RESUMO
Resumen OBJETIVO: evaluar la asociación entre la ganancia de peso durante el embarazo y las complicaciones perinatales: enfermedad hipertensiva del embarazo, diabetes gestacional, cesárea de urgencia y macrosomía fetal. MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS: estudio de casos y controles anidados en una cohorte de pacientes que recibieron control prenatal y atención del parto en el Hospital General Regional del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social de Ciudad Obregón, Sonora. Los momios se calcularon según las complicaciones perinatales, el índice de masa corporal pregestacional y la ganancia total de peso durante todo el embarazo. RESULTADOS: se seleccionó una cohorte de seguimiento de 714 pacientes de las que solo se estudió a 426 que, a su vez, se dividieron en dos grupos de 213 cada uno: de casos y controles. En el grupo de casos la frecuencia de obesidad fue de 17.6% (n = 55) y 40.3% (n=126) de sobrepeso. En el grupo control 6.7% (n=21) de obesidad y 50.8% (n=159) en los controles. En comparación con las pacientes con peso pregestacional normal, no se observó riesgo significativo de complicaciones perinatales en las pacientes con sobrepeso previo a la gestación (RM=0.79, IC 95%: 0.57-1.11, p=0.189). En las pacientes con obesidad pregestacional se observó un riesgo significativo (RM=2.63, IC 95%: 1.51- 4.60, p=.001). CONCLUSIONES: la ganancia de peso a lo largo del embarazo, superior a la recomendada, es un factor riesgo significativo de complicaciones perinatales, independiente del peso previo a la gestación.
Abstract OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between weight gain during pregnancy and perinatal complications: hypertensive pregnancy disease, gestational diabetes, emergency cesarean section and fetal macrosomia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nested case-control study in a cohort of patients who received prenatal care and delivery care at the Regional General Hospital of the Mexican Social Security Institute of Ciudad Obregon, Sonora. The odds were calculated according to perinatal complications, pregestational body mass index and total weight gain throughout pregnancy. RESULTS: A follow-up cohort of 714 patients was selected, of whom only 426 were studied, which in turn were divided into two groups of 213 each: cases and controls. In the group of cases the frequency of obesity was 17.6% (n=55) and 40.3% (n=126) of overweight. In the control group 6.7% (n=21) of obesity and 50.8% (n=159) in controls. Compared with patients with normal pregestational weight, no significant risk of perinatal complications was observed in pre-gestational overweight (OR=0.79, CI 95%: 0.57-1.11, p=0.189). A significant risk was observed in patients with pregestational obesity (OR=2.63, CI 95%: 1.51- 4.60, p=.001). CONCLUSIONS: Weight gain during pregnancy, higher than recommended, is a significant risk factor for perinatal complications, independent of pre-gestational weight.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To identify the possible association between cervicovaginal infections (CVI) and preterm delivery. DESIGN: Cohorts. REFERENCE FRAME: Instituto Nacional de PerinatologÝa, Hospital Central Militar and Hospital General Regional No. 1, IMSS, Culiacßn, Sinaloa, MÚxico. PATIENTS: Four hundred and sixty eight patients attending prenatal control and delivery care. INTERVENTIONS: Fresh smears, Gram stain, and cervicovaginal sample culture from samples obtained during the following gestational stages: First sample at 16-24 weeks, second sample at 25-32 weeks, and third sample at 33-42 weeks. The following microorganisms were studied: Candida albicans, Gardnerella vaginalis, Ureaplasma urealyticum, Streptococcus agalactiae, Mycoplasma hominis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Listeria monocytogenes, and Chlamydia trachomatis. In case of a positive culture, the specific treatment was indicated. MEASUREMENTS: Positive or negative culture for each of the studied pathogens, and the presence or absence of a preterm delivery for each of the patients included in the study. RESULTS: Three hundred and ninety eight were still present at the end of the study, of which 156 had a CVI and 242 had no CVI. No differences between both groups were observed concerning preterm delivery. Significant relative risks were: In the first stage, Ureaplasma urealyticum and Mycoplasma hominis with RR = 9.0 (6.81, 11.8); in the second stage, Ureaplasma urealyticum with RR = 6.2 (3.30, 11.7) and Escherichia coli with RR = 3.4 (1.33, 8.6); in the third stage, Ureaplasma urealyticum with RR = 9.19 (6.93, 12.1). The logistic regression analysis identified Ureaplasma urealyticum during the second stage with OR = 16.6 (2.9, 93.7), statistically significant with p = 0.001. The survival analysis showed differences between the two groups concerning pregnancy duration (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There is a difference in the duration in pregnancy in patients with CVI and without CVI. Ureaplasma urealyticum is consistently associated with preterm delivery.