Increased adverse pregnancy outcomes with unreliable last menstruation

Obstetrics and gynecology, 95(6 Pt 1), 867-873

DOI 10.1016/s0029-7844(99)00639-0 PMID 10831983 Source

Abstract

Objective

To estimate the risk of adverse outcomes in women whose first day of the last menstrual period (LMP) was unreliable.

Methods

Among 20,244 singleton pregnancies with measurements of biparietal diameter between 12 and 22 weeks' gestation, LMP was registered as unreliable in 3775 (18.6%) and reliable in 16,469 (81.4%). Adverse outcomes were defined as spontaneous or missed abortions after 12 weeks' gestation, stillbirth or postnatal death within 1 year, preterm birth, birth weight less than 2500 g, and low birth weight (LBW) for gestation (lower than 22% below sex-specific expected weight). Logistic regression analysis and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were used to analyze the risk of adverse outcomes.

Results

The risk of death was doubled in pregnant women with unreliable LMPs compared with those with reliable LMPs (odds ratio [OR] 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5, 2.6). This risk was highest with respect to stillbirth (OR 2.7; 95% CI 1.7, 4.3). The risks of preterm birth, LBW, and LBW for gestation were also significantly increased (ORs 1.5, 1.4, and 1.2; 95% CIs 1.3, 1.7; 1.2, 1.6; and 1. 0, 1.4, respectively).

Conclusion

An unreliable LMP is associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes, especially fetal death.

Topics

unreliable last menstrual period pregnancy outcomes, uncertain lmp and stillbirth risk, inaccurate menstrual dates adverse outcomes, last menstrual period reliability fetal death, gestational dating errors preterm birth, lmp accuracy and low birth weight, menstrual history quality pregnancy complications, pregnancy dating by ultrasound versus lmp, unreliable cycle history pregnancy risks

Cite this article

Nguyen, T. H., Larsen, T., Engholm, G., & Møller, H. (2000). Increased adverse pregnancy outcomes with unreliable last menstruation. *Obstetrics and gynecology*, *95*(6 Pt 1), 867-873. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0029-7844(99)00639-0

Related articles