ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻗﺒﻠﯽ
خرید پکیج
تعداد آیتم قابل مشاهده باقیمانده : 3 مورد
نسخه الکترونیک
medimedia.ir

Grand multiparity

Grand multiparity
Literature review current through: Jan 2024.
This topic last updated: Jun 07, 2023.

INTRODUCTION — This topic will discuss issues related to grand multiparity. Solomon first introduced the term "grand multipara" or "dangerous multipara" in 1934 after observing both that increasing parity was associated with an increased risk of pregnancy complications and that maternal mortality increased steadily from the 5th to the 10th pregnancy [1].

DEFINITION — A reasonable definition of "grand multiparity" is a patient who has had ≥5 births (live or stillborn) at ≥20 weeks of gestation, with "great grand multiparity" defined as ≥10 births (live or stillborn) ≥20 weeks of gestation [2]. However, other definitions are also used. (See 'Variability in the definition of parity' below.)

Pregnancy losses under 20 weeks of gestation are considered abortions. Spontaneous and induced abortions are not counted toward parity but are counted toward gravidity (ie, the number of times a patient has been pregnant, including the current pregnancy [eg, primigravidas = patients in their first pregnancy; multigravidas = patients who have had more than one pregnancy]).

PREVALENCE — In the United States in 2021, 2.97 percent of live births were the fifth child in the family, 1.28 percent were the sixth child, and 1.22 percent were the seventh child and over [3]. Africa has the highest rate of grand multiparity, where the incidence in some countries is as high as 27 percent of births [4-7].

EPIDEMIOLOGY — Grand multiparas tend to be older than patients of lower parity. In addition, social, cultural, economic, and religious factors affect the prevalence of grand multiparity. These factors include marrying at a very early age, low income, Muslim or ultra-Orthodox Jewish religion, residence in a rural area, lack of formal education, lack of employment outside of the home, and lack of access to, or religious proscription of, contraception [5,8,9].

FACTORS AFFECTING PARITY AND PREGNANCY OUTCOME — The relationship between obstetric complications and parity has been studied extensively, with inconsistent findings. In addition to the usual limitations of observational data, there are several reasons for the discordancy:

Variability in the definition of parity — There are discrepancies in the way clinicians define parity. A study that evaluated the definition of parity among obstetricians and midwives in London noted that 62 percent defined parity as pregnancies ≥24 weeks of gestation irrespective of outcome, 25 percent defined parity as pregnancies ≥24 weeks ending in live birth, and 13 percent defined parity by the number of pregnancies irrespective of outcome [10]. Only 21 percent of those surveyed described twin pregnancies as a single parous experience.

In addition, there is a discrepancy between the clinical definition of parity and the definition used by the United States National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), an organization within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The NCHS defines parity as the number of prior live births, excluding stillbirths and fetal deaths [11], while most clinical investigators in the United States have defined parity as the number of births (live births and stillbirths) ≥20 weeks of gestation. Other gestational age cut-offs to define a parous event (eg, birth after 28 weeks of gestation) are used in other parts of the world.

Finally, investigators have variably defined grand multiparity as a parity of four, five, six, seven, or eight. Thus, one study may report outcomes for patients para ≥6 compared with those <6, while another reports outcomes for patients para ≥5 compared with those <5 [12].

Variability in the definition of controls — Studies have compared grand multiparas with different referent groups, including patients of parity 1 [13,14], 1 to 3 [15], 2 to 3 [16,17], 2 to 4 [18-21], 1 to 4 [22], 1 to 6 [23], 2 to 6 [24], and the general obstetric population [25]. This makes it difficult to compare findings among studies.

Nonlinear relationship between parity and pregnancy outcome — The relationship between parity and birth outcome is not linear. In a cross-sectional analysis of births to patients of parity 0 to 8 in Australia between 1992 and 1997, multivariate analysis showed that the risk of pregnancy complications was highest in nulliparas, lowest in multiparas who had one to three births, and intermediate in multiparas with four or more births (for any obstetric complication: nulliparas odds ratio [OR] 1.75, paras 1 to 3 OR 0.96-1.03, paras 4 to 8 OR 1.19-1.35) [13]. These findings suggest that the risk of obstetric complications associated with parity is bimodal.

Inadequate adjustment for maternal age — Many of the complications that have been associated with grand multiparity have also been independently associated with advanced maternal age [26]. Increasing maternal age is associated with increasing prevalence of comorbidities, such as type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and obesity, which also increase the risk of adverse pregnancy outcome. Thus, maternal age is an important confounder that must be accounted for to minimize bias in interpretation of results. (See "Effects of advanced maternal age on pregnancy".)

