{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,22]],"date-time":"2026-09-22T23:48:14Z","timestamp":1790120894072,"version":"4.0.1"},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Georg Thieme Verlag KG","issue":"07","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Amer J Perinatol"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2018,6]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>\n            Background\u2003Scheduled cesarean is frequently performed for fetal growth restriction due to concerns for fetal intolerance of labor.<\/jats:p><jats:p>\n            Objective\u2003We compared neonatal outcomes in preterm growth-restricted fetuses by intended mode of delivery.<\/jats:p><jats:p>\n            Study Design\u2003We performed a retrospective cohort study of indicated preterm births with prenatally diagnosed growth restriction from 2011 to 2014 at a single institution. Patients were classified by intended mode of delivery. The primary outcome was a composite of adverse neonatal outcomes, including perinatal death, cord blood acidemia, chest compressions during neonatal resuscitation, seizures, culture-proven sepsis, necrotizing enterocolitis, and grade III\u2013IV intraventricular hemorrhage. Secondary analysis was performed examining the impact of umbilical artery Dopplers.<\/jats:p><jats:p>\n            Results\u2003Of 101 fetuses with growth restriction, 75 underwent planned cesarean deliveries. Of those induced, 46.2% delivered vaginally. Delivery by scheduled cesarean was not associated with a decreased risk of the composite outcome (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45\u20135.78), even when only those with abnormal umbilical artery Dopplers were considered (aOR, 2.8; 95% CI, 0.40\u201320.2).<\/jats:p><jats:p>\n            Conclusion\u2003In this cohort, planned cesarean was not associated with a reduction in neonatal morbidity, even when considering only those with abnormal umbilical artery Dopplers. In otherwise appropriate candidates for vaginal delivery, fetal growth restriction should not be considered a contraindication to trial of labor.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0037-1608812","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2017,11,28]],"date-time":"2017-11-28T18:33:07Z","timestamp":1511893987000},"page":"605-610","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":6,"title":["Impact of Intended Mode of Delivery on Outcomes in Preterm Growth-Restricted Fetuses"],"prefix":"10.1055","volume":"35","author":[{"given":"Spencer","family":"Kuper","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center for Women's Reproductive Health, School of Medicine at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Michelle","family":"Wang","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center for Women's Reproductive Health, School of Medicine at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Robin","family":"Steele","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center for Women's Reproductive Health, School of Medicine at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Joseph","family":"Biggio","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center for Women's Reproductive Health, School of Medicine at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Lorie","family":"Harper","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center for Women's Reproductive Health, School of Medicine at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Sima","family":"Baalbaki","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center for Women's Reproductive Health, School of Medicine at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"194","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2017,11,28]]},"container-title":["American Journal of Perinatology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/www.thieme-connect.de\/products\/ejournals\/pdf\/10.1055\/s-0037-1608812.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2018,5,11]],"date-time":"2018-05-11T18:31:18Z","timestamp":1526063478000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"http:\/\/www.thieme-connect.de\/DOI\/DOI?10.1055\/s-0037-1608812"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2017,11,28]]},"references-count":0,"journal-issue":{"issue":"07","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2018,5,11]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2018,6]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1055\/s-0037-1608812","relation":{},"ISSN":["0735-1631","1098-8785"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0735-1631","type":"print"},{"value":"1098-8785","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2017,11,28]]}}}