• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Infant mortality in twin pregnancies following in-utero demise of the co-twin

    2015-12-26 07:49:36BoubakariIbrahimouHamisuSalihuMuktarAliyuGaryEnglishGetachewDagne
    Asian Pacific Journal of Reproduction 2015年3期

    Boubakari Ibrahimou, Hamisu M. Salihu, Muktar H. Aliyu, Gary English, Getachew Dagne

    1Florida International University, Robert Stempel College of Public Health & Social Work, Department of Biostatistics, 11200 S.W. 8th Street, AHC2

    583, Miami, FL 33199, USA

    2Baylor College of Medicine, Department of Family and Community Medicine, 3701 Kirby Drive, Suite 600, Houston, TX 77098, USA

    3Departments of Health Policy and Medicine, Vanderbilt University, 2525 West End Avenue, Suite 750, Nashville, TN 37203, USA

    4Western Kentucky University, College of Health and Human Services, Department of Public Health, 1906 College Heights Blvd., Bowling Green, KY

    42101, USA

    5University of South Florida, College of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, 13201 Bruce B. Downs Blvd., MDC 56, Tampa, FL 33612, USA

    IP Oyeyipo1,2, PJ MaartenSS du Plessis1*

    Document heading

    Infant mortality in twin pregnancies following in-utero demise of the co-twin

    Boubakari Ibrahimou1*, Hamisu M. Salihu2, Muktar H. Aliyu3, Gary English4, Getachew Dagne5

    1Florida International University, Robert Stempel College of Public Health & Social Work, Department of Biostatistics, 11200 S.W. 8th Street, AHC2

    583, Miami, FL 33199, USA

    2Baylor College of Medicine, Department of Family and Community Medicine, 3701 Kirby Drive, Suite 600, Houston, TX 77098, USA

    3Departments of Health Policy and Medicine, Vanderbilt University, 2525 West End Avenue, Suite 750, Nashville, TN 37203, USA

    4Western Kentucky University, College of Health and Human Services, Department of Public Health, 1906 College Heights Blvd., Bowling Green, KY

    42101, USA

    5University of South Florida, College of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, 13201 Bruce B. Downs Blvd., MDC 56, Tampa, FL 33612, USA

    ARTICLE INFO

    Article history:

    Received 17 March 2015

    Received in revised form 15 April 2015

    Accepted 21 April 2015

    Available online 20 September 2015

    Surviving co-twin

    Double programming

    Twin conversion

    Twin pregnancy

    Mortality

    Objective: To assess whether conversion from twin to singleton pregnancy following the demise of a cotwin influences survival. Methods: This retrospective study compared the risk for neonatal, post-neonatal and infant death for converted co-twins versus unconverted co-twins using the US matched multiple file dataset for the period 1995-2000. We also examined the same risks for converted versus same-quantile co-twins, hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed using Cox Proportional Hazards models. Results: The risk for neonatal (HR=0.18, 95%CI: 0.09-0.34 andHR=0.69, 95%CI: 0.50- 0.96) and infant death (HR=0.22, 95%CI: 0.12-0.42 andHR=0.57, 95%CI: 0.42-0.77) were significantly lower for converted twins than for unconverted twins and same-quantile twins, respectively. For black compared to white, the risk for post-neonatal death increased by 89% (HR=1.89, 95%CI= 1.03, 3.48), and 79% (HR=1.79, 95%CI=1.53, 2.09) for convertedvs. unconverted and convertedvs. samequantile, respectively. For converted black, the risk for neonatal death decreased by 17% (HR=0.83, 95%CI=0.73-0.93) as compared to unconverted. Conclusions: Risks for all mortality types were lower among converted co-twins than their unconverted or same-quantile counterparts. The lower neonatal and higher post-neonatal mortality among black require future research.

    1. Introduction

    Twin pregnancies are high-risk gestations with elevated perinatal mortality rates[1]. Twins, when compared with singletons, have a five-fold risk of fetal death, seven-fold elevated risk of neonatal death, and five-fold risk of infant death[2-4]. Twins also responddifferently from singletons to interventions that are designed to lengthen the gestational age at birth[5-6]. Factors that impact fetal mortality risks include prenatal complications, maternal age, poor obstetric history and Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) [1-6]. Twins face greater risks for low birth weight, preterm birth, longterm disability and early death than singletons[7].

    Death of one of the twins in a multiple gestation can lead to severe complications in the surviving co-twin, especially in the second or third trimester[8]. The prognosis of the surviving twin in a dichorionic twin pregnancy is better than in a monochorionic twin gestation. The latter has more neurological complicationssuch as neural tube defects, optic nerve hypoplasia, microcephaly, and hemorrhagic or hypoxic lesions of the white matter[9]. Other anomalies include bilateral renal cortical necrosis, unilateral absence of kidney, gastro intestinal tract atresia and hemifacial microsomia [9]. An important consequence of the demise of a co-twin is cerebral palsy in the surviving co-twin, which may be the result of prenatal damage arising from placental vascular anastomoses[10]. Ficheraet al[9] also reported a greater risk of perinatal mortality for the surviving co-twin in monochorionicvs.dichorionic pregnancies following a single intra-uterine, second or third trimester death.

