4.6 Article

Fibroid tumors are not a risk factor for adverse outcomes in twin pregnancies

Journal

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.10.879

Keywords

fibroid tumor; preterm birth; twin pregnancy

Funding

  1. NICHD [5 T32 HD055172-02]
  2. Washington University CTSA [UL1 RR024992]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: Uterine fibroid tumors have been associated with adverse outcomes in singleton pregnancies. We aimed to estimate risk for adverse obstetric outcomes that are associated with fibroid tumors in twin pregnancies. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of twin pregnancies with >1 fibroid tumor on second trimester ultrasound examination. Outcomes included small-for-gestational-age fetal growth, preterm delivery, preterm rupture of membranes, abruption, preeclampsia, and intrauterine fetal death. Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to evaluate the impact of fibroid tumors on outcomes in twin pregnancies compared with twin pregnancies without fibroid tumors. RESULTS: Of 2378 nonanomalous twin pregnancies, 2.3% had fibroid tumors. Twin pregnancies with fibroid tumors were no more likely to have small-for-gestational-age growth (40.0% vs 36.0%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 0.7-2.0) or preterm delivery at <34 weeks' gestation (25.0% vs 24.0%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.0; 95% confidence interval, 0.5-1.9) than twin pregnancies without fibroid tumors. Other adverse outcomes were no more likely to occur in twin pregnancies with fibroid tumors than in twin pregnancies without fibroid tumors. Post hoc power calculations suggested >97% power to detect 2-fold differences in small for gestational age and preterm delivery at <34 weeks' gestation. CONCLUSION: In contrast to data that suggest an increased risk for adverse outcomes in singleton pregnancies with fibroid tumors, twin pregnancies with fibroid tumors do not appear to be at increased risk for complications compared with those pregnancies without fibroid tumors.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available