Close
New

Medscape is available in 5 Language Editions – Choose your Edition here.

 

Macrosomia

  • Author: Allahyar Jazayeri, MD, PhD, FACOG, DACOG, FSMFM; Chief Editor: Christine Isaacs, MD  more...
 
Updated: Jan 06, 2015
 

Background

The term macrosomia is used to describe a newborn with an excessive birth weight. A diagnosis of fetal macrosomia can be made only by measuring birth weight after delivery; therefore, the condition is confirmed only retrospectively, ie, after delivery of the neonate. Fetal macrosomia is encountered in up to 10% of deliveries.[1]

Attempts at perinatal diagnosis of macrosomia have proven difficult and are often inaccurate. This article defines macrosomia and reviews clinical and diagnostic modalities currently used to screen for pregnancies at the greatest risk for macrosomia with some degree of accuracy. Maternal, fetal, and neonatal consequences of macrosomia are also discussed, with specific attention to the potential etiology of macrosomia.

Fetal macrosomia has been defined in several different ways, including birth weight of 4000-4500 g (8 lb 13 oz to 9 lb 15 oz) or greater than 90% for gestational age after correcting for neonatal sex and ethnicity. Based on these definitions, macrosomia affects 1-10% of all pregnancies.

See the image below.

Photograph of a macrosomic newborn soon after birt Photograph of a macrosomic newborn soon after birth.

Factors associated with fetal macrosomia include genetics; duration of gestation; presence of gestational diabetes; and class A, B, and C diabetes mellitus. Genetic, racial, and ethnic factors influence birth weight and the risk of macrosomia.[2] Male newborns typically weigh more than female newborns and thus comprise a greater proportion of infants with birth weights exceeding 4500 g at any gestational age. The risk of macrosomia also varies with ethnicity. Even when controlled for diabetes, studies have demonstrated that Hispanic women have a higher risk of fetal macrosomia compared with white, African American, or Asian women. Genetic factors, such as parental height and weight, may also play a role in determining newborn birth weight.

Despite the identification and characterization of risk factors, no combination of these risk factors can predict macrosomia accurately enough to be used clinically. Much of the birth weight variation remains unexplained, and most macrosomic infants do not have identifiable risk factors. Finally, macrosomia is reportedly associated with neonatal morbidity, neonatal injury, maternal injury, and cesarean delivery.[3]

Next

Pathophysiology

The pathophysiology of macrosomia is related to the associated maternal or fetal condition that accounts for its development. In general, poorly controlled diabetes, maternal obesity, and excessive maternal weight gain are all associated with macrosomia and have intermittent periods of hyperglycemia in common. Hyperglycemia in the fetus results in the stimulation of insulin, insulinlike growth factors, growth hormone, and other growth factors, which, in turn, stimulate fetal growth and deposition of fat and glycogen. Advanced gestational age results in a larger birth weight at delivery by allowing the growth process to continue in utero.

Macrosomia may be associated with birth trauma for the neonate and birth canal lacerations, eg, perineal, vaginal, and cervical[4] , or cesarean delivery for the mother. However, macrosomia in the neonate of a diabetic mother may indicate poor glucose control. These infants are at increased risk of intrauterine death and thus require close monitoring and antepartum fetal testing.[5]

Previous
Next

Epidemiology

Frequency

United States

Infants with a birth weight of 4000 g (8 lb 13 oz) or more comprise up to 10% of infants born in the United States, and, in 1998, 1.5% of all neonates had a birth weight equal to or greater than 4500 g (9 lb 15 oz).

International

Variation in the percentage of macrosomia in different ethnic groups has been observed independent of diabetes. In general, Hispanic women have a larger proportion of macrosomic newborns compared with white, African American, or Asian women.

Mortality/Morbidity

Morbidity and mortality associated with macrosomia can be divided into maternal, fetal, and neonatal categories. A recent study investigating the effects of birth weight on fetal mortality shows that higher fetal mortality rates are associated with a birth weight of greater than 4250 g in nondiabetic mothers and a birth weight of 4000 g in diabetic mothers.[5]

Maternal morbidity

Macrosomia is associated with a higher incidence of cesarean delivery (double that of control subjects) and with birth canal lacerations associated with vaginal delivery. Mulik et al[6] reviewed the outcomes of 8617 deliveries over a period of 11 years. In that population, 666 neonates were born with a birth weight of 4000-4499 g and 97 neonates were larger than 4500 g. In their study, Mulik et al found maternal morbidity to be associated with a birth weight of 4500 g or higher compared with a birth weight of less than 4000 g. Postpartum hemorrhage occurred in 3.1% of mothers with newborns weighing 4500 g or more compared with 1.5% in mothers with newborns weighing less than 4000 g. Blood transfusions occurred in 15.4% of mothers with newborns weighing 4500 g or more compared with 3.1% in mothers with newborns weighing less than 4000 g.

