ArticleWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2026
Vaginal versus caesarean delivery in fetal macrosomia-a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aims of this study were to determine the incidence of macrosomic births over a 5-year period and to examine the childbirth complications for both mother and newborn. PATIENTS AND
methodsDuring the study period there were a total of 16,126 deliveries, of which 1905 were macrosomic fetuses (defined as those with a birthweight of 4000 g or more). Data on the course of pregnancy and childbirth were collected from existing maternal and peripartum medical records. Patients were divided into two groups: those who delivered vaginally and those who delivered by caesarean section. The groups were compared in terms of obstetric, fetal, and neonatal data as well as perinatal outcomes.
resultsWe included 1905 women in the study, 1286 (67.5%) with vaginal delivery and 619 (32.4%) with caesarean section. Primiparous women more frequently delivered by caesarean section, whereas multiparous women more commonly delivered vaginally (p < 0.00001). Male fetuses were significantly more prevalent in both examined groups. Risk factors for fetal macrosomia, such as gestational diabetes, maternal obesity, pregnancy-induced hypertension, polyhydramnios, and multiparity, were significantly more prevalent in the group with caesarean section (p < 0.00001). Delivery complications such as dorsoposterior presentation of the fetal head; fetal asphyxia, dystocia, and cephalopelvic disproportion; and uterine rupture were statistically significantly more frequent with caesarean section
conclusionOur data show that caesarean deliveries for fetal macrosomia were associated with more maternal and neonatal complications than vaginal deliveries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39775438What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.