    As a result of in-utero demise of a co-twin, a twin pregnancy may sometimes be converted into a singleton gestation[5]. In these cases, the growth and development of the surviving singleton cotwin depends on the adaptive response and physiological process in the remaining pregnancy period. Salihuet alstudied the fetal programming switch process among surviving co-twins from a twin programming trajectory to that of a singleton during pregnancy[5].

    It is well established that surviving co-twins have higher mortality rates than live-born twin pairs[11]. Surviving co-twins also bear a greater risk for later morbidity, including neuro-cognitive and behavioral problems[11-14]. It remains, however, unknown to what extent exposure to double programming in utero would impact subsequent morbidity and mortality of surviving co-twins. It will be interesting and useful to determine whether conversion to a singleton fetal programming pattern by surviving co-twins influences future survival. We are unaware of any twin study that has examined the contribution of double programming to early mortality among twins. Thus, the objective of this paper is to estimate the risk for neonatal, post-neonatal, and infant death among twins that were able to convert to singleton gestation as compared to those who do not within a large population-based sample of twins.

    2. Materials and methods

    The dataset from the “matched multiple birth file” prepared by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), for the period 1995-2000, was used for this study. This dataset contains matched and linked data for multiple deliveries in the United States. The data files consist of individual records of live births and fetal deaths involving multiple deliveries. In the dataset, siblings were linked to their biological mothers through the use of a unique identifier. The primary outcomes of interest in this study were infant mortality (death of the infant from day 0 to day 364 after birth), neonatal mortality (death from day 0 to day 27 after birth) and post-neonatal mortality (death from day 28 to day 364 after birth).

    Gestational age was determined as the time between the last menstrual period and the time of delivery of the baby (95% cases). When the menstrual estimate of gestational age was inconsistent with the birth weight (e.g. very low birth weight at term), a clinical estimate of gestational age on the vital records was used instead[15]. The precision of using the gestational age as noted on the US birth certificate has previously been validated[16]. The exposure of interest in this study is conversion to singleton programming in the surviving co-twin following the demise of the other twin. The concept of change or turning points was used in order to estimate the point periods in-utero at which the “switch” from a twin to a singleton fetal programming sequence might have occurred following the demise of a co-twin. In a previous study, we reported findings showing that a critical in-utero mass has to be attained by the surviving co-twin for successful conversion to a singleton path during pregnancy. In that pioneer study, it is reported that a critical mass and a specific gestational age (change point) need to be attained for the conversion from twin to singleton to take place. Results of the study showed that a critical mass (80th percentile of the gestational age-specific birth weight distribution for twins of same sex pairs and 70th percentile for opposite sex pairs) have to be attained by the surviving co-twin for successful conversion to a singleton path during pregnancy. The threshold (change point) for the conversion of the surviving co-twin to a singleton programming sequence was approximately at the 27th week of gestation. A surviving co-twin satisfying these conditions will be referred to as “converted twin” throughout this manuscript. Otherwise, we will refer to the surviving co-twin as an “unconverted twin”.

    We consider two comparison groups for our study. In the first case we compare the survival of converted twinsvs.unconverted twins. In second case comparison of survival between converted twins and same-quantile twins (co-twins who reached the same quantile of the birthweight distribution at the same gestational age, but who could not switch to singleton programming because their co-twin also survived and was delivered alive) is considered.

    We selected viable births (20–44 weeks of gestation) for both converted, as well as unconverted and same-quantile twins. We further categorized twin clusters into three groups based on the presence or absence of a stillbirth (defined as intra-uterine fetal demise at 20 weeks’ gestation):

    1. Group A: all members were live births

    2. Group B: one member was a live birth and the other a stillbirth (surviving co-twin model)

    3. Group C: Both members experienced a stillbirth

    We excluded Group C from further analysis. In the first comparison convertedvs.unconverted only Group B is considered. In the second comparison convertedvs.same-quantile twins, both co-twins from Group B and co-twins from Group A who reached the same quantile of the birth weight distribution at the same gestational age, but who could not switch to singleton programming because their co-twin also survived and was delivered alive were considered. The selection pathway for the co-twins used in this analysis is given in detail in Figure 1.

