4.5 Article

Fetal sex pairing and adverse perinatal outcomes in twin gestations

Journal

ANNALS OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 1, Pages 7-12

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2012.10.003

Keywords

Twin gestations; Fetal sex pairing; Infant outcomes

Funding

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Paul L Foster School of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, El Paso, Texas

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To assess the association between fetal sex pairing in twin pregnancies and adverse perinatal and infant outcomes. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 9770 infants from 4885 twin pregnancies delivered in 2007 was conducted with a statewide hospital discharge database for Texas. Log-binomial regression models based on generalized estimating equations were used to calculate relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% Cl) for the following dichotomous outcomes: breech presentation, hospital mortality, intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), low birth weight, prolonged length of stay (>4 days), receipt of mechanical ventilation, and respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). Results: The sample was composed of 4918 females and 4852 males. An approximately equal number of infants were from a female-female pregnancy (n = 3270), mixed-sex pregnancy (n = 3296), and a male-male pregnancy (n = 3204). Twins of either sex from mixed-sex pairs were 45% less likely to die in the hospital compared with females from a female-female pregnancy (RR, 0.55, 95% CI, 0.31-0.98). Males from a male male pair were 33% less likely than females from female-female pairs to experience IUGR (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.53-0.83). The incidence of RDS was significantly increased in males from male-male twin pairs versus females from female-female pairs (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.05-1.41). Conclusions: Male infants from male-male twin pairs were more likely to develop RDS and be placed on a ventilator but less likely to experience IUGR than female infants from female-female pairs. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available