Neonatal morbidity

Macrosomic neonates are at risk for shoulder dystocia and birth trauma. This risk is directly related to neonatal birth weight and begins to increase substantially when birth weight exceeds 4500 g and particularly when it exceeds 5000 g. Brachial plexus injury is rare, with an incidence of fewer than 2 cases per 1000 vaginal deliveries. This risk is approximately 20 times higher when the birth weight is more than 4500 g.[4] Mulik et al reported a higher incidence of NICU admissions for neonates with a birth weight higher than 4500 g compared with newborns with a birth weight of less than 4000 g (9.3% vs 2.7%). Risk of shoulder dystocia was 10 times higher in the larger babies (4.1% vs 0.4%).

Fetal morbidity/mortality

When associated with diabetes, fetal macrosomia indicates poor maternal glucose control, and these infants are at risk of stillbirth. Stillbirth rates in macrosomic infants are twice as high as those in control subjects, irrespective of diabetes. However, for a birth weight of 4500-5000 g, the fetal death rate is fewer than 2 deaths per 1000 births for nondiabetic women and is approximately 8 deaths per 1000 births for diabetic women. For a birth weight of 5000-5500 g, this rate is 5-18 deaths per 1000 births for nondiabetic women and is approximately 40 deaths per 1000 births for diabetic women.[5]

Race

Macrosomia occurs with higher frequency in newborns of Hispanic origin. Because Hispanic women have a higher incidence of diabetes during pregnancy, part of the preponderance of macrosomia in this ethnic group is due to the higher incidence of diabetes in pregnancy. However, even when corrected for diabetes, Hispanic mothers tend to have larger newborns.

Sex

Male infants are more likely to be macrosomic than female infants.

Age

Macrosomia, as defined by birth weight greater than 4000-4500 g, occurs with higher frequency in prolonged pregnancies that continue beyond the expected delivery date.

Previous
 
 
Contributor Information and Disclosures
Author

Allahyar Jazayeri, MD, PhD, FACOG, DACOG, FSMFM Medical Director of Perinatal Services, Aspirus Hospital; Consulting Staff and Owner, Women's Specialty Care and NEWMOMS of Green Bay

Allahyar Jazayeri, MD, PhD, FACOG, DACOG, FSMFM is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine, Association of Professors of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Society for Reproductive Investigation, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editor Board

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Received salary from Medscape for employment. for: Medscape.

Christine Isaacs, MD Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division Head, General Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical Director of Midwifery Services, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine

Christine Isaacs, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

Christine Isaacs, MD Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division Head, General Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical Director of Midwifery Services, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine

Christine Isaacs, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

References
  1. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD, Ventura SJ, Menacker F, Kirmeyer S. Births: final data for 2004. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2006 Sep 29. 55(1):1-101. [Medline].

  2. Okun N, Verma A, Mitchell BF, Flowerdew G. Relative importance of maternal constitutional factors and glucose intolerance of pregnancy in the development of newborn macrosomia. J Matern Fetal Med. 1997 Sep-Oct. 6(5):285-90. [Medline].

  3. Spellacy WN, Miller S, Winegar A, Peterson PQ. Macrosomia--maternal characteristics and infant complications. Obstet Gynecol. 1985 Aug. 66(2):158-61. [Medline].

  4. McFarland LV, Raskin M, Daling JR, Benedetti TJ. Erb/Duchenne's palsy: a consequence of fetal macrosomia and method of delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 1986 Dec. 68(6):784-8. [Medline].

  5. Mondestin MA, Ananth CV, Smulian JC, Vintzileos AM. Birth weight and fetal death in the United States: the effect of maternal diabetes during pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Oct. 187(4):922-6. [Medline].

  6. Mulik V, Usha Kiran TS, Bethal J, Bhal PS. The outcome of macrosomic fetuses in a low risk primigravid population. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2003 Jan. 80(1):15-22. [Medline].

  7. Catalano PM. Management of obesity in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Feb. 109(2 Pt 1):419-33. [Medline].

  8. Gaudet L, Ferraro ZM, Wen SW, et al. Maternal Obesity and Occurrence of Fetal Macrosomia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Biomed Res Int. 2014. 2014:640291. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  9. GIBSON JR, McKEOWN T. Observations on all births (23, 970) in Birmingham, 1947. VII. Effect of changing family size on infant mortality. Br J Soc Med. 1952 Jul. 6(3):183-7. [Medline].

  10. Thomson AM, Billewicz WZ, Hytten FE. The assessment of fetal growth. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Commonw. 1968 Sep. 75(9):903-16. [Medline].

  11. Di Renzo GC, Rosati A, Sarti RD, Cruciani L, Cutuli AM. Does fetal sex affect pregnancy outcome?. Gend Med. 2007 Mar. 4(1):19-30. [Medline].