    Study variables included in this analysis comprised: day of birth and death, mode of delivery (cesarean or vaginal), pregnancy and labor complications, method of delivery, maternal sociodemographics (race, age, marital status, educational level) and maternal lifestyle factors (smoking) and infant characteristics (e.g., sex). Maternal race was defined as black, white and others; maternal age was grouped as less than 18 years, 18 to 34 years and ≥35 years. Maternal education level was categorized into two groups: less than 12 years of education and ≥12 years. The study also determined the occurrence of maternal medical complications among both groups. Maternal complications considered included anemia, preeclampsia, chronic hypertension, placental abruption, diabetes and placenta previa.

    The rate of infant mortality was computed by dividing the total number of deaths by the total number of live births and multiplying the outcome by 1 000.Chi-square test was used to assess differences in proportions. The Cox proportional hazard model was employed to perform the survival analysis. We used the Cox proportional hazards regression model to derive adjusted hazard ratios after testing for non-violation of the proportionality assumption in each case. We confirmed this by plotting the log-negative-log of the Kaplan-Meier estimates of the survival function versus the log of time[17]. The resulting curves were found to be parallel, confirming the proportionality assumption. Adjusted hazard ratios were derived by loading all the variables that were considered to be potential confounders into the model. The Cox proportional hazard model is expressed as :

    where h(t) is the hazard function in which h0 (t) represents the baseline hazard; the covariates are (x1,x2...,xp) whose effects are measured by the size of the individual coefficients (b1, b2, ...,bp), and t is the survival time of infancy. The type 1 error rate was set at 5% for all tests of hypotheses. Analysis was conducted using R statistical software, version 3.0.2. This study was approved by the institutional review board at the University of South Florida.

    3. Results

    For the first comparison: Convertedvs.Unconverted, a total of 4 291 co-twins were analyzed. Of this 1 289 (30.04%) were cotwins converted to singleton while 3002 (69.96%) were unconverted and maintained the initial twin programming pattern. For the second comparison: Convertedvs. Same-quantile twins, a total of 390 302 twins were analyzed. Of this number, 1 289 (0.33%) were cotwins converted to singleton while 389 013 (99.67%) were either unconverted co-twins that maintained the initial twin programmingpattern or co-twins who reached the same quantile of the birth weight distribution at the same gestational age, but who could not switch to singleton programming because their co-twin also survived and was delivered alive. The frequencies of socio-demographic characteristics of the study population from the first comparison (converted vs unconverted) are summarized in Table 1. Around 80% of mothers were white, non-smokers and aged between 18 and 34 years. Mothers of converted twins were more likely than those of unconverted twins to be older, white, married and to have at least a high school education (Table 1). Mothers of unconverted twins were more likely than those of converted twins to smoke cigarettes in pregnancy (P<0.001). Also from Table 1, labor complication does not show a significant difference between the two groups (P=0.247)

    Table 1 Socio-demographic characteristics, rates of pregnancy and labor complications of study populations United States, 1995-2000 comparing converted and unconverted twins (n=4291)a.

    Table 2 Rates of neonatal, post-neonatal and infant mortality among twins (converted versus non converted twin births), United States,

    Table 2 Rates of neonatal, post-neonatal and infant mortality among twins (converted versus non converted twin births), United States,

    aSignificant p-values are in bold font.P-values of 0.05 or less were considered significant.

    Rates per 1 000 live birthsn=4291 Converted co-twinn(%) Unconverted co-twinn(%) P-valueaNeonatal death (<28 days) 41(3.18) 954(31.77) <0.001 Post-neonatal death (28-364 days) 5(0.39) 53(1.77) <0.001 Infant death (0-364 days) 46(3.57) 1007(33.54) <0.001

    Infant mortality rates among converted versus unconverted birth (first comparison) are displayed in Table 2. Significant differences were observed in neonatal, post-neonatal and infant mortalities between the two groups. Neonatal mortality rate was lower for converted (3.18%) than for unconverted twins (31.77%) (P<0.0001). Rates of post-neonatal and infant death were also smaller among converted than for unconverted twins (postneonatal death: 0.39% for convertedvs. 1.77% for unconverted twins,P<0.0001; infant death: 3.57% for convertedvs. 33.54% for unconverted twins,P<0.0001).

    Table 3 presents summary estimates for the adjusted hazard ratios for neonatal, post-neonatal and infant deaths in relation to types of twin programming for first comparison (converted versus unconverted) and selected medical risk factors. The risk for all types of mortality was reduced for converted as compared to unconverted twins [Adjusted hazard ratio,HR(95% confidence interval,CI) for neonatal death=0.18(0.09, 0.34), post-neonatal death=0.59(0.06,5.28) and infant death=0.22(0.12, 0.40)]. Although lower, the reduced risk for post-neonatal death is not statistically significant. The most interesting factor associated with subsequent death of the surviving twin was mother’s race. For infants of black mothers as compared to white mothers, the risk for post-neonatal death increased by 89% (HR=1.89, 95%CI=1.03, 3.48), while we see a borderline significance reduction for neonatal death by 10% (HR= 0.90, 95%CI=0.77, 1.05), and for infant death by 6% (HR=0.94, 95%CI=0.80, 1.09). We found

    no significant difference between white versus other (non-black or white races). We found also no statistically significant difference with respect to mother’s age despite the hazard ratio being consistently lower for older mothers. Marital status and place of delivery also show no significant difference.