The importance of maternal age was illustrated in a retrospective cohort study that examined the birth outcomes of 4937 young (under 35 years of age) grand multiparas (parity ≥5) and over 83,000 young primiparas in Utah [14]. Young grand multiparas compared with young primiparas were at lower risk for "any intrapartum complication" (eg, placental abruption, placenta previa, intrapartum vaginal bleeding, umbilical cord prolapse, fetal distress, malpresentation, surgical delivery, instrumented delivery). In addition, young grand multiparas compared with older grand multiparas were also at lower risk for any intrapartum complication. However, the evidence is conflicting. In a prospective study including 426 young (ages 18 to 35) grand multiparous and "low-risk" primiparous patients in Sudan, young grand multiparas compared with primiparas had higher rates of postpartum hemorrhage, low birth weight, and infant neonatal intensive care unit admission; other maternal and neonatal complications were similar between groups [27].

Healthy person effect — Patients who have had obstetric complications in their first few pregnancies may be more likely to end childbearing before becoming grand multiparas compared with those who had uncomplicated pregnancies and deliveries. Thus, grand multiparas, at least in concept, may represent a healthier group than patients of lower parity.

RISK OF PREGNANCY COMPLICATIONS — A multivariate analysis of parity and pregnancy outcome reported a significantly increased risk of "any obstetric complication" among patients of parity 4, 5, 6, and 7 to 8 when compared with primiparas [13]. The obstetric complications included antepartum hemorrhage, gestational diabetes, pregnancy-induced hypertension, prelabor rupture of membranes, threatened preterm labor, postpartum hemorrhage, and third-degree lacerations. There was a variable relationship between parity and the individual components of the composite outcome.

Grand multiparity probably increases the risk of the following complications, although findings are inconsistent across studies:

Placental abnormalities, such as placenta previa and abruption [16,19-21,28-31]

Postpartum hemorrhage [13,19,22,27,32]

Macrosomia [15,17,19,20,23,24,33-35]

Umbilical cord prolapse [36]

Data are not adequate to clearly support or refute an association between grand multiparity and:

Cesarean birth [6,35,37]

Venous thromboembolic events [38]

Gestational hypertension/preeclampsia [18,20,23,25,34,35,37,39-41]

Pregestational/gestational diabetes [18,23,24,34,35,40-42]

Malpresentation/operative delivery [16,17,19,20,24,25,28,30,32,34,41,43]

Dysfunctional labor/prolonged labor [15-20,44]

Preterm birth/low birth weight [6,27,35,41,45]

Neonatal intensive care unit admission [13,20,27]

Perinatal death [13,15,17-19,25,28,33,40,41,46]

Amniotic fluid disorders (oligohydramnios, polyhydramnios) [37,47]

Perineal lacerations [7,48]

Uterine rupture [49,50]

However, in a repeat cross-sectional study utilizing data from a United States national database (Nationwide Inpatient Sample) between 2000 and 2015, patients with parity >5 compared with ≤5 were at lower risk of severe maternal morbidity (SMM; adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 0.93, 95% CI 0.89-0.96) after controlling for a number of variables including year of delivery, maternal age, comorbidity index score, race, household income, insurance status, and hospital location/teaching status/size [51,52].

Some problems with the available data are that most reports have not distinguished between chronic hypertension, gestational hypertension, and preeclampsia or between pregestational and gestational diabetes; many studies do not adjust for confounders; and reports on the risk of perinatal death do not control for concurrent maternal medical problems.

Role of previous cesarean birth — The route of previous deliveries is a key factor to consider when evaluating the risk of adverse pregnancy outcome. Large observational studies have consistently shown that patients who undergo multiple repeat cesarean births are at increased risk of maternal morbidity, and the risk increases with the number of cesarean births. The largest prospective study of maternal morbidity associated with multiple cesarean births included 6201 first; 15,808 second; 6324 third; 1452 fourth; 258 fifth; and 89 sixth cesarean births [53]. The odds of placenta previa and accreta progressively increased with the number of cesarean births, and patients with placenta previa were at very high risk of also having placenta accreta (table 1 and table 2). The risk of peripartum hysterectomy at the fourth cesarean birth was 1 in 40, increasing to 1 in 11 at the sixth cesarean birth. (See "Repeat cesarean birth", section on 'Is there an unsafe number of repeat cesarean births?'.)