  12. Hackmon R, Bornstein E, Ferber A, Horani J, O'Reilly Green CP, Divon MY. Combined analysis with amniotic fluid index and estimated fetal weight for prediction of severe macrosomia at birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Apr. 196(4):333.e1-4. [Medline].

  13. Institute of Medicine. Nutritional status and weight gain. Nutrition During Pregnancy. National Academies Press; 27-233.

  14. Smith GC, Smith MF, McNay MB, Fleming JE. The relation between fetal abdominal circumference and birthweight: findings in 3512 pregnancies. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997 Feb. 104(2):186-90. [Medline].

  15. Chauhan SP, Hendrix NW, Magann EF, Morrison JC, Kenney SP, Devoe LD. Limitations of clinical and sonographic estimates of birth weight: experience with 1034 parturients. Obstet Gynecol. 1998 Jan. 91(1):72-7. [Medline].

  16. ACOG Practice Bulletin. Clinical Management Guidelines for Obstetrician-Gynecologists. Number 60, March 2005. Pregestational diabetes mellitus. Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Mar. 105(3):675-85. [Medline].

  17. Faschingbauer F, Dammer U, Raabe E, et al. Sonographic weight estimation in fetal macrosomia: influence of the time interval between estimation and delivery. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014 Dec 23. [Medline].

  18. Kritzer S, Magner K, Warshak CR. Increasing maternal body mass index and the accuracy of sonographic estimation of fetal weight near delivery. J Ultrasound Med. 2014 Dec. 33(12):2173-9. [Medline].

  19. Jazayeri A, Heffron JA, Phillips R, Spellacy WN. Macrosomia prediction using ultrasound fetal abdominal circumference of 35 centimeters or more. Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Apr. 93(4):523-6. [Medline].

  20. Ben-Haroush A, Yogev Y, Bar J, et al. Accuracy of sonographically estimated fetal weight in 840 women with different pregnancy complications prior to induction of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Feb. 23(2):172-6. [Medline].

  21. De Reu PA, Smits LJ, Oosterbaan HP, Nijhuis JG. Value of a single early third trimester fetal biometry for the prediction of birth weight deviations in a low risk population. J Perinat Med. 2008. 36(4):324-9. [Medline].

  22. Coomarasamy A, Connock J, Thornton J, Khan KS. Accuracy of ultrasound biometry in the prediction of macrosomia: a systematic quantitative review. BJOG. 2005. 112:1461-66.

  23. Loetworawanit R, Chittacharoen A, Sututvoravut, S. Intrapartum fetal abdominal circumference by ultrasonography for predicting fetal macrosomia. J Med Assoc Thai. 2006. Suppl 4:S60-4.

  24. Rouse DJ, Owen J, Goldenberg RL, Cliver SP. The effectiveness and costs of elective cesarean delivery for fetal macrosomia diagnosed by ultrasound. JAMA. 1996 Nov 13. 276(18):1480-6. [Medline].

  25. Combs CA, Singh NB, Khoury JC. Elective induction versus spontaneous labor after sonographic diagnosis of fetal macrosomia. Obstet Gynecol. 1993 Apr. 81(4):492-6. [Medline].

  26. Cheng Y, Sparks T, Laros R Jr, Nicholson J, Caughey A. Impending macrosomia: will induction of labour modify the risk of caesarean delivery?. BJOG. 2012 Mar. 119(4):402-9. [Medline].

  27. Acker DB, Gregory KD, Sachs BP, Friedman EA. Risk factors for Erb-Duchenne palsy. Obstet Gynecol. 1988 Mar. 71(3 Pt 1):389-92. [Medline].

  28. Buchanan TA, Kjos SL, Montoro MN, et al. Use of fetal ultrasound to select metabolic therapy for pregnancies complicated by mild gestational diabetes. Diabetes Care. 1994 Apr. 17(4):275-83. [Medline].

  29. Walkinshaw SA. Dietary regulation for 'gestational diabetes'. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000. (2):CD000070. [Medline].

  30. Parker JD, Abrams B. Prenatal weight gain advice: an examination of the recent prenatal weight gain recommendations of the Institute of Medicine. Obstet Gynecol. 1992 May. 79(5 (Pt 1)):664-9. [Medline].

  31. Cogswell ME, Serdula MK, Hungerford DW, Yip R. Gestational weight gain among average-weight and overweight women--what is excessive?. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Feb. 172(2 Pt 1):705-12. [Medline].

  32. Bianco AT, Smilen SW, Davis Y, et al. Pregnancy outcome and weight gain recommendations for the morbidly obese woman. Obstet Gynecol. 1998 Jan. 91(1):97-102. [Medline].

  33. ACOG Committee Opinion number 315, September 2005. Obesity in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Sep. 106(3):671-5. [Medline].

