Download PDF
Hebamme 2013; 26(1): 12-17
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1320153
Geburt
Makrosomie
Hippokrates Verlag in MVS Medizinverlage Stuttgart GmbH & Co. KG Stuttgart

Geburtsmanagement bei Verdacht auf Makrosomie

Ute Schnitzler
Hebamme, Köln
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
13 March 2013 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Makrosomie wird sowohl in der Literatur als auch in der geburtshilflichen Praxis unterschiedlich definiert. Ebenso unterschiedlich sind die empfohlenen Managementstrategien. Sie reichen von abwartender Geburtsleitung über Geburtseinleitung bis hin zu primärer Sectio. Diese uneinheitlichen Definitionen und Strategien verunsichern sowohl das Geburtshilfeteam als auch die schwangeren Frauen und deren Familien.

 

  • Literatur

  • Henriksen T. The macrosomic fetus: a challenge in current obstetrics. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2008; 87(2): 134-145
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Bjørstad AR, Irgens-Hansen K, Daltveit AK, Irgens LM. Macrosomia: mode of delivery and pregnancy outcome. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2010; 89(5): 664-669
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Aye SS, Miller V, Saxena S, Farhan M. Management of large-for-gestational-age pregnancy in non-diabetic women. The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist 2010; 12: 250-256
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Fetal Macrosomia, ACOG Practice Bulletin. 22. 2000
    Google Scholar
  • National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health (UK). Caesarean section NICE Clinical Guideline. 2004 [internet]: http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/CG013NICEguideline.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (DGGG). Absolute und relative Indikationen zur Sectio caesarea. AWMF Leitlinie 015/054 (S1) 2010 [internet]: http://www.dggg.de/fileadmin/public_docs/Leitlinien/4-4-6-sectio-­indikationen-2010.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • Propp U. Geburtsverlauf und Fetal Outcome bei Kindern mit einem Geburtsgewicht > 4000 g. Dissertation: Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität zu München 2004
    Google Scholar
  • Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). Green-top Guideline No. 42. Shoulder Dystocia 2nd edition 2012 [internet]: http://www.rcog.org.uk/files/rcog-corp/GTG %2042_Shoulder %20dystocia %202nd %20edi­tion %202012.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • Zhang J, Decker A, Platt RW, Kramer MS. How big is too big? The perinatal consequences of fetal macrosomia. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2008; 198(517): e1-e6
    Google Scholar
  • Ecker JL. Cesarean Delivery for Suspected Macrosomia: Inefficient at Best. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology 2004; 47(2): 352-364
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Baskett TF, Allen AC. Perinatal implications of shoulder dystocia. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 86: 14-17
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • Backe B, Magnussen EB, Johansen OJ, Sellaeg G, Russwurm H. Obstetric brachial plexus palsy: a birth injury not explained by the known risk factors. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2008; 87(10): 1027-1032
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hoeksma AF, Wolf H, Oei SL. Obstetrical brachial plexus injuries: incidence, natural course and shoulder contracture. Clinical rehabilitation 2000; 14(5): 523-526
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Evans-Jones G, Kay S, Weindling A, Cranny G, Ward A, Bradshaw A, Hernon C. Congenital brachial palsy: incidence, causes and outcome in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. Archives of Disease in Childhood: Fetal & Neonatal 2003; 88(3): F185-F189
    Google Scholar
  • Pondaag W, Malessy MJ V, Van Dijk JG, Thomeer RT W. Natural history of obstetric brachial plexus palsy: a systematic review. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 2004; 46(2): 138-144
    Google Scholar
  • Gherman RB, Goodwin TM, Ouzounian JG, Miller DA, Paul RH. Brachial plexus palsy associated with cesarean section: an in utero Injury?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 177: 1162-1164
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gilbert WM, Nesbitt TS, Danielsen B. Associated factors in 1611 cases of brachial plexus injury. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 93: 536-540
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • Sadeh-Mestechkin D, Walfisch A, Shachar R, Shoham-Vardi I, Vardi H, Hallak M. Suspected macrosomia? Better not tell. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2008; 278(3): 225-230
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Coomarasamy A, Connock M, Thornton J, Khan KS. Accuracy of ultrasound biometry in the prediction of macrosomia: a systematic quantitative review. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 2005; 112(11): 1461-1466
    Google Scholar
  • Enkin M, Keirse M, Neilson J, Crowther L, Hodnett E, Hofmeyr J. A guide to effective care in pregnancy and childbirth. 3. Aufl. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Enkin M, Glouberman S, Groff P, Jadad AR, Stern A. Beyond Evidence: The Complexity of Maternity Care. Birth 2006; 33(4): 265-269
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (DGGG). Empfehlungen zur Schulterdystokie – Erkennung, Prävention und Management. AWMF Leitlinie 015/024 (S1) 2010 [internet]: http://www.dggg.de/fileadmin/public_docs/Leitlinien/4-4-5-schulterdystokie-2010.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • Irion O, Boulvain M. Induction of labour for suspected fetal macrosomia. The Cochrane Library 1998 2: CD000938
    Google Scholar
  • Sanchez-Ramos L, Olivier F, Delke I, Kaunitz A. Labor Induction Versus Expectant Management for Postterm Pregnancies: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis. Obstetrics & Gynecology 2003; 101(6): 1312-1318
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • World Health Organization (WHO). WHO Recommendations for Induction of labour 2011. [internet]: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2011/9789241501156_eng.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health (UK). Induction of Labour Clinical Guideline 70 (CG70). 2008 [internet]: http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/
12012/41255/41255.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • Souza JP et al. Caesarean section without medical indications is associated with an increased risk of  adverse shortterm maternal outcomes: the 2004–2008 WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health. WHO 2010 [internet]: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/8/71
    Google Scholar
  • Taschner U. Re-Sectio oder vaginale Geburt bei Zustand nach Sectio?. Die Hebamme 2012; 25/3: 160-165
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • Hildebrandt S, Göbel E. Geburtshilfliche Notfälle vermeiden – erkennen – behandeln. 1. Aufl. Stuttgart: Hippokrates; 2007
    Google Scholar