The risk of uterine rupture may be increased in grand multiparity and is known to be increased in any patient undergoing a trial of labor after cesarean birth (TOLAC) (see "Choosing the route of delivery after cesarean birth"). A retrospective study reported the rate of uterine rupture during a trial of labor after a single previous cesarean was no higher than the background risk associated with TOLAC [54]. The authors identified six uterine ruptures among 1922 TOLACs (0.3 percent) in patients with ≥6 births and one previous cesarean. Other smaller series have reported mixed results [55-58]. It is difficult to determine the true risk of uterine rupture in these studies because of the low rate of this complication and differences in study methods and terminology. However, in a large, retrospective multicenter study including almost 5000 patients undergoing TOLAC after a single cesarean birth, multiparous (parity 2 to 5) compared with grand multiparous (parity ≥6) patients had similar rates of uterine rupture (0.3 percent in both groups) [59]. In a subsequent retrospective study of approximately 10,000 patients undergoing TOLAC after single cesarean birth, those with parity ≥5 compared with parity of two to four had similar rates of failed TOLAC [49]. Similarly, in a multisite study evaluating uterine rupture in 388,784 patients without uterine scarring, those with parity ≥6 (14 percent of patients) compared with parity of two to five had similar rates of rupture after controlling for maternal age. Those with parity ≥6 were older and the risk for uterine rupture had a linear pattern, increasing with age [50].

LONG-TERM RISKS — Long-term follow-up studies suggest that grand multiparity may increase the likelihood of certain maternal health issues.

Increased risk for pelvic organ prolapse – There is convincing evidence that the risk of pelvic organ prolapse increases with increasing parity [60-62]. As an example, in the Oxford Family Planning study, a prospective cohort study of more than 17,000 patients followed for 17 years, the risk of hospital admission for pelvic organ prolapse increased markedly after the first and second births compared with nulliparity (fourfold and eightfold increase, respectively) but increased less rapidly for subsequent births (ninefold increase after the third birth; 10-fold increase after the fourth birth) [62]. Among parous patients, 75 percent of prolapse cases can be attributed to pregnancy and childbirth [63]. Specific factors, such as forceps delivery, may be particularly important [64]. Patients with pelvic organ prolapse may present with symptoms related specifically to the prolapsed structures, such as a bulge or vaginal pressure, or with associated symptoms, including urinary, defecatory, or sexual dysfunction. (See "Pelvic organ prolapse in females: Epidemiology, risk factors, clinical manifestations, and management".)

Increased risk for diastasis recti. (See "Rectus abdominis diastasis", section on 'Pregnancy'.)

Increased rates of chronic pelvic pain [65,66].

Variable effects on cancer risk – Grand multiparity has been consistently associated with a decreased risk of breast cancer, suggesting that multiple pregnancies and/or lactations are associated with changes protective against this disease [67-70]. Some studies have reported a decreased risk for endometrial [67,71,72] and ovarian [67,73] cancers, but not cervical cancer [74], but these data are less consistent [70].

Grand multiparity has also been associated with an increased risk of some cancers, such as the liver/biliary tract, but data are less consistent [67,75-77]. These findings require further investigation to better understand confounding factors, such as age, obesity, smoking, and duration of breastfeeding. (See "Endometrial carcinoma: Epidemiology, risk factors, and prevention" and "Epithelial carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum: Incidence and risk factors" and "Factors that modify breast cancer risk in women", section on 'Reproductive factors'.)

There are conflicting data about the impact of parity on the risk of osteoporosis [78], with some studies finding no increased risk of osteoporosis [78-84] and similar levels of postpartum bone mineral density [85], while other studies report an increased risk of femoral osteoporosis [86], postmenopausal osteoporosis [84,86], or lower areal bone mineral density [87].

Two reports have linked grand multiparity with left ventricular diastolic dysfunction [88,89]. A parity-associated decrease in HDL cholesterol levels has also been reported [90], suggesting an increased risk of cardiovascular disease among grand multiparas. These changes may be mediated by weight gain and risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus and modified by duration of lactation [91].

Other outcomes have not been evaluated extensively in grand multiparous versus multiparous patients. Grand multiparity may increase permanent weight gain [92] and may increase risk of insulin resistance [93] and diabetes [6,42,94-97].

A few studies have found an association between grand multiparity and psychiatric illness in adult offspring, including mood disorders [98,99] and suicide attempts [98,100]. More research is needed to understand this association.

