrogenically delivered for suspected FGR were more likely to require NICU admission than babies with severe FGR who were not detected (3.0% vs. 1.1%, P < 0.001). After adjusting for potential confounders, the odds of NICU admission were increased (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 3.00, 95% confidence interval = 2.45-3.67; P < 0.001). Rates of NICU admission were also higher in ≥10th centile babies iatrogenically delivered for suspected FGR than for ≥10th centile babies who entered labour spontaneously (1.8% vs. 0.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustments, the odds of NICU admission were increased (aOR = 3.91, 95% confidence interval = 3.40-4.49; P < 0.001). NICU admissions were associated with morbidities related to iatrogenic prematurity. CONCLUSIONS: Detection and planned delivery of FGR reduces stillbirth but may be associated with increased neonatal morbidity related to iatrogenic prematurity.
AIM: Timely delivery of fetal growth restriction (FGR) is a balance between avoiding stillbirth and minimising prematurity. We sought to assess the neonatal outcomes for babies suspected of FGR, both true and false positives. METHODS: This population cohort study examined all singleton births in Victoria, Australia from 2000 to 2017 (n = 1 231 415). Neonatal morbidities associated with neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission were assessed for babies born ≥32 weeks' with severe FGR (<3rd centile) and babies with birthweight ≥10th centile who were iatrogenically delivered for suspected FGR. RESULTS: Babies with severe FGR iatrogenically delivered for suspected FGR were more likely to require NICU admission than babies with severe FGR who were not detected (3.0% vs. 1.1%, P < 0.001). After adjusting for potential confounders, the odds of NICU admission were increased (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 3.00, 95% confidence interval = 2.45-3.67; P < 0.001). Rates of NICU admission were also higher in ≥10th centile babies iatrogenically delivered for suspected FGR than for ≥10th centile babies who entered labour spontaneously (1.8% vs. 0.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustments, the odds of NICU admission were increased (aOR = 3.91, 95% confidence interval = 3.40-4.49; P < 0.001). NICU admissions were associated with morbidities related to iatrogenic prematurity. CONCLUSIONS: Detection and planned delivery of FGR reduces stillbirth but may be associated with increased neonatal morbidity related to iatrogenic prematurity.