    Table 3 Hazard ratios (95%CI) for predictors of infant mortality among Convertedvs.Unconverteda surviving co-twins.

    Table 4 Hazard ratios (95%CI) for predictors of infant mortality among Converted co-twinsvsSame-quantile co-twinsa.

    Compared to female babies, males were at 11% lower risk of neonatal death (HR=0.89, 95%CI=0.79, 1.00) and at 12% lower risk of infant death (HR=0.88, 95%CI=0.78, 0.99) but no significant difference for post-neonatal death (HR=0.86, 95%CI=0.40, 1.16). Babies delivered via cesarean section were at lower risk of neonatal death (HR=0.73, 95%CI=0.60, 0.89) and infant death (HR=0.75, 95%CI=0.62, 0.90) than those delivered by vaginal route. High maternal education decreased the risk of neonatal death (HR=0.78, 95%CI=0.67, 0.91) and infant death (HR=0.77, 95%CI=0.66, 0.90).

    Summary estimates for the adjusted hazard ratios for neonatal, postneonatal and infant deaths in relation to types of twin programming for second comparison (converted versus same-quantile twins) and selected medical risk factors are presented in Table 4. As was the case for the first comparison, the risk for all types of mortality was reduced for converted as compared to same-quantile twins [Adjusted hazard ratio,HR(95% confidence interval,CI) for neonatal death=0.69(0.50, 0.96), post-neonatal death=0.66(0.27, 1.58) and infant death=0.57(0.42, 0.77)]. Although lower, the reduced risk for post-neonatal death is not statistically significant. The race of the mother plays an important role. Compare to whites, the risk of post-neonatal death increased for both black (HR=1.79, 95%CI=1.53, 2.09) and Others: non-white or black (HR=1.73, 95%CI=1.29, 2.32). By contract, neonatal death decrease by 8% (HR=0.83, 95%CI= 0.73, 0.93) for blacks compared to whites.

    The risk for all types of mortality was reduced for male as compared to female twins [Adjusted hazard ratio,HR(95% confidence interval,CI) for neonatal death=0.93(0.85, 1.02), postneonatal death=0.81(0.71, 0.92) and infant death=0.89(0.83, 0.96)]. Babies delivered via cesarean section were at higher risk of postneonatal death (HR=1.15, 95%CI=1.01, 1.32) than those delivered by vaginal route. High maternal education decreased the risk of all type of mortality [neonatal death (HR=0.84, 95%CI=0.75, 0.96), post-neonatal death (HR=0.61, 95%CI=0.52, 0.71 and infant death (HR=0.74, 95%CI=0.67, 0.81)]. Deliveries in a clinic were associated with lower risk of neonatal death (HR=0.66, 95%CI= 0.45, 0.97) and infant death (HR=0.66, 95%CI=0.46, 0.95) as compared to those outside a clinic setting. Older mothers show a low risk of all types of infant death (neonatal,HR=0.87, 95%CI=0.74, post-neonatal,HR=0.71, 95%CI=0.57, 0.89, infant death,HR=0.80, 95%CI= 0.71, 0.91) as compare to younger mothers.

    4. Discussion

    The matched multiple birth file was used in this paper to study the impact of intrauterine demise of a co-twin on neonatal, postneonatal and infant mortality of the surviving sibling. Findings from this study suggest that the death of the co-twin confers a survival advantage for the sibling, namely a lower risk of neonatal, postneonatal, and infant death. To our knowledge this is the first study to report an advantage (in terms of survival through infancy) associated with conversion of a twin pregnancy to a singleton gestation.

    Another significant finding of our analysis is the impact of maternal education on survival of surviving co-twins. Maternal education was inversely associated with the risk of death of the surviving cotwin. Offspring of mothers with more than 12 years of education had lower risk of neonatal, post-neonatal and infant death as compared to those born to women with 12 years or less of education. A surprised finding of our study is an increased risk of infant mortality among mothers between 18 to 34 years as to compared to age <18 years. Previous studies have shown that teenage pregnancies, in general, are associated with an increased risk of neonatal mortality[18, 19]. They reported that an increased risk may be linked to biological immaturity[20] although other factors might also play a role[21-22].

    Despite multiple reports of increased mortality associated with complications in twin pregnancies[21-24]. For example, Spellacyet al. [25], found that twin pregnancies were complicated by elevated risk for hypertension, anemia and placental abruption. Our study did not find a significant association between mortality and complications (anemia, preeclampsia, hypertension, placental abruption, diabetes and previa).

