Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objective: The aim of the study was to compare the perinatal results of spontaneous and medically-indicated late-preterm infants. Methods:We conducted a retrospective cohort study including all singleton late-preterm infants born at our University Hospital between January 2009 and December 2010 (n=171).Neonates with congenital infections, major congenital malformations and chromosomal abnormalities were excluded.Late-preterm infants were classified into two groups, spontaneous and medically-indicated, according to delivery indication.Obstetric complications and short-term neonatal outcomes were investigated.Results: 145 late-preterm infants were eligible for analysis.Obstetric complications were more frequent in medically-indicated late-preterm infants.However, when neonatal results were compared no differences were found between groups.Both spontaneous and medically-indicated late-preterm infants were at risk to develop respiratory morbidity (14.5% vs 24.2%, p=0.195), hyperbilirubinemia (15.7% vs 11.3%, p=0.478), excessive weight loss (2.4% vs 4.8%, p =0.651), infectious complications (1.2% vs 8.1%, p =0.084) and central nervous system morbidity (2.4% vs 0%, p=0.507).Only length of hospital stay was significantly higher among medically-indicated late-preterm infants.Conclusions: Both spontaneous and medically-indicated late-preterm infants are at risk for perinatal morbidity.Obstetric management of pregnancies at risk for late-preterm prematurity should be clarified, and specific strategies of care for these infants need to be improved.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Trilla et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: