4.5 Review

Endometriosis and adenomyosis are associated with increased risk of preterm delivery and a small-for-gestational-age child: a systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA
卷 97, 期 9, 页码 1073-1090

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/aogs.13364

关键词

adenomyosis; birthweight; endometriosis; premature; preterm birth; preterm delivery; small for gestational age

向作者/读者索取更多资源

IntroductionThe objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the risk of preterm delivery and having a small-for-gestational-age (SGA) child in women with endometriosis and adenomyosis compared with women without these two diseases. Material and methodsStudies on endometriosis or adenomyosis and risk of preterm delivery and/or SGA infant were included. The systematic search was conducted for all published articles in PubMed and Embase published from 1950 to 2017 using specific search terms. After duplicates were removed, two authors independently reviewed all studies, initially based on title and subsequently based on abstract. Studies considered relevant were read in full text by both reviewers to identify if studies met the inclusion criteria. ResultsThe search found 21 studies on a total of 2517516 women meeting the inclusion criteria. Women with endometriosis had an increased odds of preterm delivery [odds ratio (OR) 1.47, 95% CI 1.28-1.69] and SGA infant (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.04-1.549). Compared with endometriosis, adenomyosis implied an even higher odds of both preterm delivery (OR 3.09, 95% CI 1.88-5.09) and SGA infant (OR 3.23, 95% CI 1.71-6.09) as well. ConclusionsWomen with endometriosis or adenomyosis had a higher odds of preterm delivery and having a child that was SGA compared with women without endometriosis or adenomyosis. The odds of both adverse birth outcomes was highest among women with adenomyosis. The results suggest a closer prenatal monitoring among pregnant women with endometriosis or adenomyosis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据