Please wait a minute...
Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology  2020, Vol. 47 Issue (2): 234-237    DOI: 10.31083/j.ceog.2020.02.5103
Original Research Previous articles | Next articles
Effects of marginal umbilical cord insertion on the prognosis of fetus
Y. Tian1, H. Luo1, *(), M. He1
1Ultrasound Department, Sichuan University West China Second University Hospital/Key Laboratory of Obstetrics & Gynecologic and Pediatric Diseases and Birth Defects of Ministry of Education, Chengdu, Si Chuan Province, P.R. China
Download:  PDF(727KB)  ( 348 ) Full text   ( 12 )
Export:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
Abstract  Objective: To investigate the effect of marginal placental insertion of the umbilical cord on the prognosis of a fetus. Material and Methods: Retrospective analysis was performed to compare the differences in fetal weight (FW), placental weight (PW), fetal/placental weight ratio (FPR) and complications between 295 cases with marginal insertion of umbilical cord, and 297 cases with normal umbilical cord insertion. The cases studied, with marginal insertion of umbilical cord, were admitted between 2013-2017 to the Second Western China Hospital of Sichuan University. The cases were divided into “upper”, “lower” and “other”, according to the site of umbilical cord insertion into the placenta. Results: The FW was lower, while the incident of low-birth weight infants was higher in the marginal umbilical cord insertion group than in the normal umbilical cord insertion group. In the subgroup of lower marginal insertions, the PW and FW were lower and the FPR was higher than in the subgroup of upper marginal insertion sites.Conclusion: The fetus with lower marginal umbilical cord insertion should be attended closely, with frequent monitoring of the developmental indices in order to screen abnormal growth of the fetus.
Key words:  Marginal umbilical cord insertion      Fetal weight      Placental weight      Fetal/placental weight ratio      Complications     
Published:  15 April 2020     
Fund: 2018JY0330/Applied Basic Research Program of Science and Technology Department of Sichuan Province
*Corresponding Author(s):  H. Luo     E-mail:  luohongcd1969@163.com

Cite this article: 

Y. Tian, H. Luo, M. He. Effects of marginal umbilical cord insertion on the prognosis of fetus. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 47(2): 234-237.

URL: 

https://ceog.imrpress.com/EN/10.31083/j.ceog.2020.02.5103     OR     https://ceog.imrpress.com/EN/Y2020/V47/I2/234