There is some evidence that grand multiparity may be associated with later-life cognitive impairment [101] and Alzheimer's disease [102]. Researchers have identified differences in hippocampal volume by parity, with grand multiparas having higher rates of hippocampal atrophy compared with patients of lower parity [103]. These associations may be related to the role of estrogen on cognitive function, but additional research is needed in this area.

PATIENT COUNSELING — We counsel our patients that the maximum number of pregnancies that is safe for mother and baby is unclear, and factors other than obstetric issues need to be considered. Although having more than four or five births has been associated with a number of obstetric complications, most patients who experience this number of births have similar birth outcomes when compared with patients of lower parity, especially in settings where contemporary obstetric care with adequate resources is readily available.

We believe most of the complications that have been associated with grand multiparity may actually be related to advanced maternal age and its associated comorbidities, and we review the relevant medical issues on a case-by-case basis. (See "Effects of advanced maternal age on pregnancy".)

Regardless of maternal age, in patients without underlying comorbidities, the fourth, fifth, or sixth births do not appear to be independent risk factors for severe obstetric complications, except possibly placenta previa and abruption [16,19-21,28-31]. However, we counsel patients with more than one prior cesarean birth of the clearly increased risk of placenta previa-accreta and associated morbidities with increasing number of cesarean births. (See "Placenta previa: Epidemiology, clinical features, diagnosis, morbidity and mortality" and "Placenta accreta spectrum: Clinical features, diagnosis, and potential consequences".)

Grand multiparous patients who are obese, prediabetic, and/or have a history of gestational diabetes mellitus may benefit from weight loss prior to conception. Whenever possible, preconception counseling addressing healthy lifestyle and pregnancy risks is indicated in this group [104]. For example, regular physical exercise (specifically, walking) has been shown to maintain cognitive performance in grand multiparas [105].

PREGNANCY MANAGEMENT — Antepartum clinical care is similar for all multiparous patients, regardless of the number of previous births.

In patients with one prior cesarean birth, we do not advise against a trial of labor based on grand multiparity alone. (See "Choosing the route of delivery after cesarean birth".)

Intrapartum, providers should anticipate an increased risk of macrosomia, labor abnormalities, and postpartum hemorrhage. Thus, they should be prepared to manage labor abnormalities more common in this population (eg, failure to progress due to macrosomia or malposition) and complications such as shoulder dystocia and excessive bleeding after delivery. (See "Shoulder dystocia: Intrapartum diagnosis, management, and outcome" and "Overview of postpartum hemorrhage".)

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Definition – A reasonable definition of "grand multiparity" is a patient who has had ≥5 births (live or stillborn) at ≥20 weeks of gestation, with "great grand multiparity" defined as ≥10 births (live or stillborn) at ≥20 weeks of gestation. However, other definitions are also used. Spontaneous and induced pregnancy losses under 20 weeks of gestation are not counted toward parity but are counted toward gravidity. (See 'Definition' above and 'Variability in the definition of parity' above.)

Pregnancy complications

Although grand multiparity has been associated with several obstetric complications, most grand multiparas have similar birth outcomes when compared with patients of lower parity, especially in settings where modern obstetric care is readily available. (See 'Risk of pregnancy complications' above.)

Most of the complications that have been associated with grand multiparity may actually be confounded by advanced maternal age and its associated comorbidities. Thus, in patients without underlying comorbidity, grand multiparity does not appear to be an independent risk factor for severe obstetric complications, except for placenta previa, abruption, and postpartum hemorrhage. (See 'Risk of pregnancy complications' above and 'Factors affecting parity and pregnancy outcome' above.)

Role of prior cesarean birth – Patients who undergo multiple repeat cesarean births are at increased risk of maternal morbidity, particularly placenta previa and accreta. The risk increases with the number of cesarean births. However, a trial of labor after a single prior cesarean birth in a grand multiparous woman does not appear to be associated with greater risks than a similar trial of labor in women of lower parity. (See 'Role of previous cesarean birth' above.)

Pregnancy management – Antepartum clinical care is similar for all multiparous patients, regardless of the number of previous births. In patients with a prior cesarean birth, we do not advise against a trial of labor based on grand multiparity alone. During labor, providers caring for grand multiparas should anticipate and be prepared to manage macrosomia (and shoulder dystocia), labor abnormalities (including dystocia related to macrosomia or malposition), and postpartum hemorrhage. (See 'Pregnancy management' above.)

Long-term risks – The long-term maternal effects of grand multiparity are not well established. The best evidence is for an increased risk of pelvic organ prolapse. (See 'Long-term risks' above.)

  1. Solomons, B. The dangerous multipara. Lancet 1934; 2:8.
  2. Abu-Heija AT, Chalabi HE. Great grand multiparity: is it a risk? J Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 18:136.
  3. Osterman MJK, Hamilton BE, Martin JA, et al. Births: Final Data for 2021. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2023; 72:1.
  4. http://www.prb.org/Publications/Datasheets/2014/2014-world-population-data-sheet/data-sheet.aspx.
  5. Njoku CO, Abeshi SE, Emechebe CI. Grand Multiparity: Obstetric Outcome in Comparison with Multiparous Women in a Developing Country. OJOG 2017; 7:707.
  6. Al-Shaikh GK, Ibrahim GH, Fayed AA, Al-Mandeel H. Grand multiparity and the possible risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes: a dilemma to be deciphered. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2017; 17:310.
  7. Ajong AB, Agbor VN, Simo LP, et al. Grand multiparity in rural Cameroon: prevalence and adverse maternal and fetal delivery outcomes. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2019; 19:233.
  8. Aaragaw YA. Grand Multiparity and Pregnancy Related Complications among Women Who Gave Birth at Jimma University Specialized Hospital, Jimma, Southwest Ethiopia. Gynecol Obstet (Paris) 2017; 7:4.
  9. Ezra Y, Schmuel E, Hakim M, Schenker JG. The outcome of grand-multiparous pregnancies of Arabic and Jewish populations in peripheral and central areas of Israel. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2001; 80:30.
  10. Opara EI, Zaidi J. The interpretation and clinical application of the word 'parity': a survey. BJOG 2007; 114:1295.
  11. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Health Statistics: NCHS Definitions. National Survey of Family Growth. June 18, 2004; December 4, 2004.
  12. Aliyu MH, Jolly PE, Ehiri JE, Salihu HM. High parity and adverse birth outcomes: exploring the maze. Birth 2005; 32:45.
  13. Bai J, Wong FW, Bauman A, Mohsin M. Parity and pregnancy outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186:274.
  14. Simonsen SM, Lyon JL, Alder SC, Varner MW. Effect of grand multiparity on intrapartum and newborn complications in young women. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106:454.
  15. Lyrenäs S. Labor in the grand multipara. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2002; 53:6.
  16. Tanbo TG, Bungum L. The grand multipara--maternal and neonatal complications. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1987; 66:53.
  17. Bugg GJ, Atwal GS, Maresh M. Grandmultiparae in a modern setting. BJOG 2002; 109:249.
  18. Roman H, Robillard PY, Verspyck E, et al. Obstetric and neonatal outcomes in grand multiparity. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 103:1294.
  19. Toohey JS, Keegan KA Jr, Morgan MA, et al. The "dangerous multipara": fact or fiction? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 172:683.
  20. 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; 181:669.
  21. Brunner J, Melander E, Krook-Brandt M, Thomassen PA. Grand multiparity as an obstetric risk factor; a prospective case-control study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1992; 47:201.
  22. Humphrey MD. Is grand multiparity an independent predictor of pregnancy risk? A retrospective observational study. Med J Aust 2003; 179:294.
  23. Samueloff A, Mor-Yosef S, Seidman DS, et al. Grand multiparity--a nationwide survey. Isr J Med Sci 1989; 25:625.
  24. Seidman DS, Armon Y, Roll D, et al. Grand multiparity: an obstetric or neonatal risk factor? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1988; 158:1034.
  25. Fuchs K, Peretz BA, Marcovici R, et al. The "grand multipara"--is it a problem? A review of 5785 cases. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1985; 23:321.
  26. Chan BC, Lao TT. Effect of parity and advanced maternal age on obstetric outcome. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2008; 102:237.
  27. Alsammani MA, Jafer AM, Khieri SA, et al. Effect of Grand Multiparity on Pregnancy Outcomes in Women Under 35 Years of Age: a Comparative Study. Med Arch 2019; 73:92.
  28. Agrawal S, Agarwal A, Das V. Impact of grandmultiparity on obstetric outcome in low resource setting. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2011; 37:1015.
  29. Geidam AD, Audu BM, Oummate Z. Pregnancy outcome among grand multiparous women at the University of Maiduguri Teaching Hospital: a case control study. J Obstet Gynaecol 2011; 31:404.
  30. Mgaya AH, Massawe SN, Kidanto HL, Mgaya HN. Grand multiparity: is it still a risk in pregnancy? BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2013; 13:241.
  31. Shahida SM, Islam MA, Begum S, et al. Maternal outcome of grand multipara. Mymensingh Med J 2011; 20:381.
  32. Dasa TT, Okunlola MA, Dessie Y. Effect of grand multiparity on adverse maternal outcomes: A prospective cohort study. Front Public Health 2022; 10:959633.
  33. Jacquemyn Y, Senten L, Vellinga S, et al. Does practice make perfect? An age-matched study on grand multiparity in Flanders, Belgium. J Perinat Med 2006; 34:28.
  34. Alsammani MA, Ahmed SR. Grand Multiparity: Risk Factors and Outcome in a Tertiary Hospital: a Comparative Study. Mater Sociomed 2015; 27:244.
  35. Alsammani MA, Ahmed SR. Grandmultiparity: risk factors and outcome in a tertiary hospital: a comparative study. Med Arch 2015; 69:38.
  36. Behbehani S, Patenaude V, Abenhaim HA. Maternal Risk Factors and Outcomes of Umbilical Cord Prolapse: A Population-Based Study. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2016; 38:23.
  37. Farladansky-Gershnabel S, Levy G, Neiger R. Obstetric Complications and Pregnancy Outcome Among Grand Multiparous Women. J Reprod Med 2016; 61:452.
  38. Waldman M, Sheiner E, Sergienko R, Shoham-Vardi I. Can we identify risk factors during pregnancy for thrombo-embolic events during the puerperium and later in life? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2015; 28:1005.
  39. Bobrowski RA, Bottoms SF. Underappreciated risks of the elderly multipara. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 172:1764.
  40. Nassar AH, Fayyumy R, Saab W, et al. Grandmultiparas in modern obstetrics. Am J Perinatol 2006; 23:345.
  41. Al JF. Grandmultiparity: a potential risk factor for adverse pregnancy outcomes. J Reprod Med 2012; 57:53.
  42. Simmons D, Shaw J, McKenzie A, et al. Is grand multiparity associated with an increased risk of dysglycaemia? Diabetologia 2006; 49:1522.
  43. El-Toukhy T, Ramadan G, Maidman D, et al. Impact of parity on obstetric and neonatal outcome of external cephalic version. J Obstet Gynaecol 2007; 27:580.
  44. Shechter Y, Levy A, Wiznitzer A, et al. Obstetric complications in grand and great grand multiparous women. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2010; 23:1211.
  45. Shah PS, Knowledge Synthesis Group on Determinants of LBW/PT births. Parity and low birth weight and preterm birth: a systematic review and meta-analyses. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2010; 89:862.
  46. Hilder L, Sairam S, Thilaganathan B. Influence of parity on fetal mortality in prolonged pregnancy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2007; 132:167.
  47. Goldman GA, Kaplan B, Neri A, et al. The grand multipara. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1995; 61:105.
  48. Khaskheli M, Baloch S, Baloch AS. Obstetrical trauma to the genital tract following vaginal delivery. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2012; 22:95.
  49. Lopian M, Kashani-Ligumski L, Cohen R, et al. Grand multiparity, is it a help or a hindrance in a trial of labor after cesarean section (TOLAC)? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2023; 36:2190835.
  50. Hochler H, Wainstock T, Lipschuetz M, et al. Grandmultiparity, maternal age, and the risk for uterine rupture-A multicenter cohort study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2020; 99:267.
  51. Lee KE, Wen T, Faye AS, et al. Delivery risks and outcomes associated with grand multiparity. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2022; 35:7708.
  52. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). How Does CDC Identify Severe Maternal Morbidity? https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/smm/severe-morbidity-ICD.htm.
  53. Silver RM, Landon MB, Rouse DJ, et al. Maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107:1226.
  54. Hochler H, Yaffe H, Schwed P, Mankuta D. Safety of trial of labor after cesarean delivery in grandmultiparous women. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 123:304.
  55. Kugler E, Shoham-Vardi I, Burstien E, et al. The safety of a trial of labor after cesarean section in a grandmultiparous population. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2008; 277:339.
  56. Ali AM, Abu-Heija AT. Obstetric and perinatal outcome of women para > or = 5 including one lower segment cesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2002; 28:163.