    This study confirms findings from previous researchers that twin infants born to black parents are at a higher risk of mortality when compared to their white counterparts[26, 27]. A two fold risk of postneonatal death was observed in infants of black mothers as compared to white mothers. But in contract a low risk of neonatal is observed when converted twins are compared to same-quantile co-twins who reached the same quantile of the birth weight distribution at the same gestational age, but who could not switch to singleton programming because their co-twin also survived and was delivered alive. A decreased risk of neonatal, post-neonatal and infant mortality was observed for male offspring as compared to female. Our finding of an elevated risk of post-neonatal death in convertedvssame-quantile twins comparison after the demise of a twin sibling is also in agreement with prior reports of cesarean delivery being a risk factor for singleton deaths, as a converted co-twin is now analogous to asingleton[28]. But in contrast a low risk is observed when converted are compared to unconverted only.

    This paper shows that mothers’ age plays an important role in the rates of conversion from twin to singleton pregnancy. Rates of conversion to singletons increased with increasing age. Mothers< 34 years old were more likely to deliver unconverted twin than converted twins. Those 35 or older had a greater likelihood of having converted than unconverted twins. This finding could explain the lower risk of all mortality types among surviving co-twins from mothers that were ≥35 years old, as conversion is associated with lower risk of death.

    Our study has limitations. The findings in this study are only applicable to surviving co-twins of already viable twin pregnancies. The pregnancies included in this study were of ≥20 weeks of gestation. This selection excludes application of the findings to spontaneous partial fetal loss before attainment of viability. In addition, Assisted Reproduction Technology (ART) is responsible for approximately 16% of the twin pregnancies in the United States[29]. However, we are unable to comment on the generalizability of our findings to pregnancies conceived through ART, as the database used lacks that specific information. ART-related multifetal pregnancies are considerably more common among whites, and the elective surgical reduction in the number of growing fetuses may be associated with a worse prognosis of the surviving co-twin, therefore a potential confounding by elective fetal reduction by race is also possible. It is known that the prognosis of the surviving twin in a dichorionic twin pregnancy is better than in a monochorionic twin gestation[9]. Unfortunately we lack information on whether the pregnancy is dichorionic or moochorionic.

    A major strength of our study is the substantial sample size of the data used in our analysis. The data was extracted from over 600 000 surviving co-twin birth records, making it the largest populationbased study on co-twin delivery. The use of a national population database also makes our outcome less likely to be influenced by selection bias and provides valuable and reliable information for future studies in surviving co-twin research.

    This study shows that there are survival advantages for the surviving co-twin after the demise of the co-twin. Timely intervention before the 27th week of gestation and helping the fetus reach the critical mass needed for conversion can decrease the likelihood of death for the surviving co-twin. Also, identifying important protective factors and interventions that help in the conversion of the surviving co-twin can help in increasing its survival rate. More research is needed to understand factors associated with neonatal and infant mortality in twin pregnancies complicated by the death of one member of the twin pair.

    Conflict of interest statement

    We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

    Acknowledgements

    The authors declare no financial interests, commercial affiliations, or conflicts of interest.

    [1] Gielen M, Lindsey PJ, Derom C, Loos RJ, Souren NY, Paulussen AD, et al. Twin-specific intrauterine growth charts based on cross-sectional birth weight.Twin Res Hum Genet2008; 11: 224-235.

    [2] Scher Al, Petterson B, Blair E, Ellenberg JH, Grether JK, Haan E, et al. The risk of mortality or cerebral palsy in twins: a collaborative population-based study.Pediatr Res2002; 52: 5: 671-681.

    [3] Misra DP, Ananth CV. Infant mortality among singletons and twins in the United States during 2 decades: Effects of maternal age.Pediatrics2002; 110:6: 1163-1168.

    [4] Tan H, Wen SW, Walker M, Demissie K. The Effect of parental race on fetal and infant mortality in twin gestations.J Natl Med Assoc2004; 96(10): 1337-1343.

    [5] Salihu HM, Ibrahimou B, Dagne G. Intra-uterine exposure to dual fetal programming sequences among surviving co-twins.J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med2010; 24:1: 96-103.

    [6] Rouse DJ, Caritis SN, Peaceman AM, Sciscione A, Thom EA, Spong CY, et al. A trial of 17 alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate to prevent prematurity in twins.N Engl J Med2007; 357: 454– 461.

    [7] Center for Disease Control and Prevention.Reproductive and birth outcomes.[Online] Available at: http://ephtracking.cdc.gov/ showRbPrematureBirthEnv.action[Accessed on 06-June-2014].