Table 1  General information in MI group and NI groups
NI group MI group p score
Case 297 295 > 0.05
Maternal age 31.13 ± 4.2 31.13 ± 3.9 > 0.05
Gravidity 2.18 ± 1.3 1.99 ± 1.42 > 0.05
Parity 0.42 ± 0.53 0.27 ± 0.47 < 0.05
Gestational weeks 39+4 ± 1.08 39+2 ± 0.78 > 0.05
Conception way(nature) 280 (94.28%) 279 (94.58%) > 0.05
Table 2  FW、 PW 、FPR in MI group and NI groups
case FW PW FPR
NI group 297 3346.8 ± 387.49 599.19 ± 90.55 5.66 ± 0.76
MI group 295 3244.7 ± 365.48 590 ± 85.62 5.57 ± 0.78
p score < 0.05 > 0.05 > 0.05
Table 3  Classification comparison of different insertion positions in MI group
case FW PW FPR
Upper 179 3292.95 ± 347.31* 604.87 ± 81.89* 5.52 ± 0.79*
Lower 99 3181.46 ± 406.14* 566.17 ± 81.00* 5.67 ± 0.72*
Others 17 3178.92 ± 312.58 582.14 ± 100.98 5.58 ± 0.88
Table 4  Complications in MI group and NI groups
Complications NI group MI group
cases ratio cases ratio
Premature rupture 78 26.26% 70 23.73%
Postpartum hemorrhage 11 3.7% 14 4.75%
Premature delivery 6 2.02% 6 2.03%
Fetal distress 1 0.34% 4 1.36%
Low birth weight 0 0 8 2.7%*
Fetal macrosomia 18 6.1% 8 2.7%
Still birth 0 0 1 0.34%
[1] Ebbing C., Kiserud T., Johnsen S.L., et al.: “Prevalence risk factors and outcomes of velamentous and marginal cord insertions: A population-based study of 634741 pregnancies”. PLoS One, 2013, 8(7), e70380.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0070380 pmid: 23936197
[2] Salafia C.M., Zhang J., Charles A.K., et al.: “Placental characteristics and birth weight”. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol, 2008, 22, 229-239.
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3016.2008.00935.x pmid: 18426518
[3] Wallace J.M., Bhattacharya S., Horgan G.W.: “Gestational age, gender and parity specific centile charts for placental weight for singleton deliveries in Aberdeen, UK”. Placenta, 2013, 30, 269-274.
[4] Barker D.J., Bull A.R., Osmond C., Simmonds S.J.: “Fetal and placental size and risk of hypertension in adult life”. BMJ, 1990, 301, 259-262.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.301.6746.259 pmid: 2390618
[5] Luque-Fernandez M.A., Ananth C.V., Jaddoe V.W. et al.: “Is the fetoplacental ratio a differential marker of fetal growth restriction in small for gestational age infants?” Eur J Epidemiol. , DOI: 10.1007/s10654-015-9993-9.
doi: 10.1007/s10654-020-00651-2 pmid: 32564181
[6] De Paepe M.E., Shapiro S., Young L.E., Luks F.I.: “Placental weight, birth weight and fetal: placental weight ratio in dichorionic and monochorionic twin gestations in function of gestational age, cord insertion type and placental partition”. Placenta, 2015, V36N2, 213-20.
[7] Luo G.J., Redline R.W., : “Peripheral insertion of umbilical cord”. Pediatr Dev Pathol, 2013, V16N6, 399-404.
[8] Ebbing C., Johnsen S.L., Albrechtsen S., Sunde I.D., Vekseth C., Rasmussen S.: “Velamentous or marginal cord insertion and the risk of spontaneous preterm birth, prelabor rupture of the membranes, and anomalous cord length, a population-based study”. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand., 2017, V96N1, 78-85.
[1] Dino Pavoković, Vesna Elveđi Gašparović, Tvrtko Tupek, Analena Gregorić, Ana Tikvica Luetić, Dubravko Habek. Perinatal outcome in twins. A hospital based comparative study at a single third-level care centre in Croatia[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 631-636.
[2] Özgür Koçak, Cem Koçak. Finding the best formulas to estimate fetal weight based on ultrasound for the Turkish population: a comparison of 24 formulas[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 676-685.
[3] Saša Raičević, Duško Kljakić, Filip Vukmirović, Miloš Z. Milosavljević. A giant placental chorioangioma with a resultant live birth; a discussion of management options[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(2): 426-430.
[4] D. Filipecka-Tyczka, A. Kajdy, B.P. Siekierski, M. Stańczyk, A. Rogowski, M. Rabijewski, R.B. Maksym. Deep infiltrating endometriosis as a cause of severe urogynecological complications despite invasive treatment - report of two cases from the center of endometriosis surgery[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 47(6): 955-960.
[5] H.J. Wang, T.H. Chou, Y.C. Lee, H.K. Au. Acute fatty liver during pregnancy and gestational diabetes insipidus: a case report[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 47(3): 438-441.
[6] R. T. Ratner, A. Harris, J. Tsaltas, N. Goyal, M. Davies-Tuck, H. Najjar, O. Barel. An eight-year retrospective analysis of laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis, outcomes and complications in a large multicenter unit[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2019, 46(5): 699-703.
[7] A.M. Coelho Holanda, F. Osório Marques, I.M. Seabra Leite, J.A. dos Santos Junior. Myomectomy in the 14th week of pregnancy - case report[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2019, 46(5): 818-820.
[8] D. Semenič, N. Abersek, A. Zore, A. S. Laganà, D. Lukanović. The challenge of complex wound healing caused by necrotizing fasciitis after infection of tension-free vaginal transobturator tape (TVT-O) incontinence material[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2019, 46(5): 844-847.
[9] M. Naveiro-Fuentes, A. Rodríguez-Oliver, M.T. Aguilar-Romero, T. María, A. González-Paredes, J. Fernández-Parra, J. Mozas-Moreno. Vaginal and laparoscopic hysterectomy. Which one is better? Critical analysis of complications associated with both routes[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2018, 45(6): 845-849.
[10] M.B. Senturk, C. Kilicci, O. Doğan, I. Yenidede, M. Polat, Ç. Pulatoğlu, A. Eser, B.K. Yılmaz. Comparison of extra-peritoneal and intra-peritoneal cesarean technique: a prospective randomised trial[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2018, 45(5): 756-761.
[11] R. La Torre, S. Grisolia, V. D'Ambrosio, E. Marcoccia, S. Gatto, A. Squarcella, C. Aliberti, F. Colloridi, F. Rech, A. Giancotti. Advanced maternal age and pregnancy outcome: experience in a tertiary care center[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2018, 45(3): 334-338.
[12] N. Sahly, A. Sahly, N. Al Mansouri, N. Al Sinani, S. Kafy. Major complications of laparoscopy: a 17-year follow up in a teaching hospital in Saudi Arabia[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2018, 45(3): 400-404.
[13] U. Indraccolo, A. Bifarini, R. Di Iorio, M. Bonito, S.R. Indraccolo. Epidural analgesia can sometimes abnormally prolong the second stage of labour[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2017, 44(4): 584-586.
[14] H.F. Xue, W.G. Wu, H.L. Yan, Y. She, H.Y. Ge. Ghrelin to obestatin ratio in maternal serum in pregnancies complicated by intrauterine growth restriction[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2017, 44(3): 364-369.
[15] E. Agacayak, S. Basaranoglu, S.Y. Tunc, M.S. Icen, F.M. Findik, S. Sak, T. Gul. A comparison of maternal outcomes in complicated vaginal and cesarean deliveries[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2017, 44(1): 20-26.
No Suggested Reading articles found!