  34. Boney CM, Verma A, Tucker R, Vohr BR. Metabolic syndrome in childhood: association with birth weight, maternal obesity, and gestational diabetes mellitus. Pediatrics. 2005 Mar. 115(3):e290-6. [Medline].

  35. Jovanovic-Peterson L, Peterson CM, Reed GF, Metzger BE, Mills JL, Knopp RH. Maternal postprandial glucose levels and infant birth weight: the Diabetes in Early Pregnancy Study. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development--Diabetes in Early Pregnancy Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991 Jan. 164(1 Pt 1):103-11. [Medline].

  36. Schrauwers C, Dekker G. Maternal and perinatal outcome in obese pregnant patients. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2009 Mar. 22(3):218-26. [Medline].

  37. Maggard MA, Yermilov I, Maglione M, et al. Pregnancy and fertility following bariatric surgery: a systematic review. JAMA. 2008. 300(19):2286-96.

  38. Karmon A, Sheiner E. Pregnancy after bariatric surgery: a comprehensive review. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2008 May. 277(5):381-8. [Medline].

  39. Raio L, Ghezzi F, Di Naro E, et al. Perinatal outcome of fetuses with a birth weight greater than 4500 g: an analysis of 3356 cases. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2003 Aug 15. 109(2):160-5. [Medline].

  40. Alexander GR, Himes JH, Kaufman RB, et al. A United States national reference for fetal growth. Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Feb. 87(2):163-8. [Medline].

  41. Babinszki A, Kerenyi T, Torok O, et al. Perinatal outcome in grand and great-grand multiparity: effects of parity on obstetric risk factors. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Sep. 181(3):669-74. [Medline].

  42. Benedetti TJ, Gabbe SG. Shoulder dystocia. A complication of fetal macrosomia and prolonged second stage of labor with midpelvic delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 1978 Nov. 52(5):526-9. [Medline].

  43. Deter RL, Hadlock FP. Use of ultrasound in the detection of macrosomia: a review. J Clin Ultrasound. 1985 Oct. 13(8):519-24. [Medline].

  44. Dooley SL, Metzger BE, Cho NH. Gestational diabetes mellitus. Influence of race on disease prevalence and perinatal outcome in a U.S. population. Diabetes. 1991 Dec. 40 Suppl 2:25-9. [Medline].

  45. Ecker JL, Greenberg JA, Norwitz ER, et al. Birth weight as a predictor of brachial plexus injury. Obstet Gynecol. 1997 May. 89(5 Pt 1):643-7. [Medline].

  46. Flamm BL, Goings JR. Vaginal birth after cesarean section: is suspected fetal macrosomia a contraindication?. Obstet Gynecol. 1989 Nov. 74(5):694-7. [Medline].

  47. Gonen O, Rosen DJ, Dolfin Z, et al. Induction of labor versus expectant management in macrosomia: a randomized study. Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Jun. 89(6):913-7. [Medline].

  48. Homko CJ, Sivan E, Nyirjesy P, Reece EA. The interrelationship between ethnicity and gestational diabetes in fetal macrosomia. Diabetes Care. 1995 Nov. 18(11):1442-5. [Medline].

  49. Juntunen K, Kirkinen P, Kauppila A. The clinical outcome in pregnancies of grand grand multiparous women. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1997 Sep. 76(8):755-9. [Medline].

  50. Klebanoff MA, Mills JL, Berendes HW. Mother's birth weight as a predictor of macrosomia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985 Oct 1. 153(3):253-7. [Medline].

  51. Larsen CE, Serdula MK, Sullivan KM. Macrosomia: influence of maternal overweight among a low-income population. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990 Feb. 162(2):490-4. [Medline].

  52. Little RE, Sing CF. Genetic and environmental influences on human birth weight. Am J Hum Genet. 1987 Jun. 40(6):512-26. [Medline].

  53. McFarland MB, Trylovich CG, Langer O. Anthropometric differences in macrosomic infants of diabetic and nondiabetic mothers. J Matern Fetal Med. 1998 Nov-Dec. 7(6):292-5. [Medline].

  54. Sermer M, Naylor CD, Gare DJ, et al. Impact of increasing carbohydrate intolerance on maternal-fetal outcomes in 3637 women without gestational diabetes. The Toronto Tri-Hospital Gestational Diabetes Project. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Jul. 173(1):146-56. [Medline].

  55. Spellacy WN. Shoulder dystocia risks. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Apr. 180(4):1047. [Medline].

  56. Toohey JS, Keegan KA, Morgan MA, et al. The "dangerous multipara": fact or fiction?. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Feb. 172(2 Pt 1):683-6. [Medline].

 
Previous
Next
 
Photograph of a macrosomic newborn soon after birth.
 
 
 
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2016 by WebMD LLC. This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.