    [8] Woo HHN, Sin SY, Tang LCH. Single foetal death in twin pregnancies: review of the maternal and neonatal outcomes and management.Hong Kong Med J2000; 6: 293-300.

    [9] Fichera A, Zombolo A, Accorsi P, Martelli P. Perinatal outcome and neurological follow up of the co twins in twin pregnancies complicated by single intrauterine death.Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol2009; 147: 37-40.

    [10] Pharoah PO, Adi Y. Consequences of in-utero death in a twin pregnancy.Lancet2000; 355: 1597–1602.

    [11] Ong SS, Zamora J, Khan KS, Kilby MD. Prognosis for the co-twin following single-twin death: a systematic review.Br J Obstet Gynaecol2006; 113: 992–998.

    [12] Tarnow-Mordi WO, Hau C, Warden A, Shearer AJ. Hospital mortality in relation to staff workload: A 4-year study in an adult intensive-care unit.Lancet2000; 356(9225): 185-189.

    [13] Pharoah PO. Cerebral palsy in the surviving twin associated with infant death of the co-twin.Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed2001; 84: F111–F116.

    [14] Glinianaia SV, Pharoah POD, Wright C, Rankin JM. Fetal or infant death in twin pregnancy: neurodevelopmental consequence for the survivor.Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed2002; 86: F9–F15.

    [15] Taffel S, Johnson D, Heuser R. A method of imputing length of gestation on birth certificates.Vital Health Stat1982; 93: 1–11.

    [16] Piper JM, Mitchel EF Jr, Snowden M, Hall C, Adams M, Taylor P, et al.Validation of 1989 Tennessee birth certificates using maternal and newborn hospital records.Am J Epidemiol1993; 137: 758-768.

    [17] Cox DR. Regression models and life-tables.J Roy Stat Soc1972; 34(2):187-220.

    [18] Chen XK, Wen SW, Fleming N, Kitaw Demissie, George G Rhoads, Mark Walker. Teenage pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes: A large population based retrospective cohort study.Int J Epidemiol2007; 36(2): 368-373.

    [19] Zabin LS, Kiragu K. The health consequences of adolescent sexual and fertility behaviour in sub-Saharan Africa.Stud Fam Plann1998; 29(2): 210–232.

    [20] Olausson PO, Cnattingius S, Haglund B. Teenage pregnancies and risk of late fetal death and infant mortality.Br J Obstet Gynaecol1999; 106(2): 116-121.

    [21] Salihu HM, Chatman LM, Alio AP, Aliyu MH, Kirby RS, Alexander GR. Single motherhood and neonatal survival of twins among Blacks and Whites.J Nat Med Assoc2004; 96: 1618-1625.

    [22] Salihu HM, Mbuba CK, Oluwatade OJ, Aliyu MH. Mortality among twins born to unmarried teens in the United States.Matern & Child Health J2005; 9: 229-35.

    [23] Salihu HM, Kinniburgh BA, Aliyu MH, Kirby RS, Alexander GR. Racial disparity in stillbirth rates among singletons, twins and triplets.Obstet Gynecol2004; 104: 734-740.

    [24] Salihu HM, Bekan B, Aliyu MH, Rouse DJ, Kirby RS, Alexander GR. Feto-neonatal demise among singletons, twins and triplets with abruptio placenta.Am J Obstet Gynecol2005; 193: 198-203.

    [25] Spellacy WN, Handler A, Ferre CD. A case control study of 1253 twin pregnancies from a 1982 – 1987 perinatal data base.Obstetric Gynecol1990; 75(2): 168-171.

    [26] Tan H, Wen SW, Walker M. et al. The effect of parental race on fetal and infant mortality in twin gestations.J Natl Med Assoc2004; 96(10): 1337-1343.

    [27] Salihu HM, Alexander MR, Shumpert MN. Pierre-Louis JB, Alexander GR. Infant mortality among twins born to teenagers in the United States. Black-white disparity.J Reprod Med2003; 48: 257-267.

    [28] MacDorman MF, Declercq E, Menacker F, Malloy MH. Infant and neonatal mortality for primary cesarean and vaginal births to women with “No Indicated Risk,” United States, 1998-2001 Birth Coharts.Birth2006; 33: 175-182

    [29] Dickey RP. The relative contribution of assisted reproductive technologies and ovulation induction to multiple births in the United States 5 years after the Society for Assisted reproductive Technology/ American Society for Reproductive Medicine recommendation to limit the number of embryos transferred.Fertil Steril2007; 88(6):1554 -1561.

    Document heading

    IP Oyeyipo1,2, PJ MaartenSS du Plessis1*

    10.1016/j.apjr.2015.06.007

    *Corresponding author: Boubakari Ibrahimou, PhD, Assistant Professor, Florida International University, Robert Stempel College of Public Health & Social Work, Department of Biostatistics 11200 S.W. 8th Street, AHC2 583, Miami, FL 33199, USA.

