Comparison of maternal and perinatal outcomes between adolescent and adult twin pregnancies: Retrospective study

0Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the maternal and perinatal outcomes of twin adolescent pregnancies and twin adult pregnancies. Material and Methods: A study was conducted on twin pregnancies delivered between 2014 and 2019 in tertiary hospital. Twin pregnancies between 10 and 19 years old were classified as the adolescent group (study group) and 20 and 34 years old were classified as the control group. Results: Our study included 54 adolescent twin pregnancies and 818 control group twin pregnancies. The adolescent group delivering approximately 1 week earlier compared with the control group (p=0.023). The adolescent group had approximately 2.3 times higher risk in terms of moderate preterm (28–34 weeks) [OR, 2.34; 95% [CI], 1.34–4.09; p=0.002]. Anemia was significantly higher in adolescents (p=0.039). When 105 live newborns from the adolescent group were compared with 1601 newborns from the control group, the birth weight of the newborns in the adolescent group was 191 g less on average, their height was 1.3 cm shorter on average, and their head circumference was 1 cm smaller on average (p=0.001, p=0.002, and p=0.002, respectively). The adolescent newborns had an approximately 3.1 times increased prevalence of LBW [OR, 3.13; 95% [CI], 1.73–5.65; p<0.001). The fifth-minute APGAR scores were lower in newborns from the adolescent group (p=0.026). Moreover, the need for neonatal intensive care was higher in the adolescent group (p=0.033). Conclusion: Adolescent twin pregnancies should be considered at high risk because of obstetric complications and poor pregnancy outcomes.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bayraktar, B., Bayraktar, M. G., Balikoglu, M., & Alan, M. (2021). Comparison of maternal and perinatal outcomes between adolescent and adult twin pregnancies: Retrospective study. Journal of Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology, 31(2), 46–52. https://doi.org/10.5336/jcog.2021-81646

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free