Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T16:31:35.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Influence of Birth Order and Presentation on Intrauterine Growth of Twins

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

I. Blickstein ,
R. Namir ,
A. Weissman  and
Y. Diamant
I. Blickstein*
Affiliation:
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kaplan Hospital, Rehovot
R. Namir
Affiliation:
Share Zedek Hospital, Jerusalem (affilated to theMedical School of the Hebrew University and Hadassah, Jerusalem)
A. Weissman
Affiliation:
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kaplan Hospital, Rehovot
Y. Diamant
Affiliation:
Share Zedek Hospital, Jerusalem (affilated to theMedical School of the Hebrew University and Hadassah, Jerusalem)
*
Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Kaplan Hospital, 76100, Rehovot, Israel

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.

In order to evaluate the influence of birth order and fetal presentation on antenatal growth of twins we conducted a comparison of prospective measurements of five fetal biometric indices in 50 vertex-vertex and 47 vertex-breech twins. We compared (a) twin A to twin B in both groups; (b) the second and (c) the first twins of both groups. Both groups had similar maternal and neonatal characteristics. The growth curves of the twins were also very similar except for three significant (p<0.05) deviations: (a) Twin A of the vertex-vertex group, had larger femur length (FL) at 18-19 weeks, abdominal circumference (AC) and estimated fetal weight (EFW) at 29 weeks, and EFW measurements at 36 weeks, (b) Second breech twins, compared to their second vertex cohorts, had significantly smaller biparietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC) and FL at 18-19 weeks, BPD and HC at 29 weeks, and EFW at 37 weeks, (c) First twins of the vertex-breech group, as compared to first twins of the vertex-vertex group, had significantly smaller BPD and AC at 18-19 weeks, FL and AC at 21-22 and 29 weeks, FL at 31 weeks, and EFW at 27-28 and 36 weeks' gestation. We concluded that significantly different sonographic fetal indices may be measured at about 20 and 30 weeks' gestation, but not later. An adaptive mechanism attributed to fetal presentation is suggested to explain similar birthweights in spite of these antepartum differences.

Keywords

Birth orderFetal presentationAntenatal growth
Type
Research Article
Information
Acta geneticae medicae et gemellologiae: twin research , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , April 1993 , pp. 151 - 158
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1993

References

REFERENCES

1.Blickstein, I, Lancet, M (1989): Second-breech presentation in twins - a possible adaptive measure to promote fetal growth? Obstet Gynecol 73:700–703.Google Scholar
2.Crane, JP, Tomich, PG, Kopta, M (1980): Ultrasonic growth patterns in normal and discordant twins. Obstet Gynecol 55:678–683.Google Scholar
3.Deter, RL, Rossavik, IK, Harrist, RB, Hadlock, FP (1986): Mathematic modeling of fetal growth: development of individual growth curve standards. Obstet Gynecol 68:156–161.Google Scholar
4.Elejalde, BR, Elejalde, MM (1986): The prenatal growth of the uman body determined by the measurement of bones and organs by ultrasonography. Am J Med Genet 24:575–598.Google Scholar
5.Fenner, A, Malm, T, Kusserow, U (1980): Intrauterine growth of twins. A retrospective analysis. Eur J Pediatr 133: 119–121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Hadlock, FP, Harrist, RB, Carpenter, RJ, Deter, RL, Park, SK (1984): Sonographic estimation of fetal weight. The value of femur length in addition to head and abdomen measurements. Radiology 150: 535–540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Kasby, CB, Poll, V (1982): The breech head and its ultrasound significance. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 89:106–110.Google Scholar
8.Leroy, B, Lefort, F, Neveu, P, Risse, RJ, Trevise, P, Jeny, R (1982): Intrauterine growth charts for twin fetuses. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 31:199–203.Google ScholarPubMed
9.Naeye, RL, Benirschke, K, Hagstrom, JWC, Marcus, CC (1966): Intrauterine growth of twins as estimated from liverborn birthweight data. Pediatrics 37:409–416.Google Scholar
10.Poisson-Salmon, AS, Breart, G (1989): Intrauterine growth: a comparison of longitudinal and cross-sectional approaches. Rev Epidemiol et Sante Publ 37:449–459.Google Scholar
11.Reece, AE, Yarkoni, S, Abdalla, M, et al (1991): A prospective longitudinal study of growth in twin gestations compared with growth in singleton pregnancies. I. The fetal head. J Ultrasound Med 10:439–443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Reece, AE, Yarkoni, S. Abdalla, M, et al (1991): A prospective longitudinal study of growth in twin gestations compared with growth in singleton pregnancies. II. The fetal limbs. J Ultrasound Med 10:445–450.Google Scholar
13.Rodis, JF, Vinzileos, AM, Campbell, WA, Pinette, MG, Nochimson, DJ (1990): Intrauterine fetal growth in concordant twin gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 162:1025–1029.Google Scholar
14.Rodis, JF, Vinzileos, AM, Campbell, WA, Nochimson, DJ (1990): Intrauterine fetal growth in discordant twin gestation. J Ultrasound Med 9:443–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Shepard, NJ, Richards, VA, Berkowitz, RL, Warsof, SL, Hobbins, JC (1982): An evaluation of two equations for predicting fetal weight by ultrasound. Am J Obstet Gynecol 142:47–54.Google Scholar
16.Yarkoni, S, Reece, AE, Holford, T, O'Connor, TZ, Hobbins, JC (1987): Estimated fetal weight in the evaluation of growth in twin gestations: a prospective longitudinal study. Obstet Gynecol 69:636–639.Google Scholar