    Tel: (305) 348-7524

    Fax: (305) 348-4901

    E-mail: birahim@fiu.edu

    三级国产精品片| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 成人影院久久| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 一级黄片播放器| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影 | 欧美在线黄色| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 观看美女的网站| 国产高清国产精品国产三级| freevideosex欧美| 成年美女黄网站色视频大全免费| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91 | 亚洲视频免费观看视频| 91精品三级在线观看| 中文字幕人妻丝袜制服| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| freevideosex欧美| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 最近手机中文字幕大全| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 黄色 视频免费看| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 国产极品天堂在线| 成人国产麻豆网| 午夜av观看不卡| 国产在线免费精品| 最近中文字幕2019免费版| 国产福利在线免费观看视频| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版| 满18在线观看网站| 电影成人av| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91 | 久久久久国产网址| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 亚洲色图 男人天堂 中文字幕| 桃花免费在线播放| 国产精品欧美亚洲77777| 看免费av毛片| 国产日韩一区二区三区精品不卡| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 午夜免费鲁丝| 色视频在线一区二区三区| 欧美另类一区| 亚洲精品国产一区二区精华液| 免费av中文字幕在线| 日本av手机在线免费观看| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 秋霞伦理黄片| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 伊人亚洲综合成人网| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版| 超色免费av| 一区在线观看完整版| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| 99久久精品国产国产毛片| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 国产 精品1| 啦啦啦中文免费视频观看日本| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| 国产成人精品婷婷| 亚洲色图综合在线观看| 久久久久网色| 亚洲精品第二区| 久久久久久人人人人人| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 尾随美女入室| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 日本vs欧美在线观看视频| av一本久久久久| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 秋霞在线观看毛片| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| 九草在线视频观看| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 亚洲美女黄色视频免费看| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 一级片免费观看大全| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀 | 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 大话2 男鬼变身卡| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看 | 亚洲精品自拍成人| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| 在线精品无人区一区二区三| 老汉色av国产亚洲站长工具| 国产一区二区激情短视频 | 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 一区二区三区激情视频| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 国产精品av久久久久免费| av福利片在线| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 欧美日韩av久久| 免费少妇av软件| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 哪个播放器可以免费观看大片| 亚洲av电影在线观看一区二区三区| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 国产av码专区亚洲av| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕| 欧美人与善性xxx| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 在线亚洲精品国产二区图片欧美| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 国产成人午夜福利电影在线观看| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 国产精品秋霞免费鲁丝片| 国产一区二区 视频在线| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 在线观看一区二区三区激情| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 香蕉丝袜av| 香蕉国产在线看| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 国产一区二区 视频在线| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 国产爽快片一区二区三区| 国产探花极品一区二区| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| av片东京热男人的天堂| 国产1区2区3区精品| 三级国产精品片| 亚洲精品一二三| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 大香蕉久久成人网| √禁漫天堂资源中文www| 老司机影院成人| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀 | 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频| 日韩一区二区视频免费看| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 边亲边吃奶的免费视频| 日本av免费视频播放| 大片电影免费在线观看免费| 丝袜美足系列| 女人被躁到高潮嗷嗷叫费观| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 国产精品 国内视频| 久久久久久伊人网av| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 一个人免费看片子| 五月开心婷婷网| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 精品国产一区二区三区四区第35| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 精品国产一区二区久久| 欧美日韩av久久| 国产亚洲精品第一综合不卡| 午夜福利,免费看| 男的添女的下面高潮视频| 少妇人妻 视频| 中国三级夫妇交换| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 精品酒店卫生间| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 五月天丁香电影| 91精品三级在线观看| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 香蕉精品网在线| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 午夜福利乱码中文字幕| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人 | 亚洲国产日韩一区二区| 免费av中文字幕在线| 自线自在国产av| 久久免费观看电影| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 精品酒店卫生间| 有码 亚洲区| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 边亲边吃奶的免费视频| 天天躁日日躁夜夜躁夜夜| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区 | 亚洲精品国产av蜜桃| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| 青草久久国产| 欧美日韩av久久| videosex国产| 黄片播放在线免费| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 永久网站在线| 精品国产国语对白av| 18禁国产床啪视频网站| 日韩大片免费观看网站| 欧美成人午夜免费资源| 亚洲熟女精品中文字幕| 下体分泌物呈黄色| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 综合色丁香网| 