Abstract
Objective
: The present study was aimed to investigate pregnancy outcome of patients with short
stature (height < 155 cm), and specifically to elucidate if patients with short stature are at an increased
risk for Cesarean section (CS) even after controlling for labor dystocia.
Methods
: A population-based study comparing pregnancy outcome of patients with and without
short stature, was performed. Deliveries occurred during the years 1988–2002, in a
tertiary medical center. Stratified analyses, using the Mantel–Haenszel technique,
and a multiple logistic regression model were performed to control for confounders.
Results
: During the study period, 159,210 deliveries occurred. Of these, 5822 (3.65%) were
of patients with short stature. Patients with short stature had statistically significant
higher rates of CS compared with patients ≥155 cm (21.3% versus 11.9%, odds ratio (OR) = 2.0; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.9–2.1; P < 0.001). Furthermore, there patients had higher rated of previous deliveries by CS
(17.5% versus 10.3%, OR = 1.8; 95% CI: 1.7–2.0; P < 0.001), intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR, 3.2% versus 1.9%, OR = 1.7; 95% CI: 1.4–1.9; P < 0.001), premature rupture of membranes (PROM, 7.1% versus 5.6%, OR = 1.3; 95% CI: 1.2–1.4; P < 0.001), failed induction (0.7% versus 0.4%, OR = 2.0; 95% CI: 1.5–2.8; P < 0.001), labor dystocia (6.1% versus 3.5%, OR = 1.8; 95% CI: 1.6–2.0; P < 0.001), mal-presentations (7.6% versus 6.1%, OR = 1.3; 95% CI: 1.1–1.4; P < 0.001), and cephalopelvic disproportion (CPD, 0.9% versus 0.3%, OR = 2.6; 95% CI: 1.9–3.4; P < 0.001). No significant differences were noted between the groups regarding perinatal
complications such as low birth-weight, meconium-stained amniotic fluid, perinatal
mortality, and low Apgar scores at 5 min. Controlling for possible confounders such as previous CS, IUGR, PROM, failed
induction, labor dystocia, mal-presentations and CPD, using the Mantel–Haenszel technique,
did not change the significant association between short stature and CS. Moreover,
a multiple logistic regression model was constructed with CS as the outcome variable,
controlling for all these confounders. The model found short stature to be an independent
risk factor for CS (OR = 1.7; 95% CI: 1.6–1.9; P < 0.001).
Conclusion
: Short stature is an independent risk factor for Cesarean delivery. Further studies
investigating the actual indication for CS should be performed in order to make an
informed recommendation regarding the preferred mode of delivery in short parturient
women.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive BiologyAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Maternal height, birthweight and cephalo-pelvic disproportion in urban Nigeria and rural Malawi.Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002; 81: 502-507
- The obstetric significance of short stature.Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1981; 12: 347-356
- Short stature and cephalopelvic disproportion in Burkina Faso West Africa.Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1991; 35: 347-350
- The relationship between maternal height and cephalopelvic disproportion in Dar Es Salaam.East Afr Med J. 1975; 52: 251-256
- Maternal height and the outcome of labor in rural Tanzania.Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1992; 37: 169-177
- Short stature in Scandinavian women. An obstetrical risk factor.Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1987; 66: 153-158
ACOG Practice Bulletin. Diagnosis and management of preeclampsia and eclampsia. Number 33, January 2002. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Committee on Obstetric Practice. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2002;77:67–75.
ACOG Practice Bulletin. Chronic hypertension in pregnancy. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins. Obstet Gynecol 2001;98(Suppl.):177–85.
ACOG Practice Bulletin. Gestational diabetes. Number 30, September 2001. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins. Obstet Gynecol 2001;98:525–38.
- Evolution of graphic analysis of labor.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1978; 132: 824-827
- Maternal height as a risk factor for Caesarean section due to failure to progress in labour.Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999; 39: 152-154
- Maternal height and newborn size relative to risk of intrapartum Caesarean delivery and perinatal distress.BJOG. 2001; 108: 689-696
- Risk factors and outcome of failure to progress during the first stage of labor: a population-based study.Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002; 81: 222-226
- Risk factors for arrest of descent during the second stage of labor.Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2002; 77: 15
- Reducing Cesarean section rates safely: lessons from a “breakthrough series” collaborative.Birth. 1998; 25: 117-124
- Increased Cesarean section rates and emerging patterns of health insurance in Shanghai.Chin Am J Public Health. 1998; 88: 777-780
- Infertility treatment is an independent risk factor for Cesarean section among nulliparous women aged 40 and above.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 185: 888-892
- Association between method of delivery and maternal rehospitalization.JAMA. 2000; 283: 2411-2416
- Clinical significance of fetal heart rate tracings during the second stage of labor.Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 97: 747-752
Hadar A, Sheiner E, Hallak M, Katz M, Mazor M, Shoham-Vardi I. Abnormal fetal heart rate tracing patterns during the first stage of labor: effect on perinatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000;185:863–68.
Dystocia, abnormal labor and fetopelvic disproportion. In: Cunningham FG, Gant NF, Leveno KJ, Gilstrap LC, Hauth JC, Wenstrom KD, editors. Williams obstetrics, 21st ed. McGraw-Hill; 2001. p. 425–50.
Article Info
Publication History
Accepted:
September 23,
2004
Received in revised form:
June 6,
2004
Received:
April 18,
2004
Footnotes
☆Presented at the 24th Annual Meeting of the Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine (SMFM), New Orleans, USA, 2–7 February 2004.
Identification
Copyright
© 2004 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
