Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T04:41:09.709Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Influence of Clinical Variables on Triplet Birth Weight

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

R.B. Newman*
Affiliation:
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
J.S. Jones
Affiliation:
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
M.C. Miller
Affiliation:
Department of Biostatistics, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, USA
*
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of South Carolina, 171 Ashley Avenue, Charleston, SC 29425, USA

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The small size of most reported triplet series has resulted in conflicting statements about the influence of several clinical variables on triplet birth weight. Therefore, obstetrical and neonatal data were collected on 196 mothers and their 580 infants (8 stillbirths excluded). Gestational age was based on the date of fertilization in 13 IVF triplets and on the date of ovulation in 90 medically induced triplets. Obstetrical and ultrasonic criteria were used to estimate the date of confinement in 93 spontaneous triplets. Birth weight appeared to be higher in males and with higher maternal parity, independent of gestational age. The apparent effect of medical technologies such as ovulation induction or IVF on combined triplet birth weight disappeared when maternal parity and fetal gender were controlled. Preeclampsia, maternal race and zygosity were not significantly associated with birth weight. While birth order did not significantly effect ultimate birth weight, the heaviest triplet did present first more often than would be expected by chance alone. Future evaluation of neonatal outcome data in multifetal gestations should control for gestational age, fetal gender and maternal parity. It appears that triplet birth weight is not affected by etiology, which is important given the significant impact of medical technologies.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1991

References

REFERENCES

1.Asaka, A, Imaizumi, Y, Inouye, E (1980): Analysis of multiple births in Japan. II: Weight at birth of triplets and quadruplets. Jpn J Human Genet 25: 207–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Daw, E (1978): Triplet pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynecol 85: 505509.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Deale, CJC, Cronje, HS (1984): A review of 367 triplet pregnancies. S Afr Med J 66: 9294.Google ScholarPubMed
4.Holcberg, G, Biale, Y, Lewenthal, H, Insler, V (1982): Outcome of pregnancy in 31 triplet gestations. Obstet Gynecol 59: 472476.Google ScholarPubMed
5.Itzkowic, D (1979): A survey of 59 triplet pregnancies. Br J Obstet Gynecol 86: 2328.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Kurtz, GR, Davis, LL, Loftus, JB (1958): Factors influencing the survival of triplets. Obstet Gynecol 12: 504508.Google ScholarPubMed
7.Loucopoulos, A, Jewelewicz, R (1982): Management of multifetal pregnancies: Sixteen years' experience at the Sloane Hospital For Women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 143: 902905.Google Scholar
8.McKeown, T and Record, RG (1952): Observation on foetal growth in multiple pregnancies in man. J Endocrinol 8: 386401.Google Scholar
9.Newman, RB, Hamer, C, Miller, MC (1989): Outpatient triplet management: A contemporary review. Obstet Gynecol 161: 547555.Google ScholarPubMed
10.Ron-el, R, Caspi, E, Schreyer, P, Weinkaub, Z, Arieli, S, Goldberg, MD (1981): Triplet and quadruplet pregnancies and management. Obstet Gynecol 57: 458463.Google Scholar
11.Syrop, CH, Varner, MW (1985): Triplet gestation: Maternal and neonatal implications. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 34: 8188.Google Scholar