  57. Yamani Zamzami TY. Vaginal birth after cesarean section in grand multiparous women. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2004; 270:21.
  58. Dyack C, Hughes PF, Simbakalia JB. Vaginal delivery in the grand multipara following previous lower segment cesarian section. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 1997; 23:219.
  59. Hochler H, Wainstock T, Lipschuetz M, et al. Induction of labor in women with a scarred uterus: does grand multiparity affect the risk of uterine rupture? Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2020; 2:100081.
  60. Nygaard I, Barber MD, Burgio KL, et al. Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. JAMA 2008; 300:1311.
  61. Sze EH, Sherard GB 3rd, Dolezal JM. Pregnancy, labor, delivery, and pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 2002; 100:981.
  62. Mant J, Painter R, Vessey M. Epidemiology of genital prolapse: observations from the Oxford Family Planning Association Study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997; 104:579.
  63. Patel DA, Xu X, Thomason AD, et al. Childbirth and pelvic floor dysfunction: an epidemiologic approach to the assessment of prevention opportunities at delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006; 195:23.
  64. Moalli PA, Jones Ivy S, Meyn LA, Zyczynski HM. Risk factors associated with pelvic floor disorders in women undergoing surgical repair. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 101:869.
  65. Gürel SA, Gürel H. The effect of grandmultiparity on chronic pelvic pain and sexual discomfort. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1997; 57:133.
  66. Gürel H, Atar Gürel S. Dyspareunia, back pain and chronic pelvic pain: the importance of this pain complex in gynecological practice and its relation with grandmultiparity and pelvic relaxation. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1999; 48:119.
  67. Högnäs E, Kauppila A, Pukkala E, Tapanainen JS. Cancer risk in women with 10 or more deliveries. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 123:811.
  68. Hinkula M, Pukkala E, Kyyrönen P, Kauppila A. Grand multiparity and the risk of breast cancer: population-based study in Finland. Cancer Causes Control 2001; 12:491.
  69. Clemons M, Goss P. Estrogen and the risk of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2001; 344:276.
  70. Paltiel O, Tajuddin SM, Polanker Y, et al. Grand multiparity and reproductive cancer in the Jerusalem Perinatal Study Cohort. Cancer Causes Control 2016; 27:237.
  71. Dossus L, Allen N, Kaaks R, et al. Reproductive risk factors and endometrial cancer: the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. Int J Cancer 2010; 127:442.
  72. Hinkula M, Pukkala E, Kyyrönen P, Kauppila A. Grand multiparity and incidence of endometrial cancer: a population-based study in Finland. Int J Cancer 2002; 98:912.
  73. Hinkula M, Pukkala E, Kyyrönen P, Kauppila A. Incidence of ovarian cancer of grand multiparous women--a population-based study in Finland. Gynecol Oncol 2006; 103:207.
  74. Hinkula M, Pukkala E, Kyyrönen P, et al. A population-based study on the risk of cervical cancer and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia among grand multiparous women in Finland. Br J Cancer 2004; 90:1025.
  75. La Vecchia C, Negri E, Franceschi S, Parazzini F. Long-term impact of reproductive factors on cancer risk. Int J Cancer 1993; 53:215.
  76. Högnäs E, Kauppila A, Hinkula M, et al. Incidence of cancer among grand multiparous women in Finland with special focus on non-gynaecological cancers: A population-based cohort study. Acta Oncol 2016; 55:370.
  77. Chen BK, Yang CY. Mortality from cancers of the digestive system among grand multiparous women in Taiwan. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2014; 11:4374.
  78. Turan V. Grand-grand multiparity (more than 10 deliveries) does not convey a risk for osteoporosis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2011; 90:1440.
  79. Heidari B, Heidari P, Nourooddini HG, Hajian-Tilaki KO. Relationship between parity and bone mass in postmenopausal women according to number of parities and age. J Reprod Med 2013; 58:389.
  80. Bererhi H, Kolhoff N, Constable A, Nielsen SP. Multiparity and bone mass. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1996; 103:818.
  81. Lenora J, Lekamwasam S, Karlsson MK. Effects of multiparity and prolonged breast-feeding on maternal bone mineral density: a community-based cross-sectional study. BMC Womens Health 2009; 9:19.
