3.8 Article

Meconium-stained amniotic fluid as a potential risk factor for perinatal asphyxia: A single-center experience

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEONATOLOGY
Volume 5, Issue 3, Pages 157-161

Publisher

MEDKNOW PUBLICATIONS & MEDIA PVT LTD
DOI: 10.4103/2249-4847.191246

Keywords

Meconium aspiration syndrome; Neonatal Intensive Care Unit; perinatal asphyxia

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The aim of this study was to find out immediate fetal outcome in meconium-stained amniotic fluid in relation to perinatal asphyxia. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study includes medical records of all neonates admitted to Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) between September 2014 and July 2015. The variables reviewed are age, sex, weight, mode of delivery, gestational age, presence of meconium aspiration syndrome (MAS) and perinatal asphyxia. Results: Out of 399 total admissions in NICU, 62.4% were male babies and remaining 37.6% were female babies. Of the total 6.8% were cases of MAS, making females (10.7%) more prone compared to male (4.4%) while perinatal asphyxia came out to be 11.5%, making male (12%) more prone than female (10.7%). Postterm (odds ratio [OR] =3.50 [CI: 0.39-31.42]) and term (OR = 2.58 [CI: 1.16, 5.75]) babies were having more risk of developing MAS compared to preterm (P < 0.01). Postterm (OR = 9.15 [CI: 1.91-43.75]) and term (OR = 2.67 [CI: 1.41-5.08]) babies were having more risk of developing perinatal asphyxia compared to preterm (P < 0.01). MAS babies are having 6.62 (CI: 2.85-15.38) times more risk of developing perinatal asphyxia (P < 0.01). Conclusion: The management of MAS, which is a perinatal problem, requires a well concerted and coordinated action by the obstetrician and pediatrician. Prompt and efficient delivery room management can minimize the sequelae of aspirated meconium and decrease the chance of perinatal asphyxia.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available