Neonatal blood glucose concentrations in caesarean and vaginally delivered term infants

Ronella Marom, Shaul Dollberg, Francis B. Mimouni, Irit Berger, Nina Mordechayev, Yifat Ochshorn, Dror Mandel*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: Little is known about the glucose concentrations at and after birth of infants delivered by caesarean section (CS), when compared with infants born vaginally (VD). Aim: To compare venous cord blood glucose concentrations of term infants born after elective CS to infants born by VD. We studied the null hypothesis that mode of delivery does not affect neonatal blood glucose values. Methods: We compared cord blood glucose concentrations in healthy term infants born after VD (n = 16) or by elective CS (n = 21). Glucose concentrations were obtained immediately at birth from the umbilical cord. Kruskal-Wallis was used to compare glucose concentrations and demographic variables between the groups. Results: Gestational age was 39.6 ± 0.8 weeks in VD group vs. 38.7 ± 0.9 weeks in CS group, and birthweight was 3359 ± 494 vs. 3500 ± 528 g. Cord blood glucose concentration was higher in VD (81.3 ± 16.9 mg/dL) than CS infants (70.3 ± 9.7 mg/dL, p = 0.039). The change in blood glucose concentration over the first 2-h of life differed significantly between the two groups, being an increase in CS versus a decrease in VD infants (-3.5 ± 15.2 vs.-15.4 ± 24.6 mg/dL, p = 0.013). Conclusions: Glucose concentrations in VD infants are higher than in infants born by elective CS without labour.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1474-1477
Number of pages4
JournalActa Paediatrica, International Journal of Paediatrics
Volume99
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2010

Keywords

  • Caesarean section
  • Glucose
  • Neonates
  • Vaginal delivery

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Neonatal blood glucose concentrations in caesarean and vaginally delivered term infants'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this