  82. Henderson PH 3rd, Sowers M, Kutzko KE, Jannausch ML. Bone mineral density in grand multiparous women with extended lactation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182:1371.
  83. Streeten EA, Ryan KA, McBride DJ, et al. The relationship between parity and bone mineral density in women characterized by a homogeneous lifestyle and high parity. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2005; 90:4536.
  84. Demirtaş Ö, Demirtaş G, Hurşitoğlu BS, et al. Is grand multiparity a risk factor for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women of lower socioeconomic status? Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2014; 18:2709.
  85. Lebel E, Mishukov Y, Babchenko L, et al. Bone mineral density in gravida: effect of pregnancies and breast-feeding in women of differing ages and parity. J Osteoporos 2014; 2014:897182.
  86. Peker N, Tosun ÖÇ. Is grand multiparity a risk factor for the development of postmenopausal osteoporosis? Clin Interv Aging 2018; 13:505.
  87. Panahi N, Ostovar A, Fahimfar N, et al. Grand multiparity associations with low bone mineral density and degraded trabecular bone pattern. Bone Rep 2021; 14:101071.
  88. Aggarwal SR, Herrington DM, Vladutiu CJ, et al. Higher number of live births is associated with left ventricular diastolic dysfunction and adverse cardiac remodelling among US Hispanic/Latina women: results from the Echocardiographic Study of Latinos. Open Heart 2017; 4:e000530.
  89. Keskin M, Avşar Ş, Hayıroğlu Mİ, et al. Relation of the Number of Parity to Left Ventricular Diastolic Function in Pregnancy. Am J Cardiol 2017; 120:154.
  90. Markovitz AR, Haug EB, Horn J, et al. Does pregnancy alter life-course lipid trajectories? Evidence from the HUNT Study in Norway. J Lipid Res 2018; 59:2403.
  91. Klingberg S, Brekke HK, Winkvist A, et al. Parity, weight change, and maternal risk of cardiovascular events. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017; 216:172.e1.
  92. Abrams B, Heggeseth B, Rehkopf D, Davis E. Parity and body mass index in US women: a prospective 25-year study. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2013; 21:1514.
  93. Eldin Ahmed Abdelsalam K, Alobeid M Elamin A. Influence of Grand Multiparity on the Levels of Insulin, Glucose and HOMA-IR in Comparison with Nulliparity and Primiparity. Pak J Biol Sci 2017; 20:42.
  94. Araneta MR, Barrett-Connor E. Grand multiparity is associated with type 2 diabetes in Filipino American women, independent of visceral fat and adiponectin. Diabetes Care 2010; 33:385.
  95. Gaudet MM, Carter BD, Hildebrand JS, et al. Associations of parity and age at first pregnancy with overall and cause-specific mortality in the Cancer Prevention Study II. Fertil Steril 2017; 107:179.
  96. Fowler-Brown AG, de Boer IH, Catov JM, et al. Parity and the association with diabetes in older women. Diabetes Care 2010; 33:1778.
  97. Nicholson WK, Asao K, Brancati F, et al. Parity and risk of type 2 diabetes: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. Diabetes Care 2006; 29:2349.
  98. Lahti M, Eriksson JG, Heinonen K, et al. Maternal Grand Multiparity and the Risk of Severe Mental Disorders in Adult Offspring. PLoS One 2014; 9:e114679.
  99. Kemppainen L, Mäkikyrö T, Jokelainen J, et al. Is grand multiparity associated with offsprings' hospital-treated mental disorders? A 28-year follow-up of the North Finland 1966 birth cohort. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2000; 35:104.
  100. Alaräisänen A, Miettunen J, Pouta A, et al. Ante- and perinatal circumstances and risk of attempted suicides and suicides in offspring: the Northern Finland birth cohort 1966 study. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2012; 47:1783.
  101. Li FD, He F, Chen TR, et al. Reproductive history and risk of cognitive impairment in elderly women: a cross-sectional study in eastern China. J Alzheimers Dis 2016; 49:139.
  102. Jang H, Bae JB, Dardiotis E, et al. Differential effects of completed and incomplete pregnancies on the risk of Alzheimer disease. Neurology 2018; 91:e643.
  103. Jung JH, Lee GW, Lee JH, et al. Multiparity, Brain Atrophy, and Cognitive Decline. Front Aging Neurosci 2020; 12:159.
  104. Delcore L, Lacoursiere DY. Preconception Care of the Obese Woman. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2016; 59:129.
  105. Barha CK, Best JR, Rosano C, et al. Walking for Cognitive Health: Previous Parity Moderates the Relationship Between Self-Reported Walking and Cognition. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2023; 78:486.
Topic 436 Version 28.0

References

آیا می خواهید مدیلیب را به صفحه اصلی خود اضافه کنید؟