国产不卡av网站在线观看| 亚洲综合色惰| 久久久久久人妻| 麻豆av在线久日| 美国免费a级毛片| 在线精品无人区一区二区三| 国产视频首页在线观看| 久久婷婷青草| 中文字幕色久视频| 乱人伦中国视频| 亚洲精品,欧美精品| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 欧美日本中文国产一区发布| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲 | 成人手机av| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 久久鲁丝午夜福利片| 欧美少妇被猛烈插入视频| 日日啪夜夜爽| 26uuu在线亚洲综合色| 国产成人aa在线观看| 亚洲成人av在线免费| 色视频在线一区二区三区| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品| 成年人免费黄色播放视频| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 丁香六月天网| 观看av在线不卡| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 国产欧美亚洲国产| 国产在视频线精品| 亚洲第一青青草原| 亚洲精品国产色婷婷电影| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av | 国产1区2区3区精品| 免费看不卡的av| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4更新| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 中文天堂在线官网| 亚洲国产精品一区三区| 女的被弄到高潮叫床怎么办| 免费在线观看完整版高清| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 国产精品欧美亚洲77777| 一边摸一边做爽爽视频免费| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区 | 美女国产视频在线观看| 超碰成人久久| h视频一区二区三区| 亚洲精品,欧美精品| 卡戴珊不雅视频在线播放| 精品亚洲成国产av| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 午夜日本视频在线| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图| 国产无遮挡羞羞视频在线观看| 欧美xxⅹ黑人| 午夜日韩欧美国产| 亚洲成色77777| 免费观看性生交大片5| 18+在线观看网站| 一级片'在线观看视频| 国产野战对白在线观看| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 丁香六月天网| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 久久久久久人妻| 欧美日韩视频精品一区| 蜜桃国产av成人99| 成人黄色视频免费在线看| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 日产精品乱码卡一卡2卡三| 久久国内精品自在自线图片| 人妻一区二区av| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 亚洲第一av免费看| 自拍欧美九色日韩亚洲蝌蚪91| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 99香蕉大伊视频| 天堂俺去俺来也www色官网| 日韩一本色道免费dvd| 在线 av 中文字幕| 国产av精品麻豆| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 久久久久人妻精品一区果冻| 久久久精品免费免费高清| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆 | 日本黄色日本黄色录像| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图| 午夜福利乱码中文字幕| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 日本91视频免费播放| 极品人妻少妇av视频| 久久久久久人妻| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 美女视频免费永久观看网站| 日韩av在线免费看完整版不卡| av卡一久久| 美女中出高潮动态图| 成人手机av| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| www.自偷自拍.com| 制服丝袜香蕉在线| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 美女大奶头黄色视频| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 一本一本久久a久久精品综合妖精 国产伦在线观看视频一区 | 亚洲精品第二区| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 日本-黄色视频高清免费观看| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 伦理电影大哥的女人| 啦啦啦中文免费视频观看日本| 91精品三级在线观看| 欧美日韩视频高清一区二区三区二| 1024香蕉在线观看| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 男女国产视频网站| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 男女国产视频网站| 18+在线观看网站| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 日韩在线高清观看一区二区三区| 成人影院久久| 亚洲第一青青草原| 精品第一国产精品| 午夜福利,免费看| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图| 熟女av电影| 久久综合国产亚洲精品| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 国产精品二区激情视频| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 18禁国产床啪视频网站| 亚洲av.av天堂| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 香蕉丝袜av| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 欧美bdsm另类| 久久人人爽人人片av| 欧美激情高清一区二区三区 | 日韩伦理黄色片| 亚洲国产av新网站| 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 在线天堂中文资源库| 亚洲av福利一区| 香蕉精品网在线| 国产福利在线免费观看视频| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 国产精品二区激情视频| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 欧美人与性动交α欧美软件| 欧美+日韩+精品| 久久久国产一区二区| 男人舔女人的私密视频| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放| 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看| 中文字幕亚洲精品专区| 哪个播放器可以免费观看大片| 国产 精品1| 伦理电影大哥的女人| 久久久久视频综合| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 精品国产乱码久久久久久小说| 亚洲成人一二三区av| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| 韩国av在线不卡| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看| 午夜激情久久久久久久| 午夜影院在线不卡| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 久久这里有精品视频免费| xxx大片免费视频| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 大香蕉久久成人网| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| 最新的欧美精品一区二区| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 亚洲在久久综合| 亚洲精品久久午夜乱码| 亚洲在久久综合| 精品一区在线观看国产| 欧美精品高潮呻吟av久久| 七月丁香在线播放| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 日日撸夜夜添| 91成人精品电影| 日本wwww免费看| 久久久精品区二区三区| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 水蜜桃什么品种好| 电影成人av| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| 少妇熟女欧美另类| av在线观看视频网站免费| 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区 | 国产av精品麻豆| 免费观看性生交大片5| 国产在线免费精品| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 午夜日本视频在线| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 精品国产乱码久久久久久小说| 卡戴珊不雅视频在线播放| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 一级片免费观看大全| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清一级| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 黄色一级大片看看| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 在线亚洲精品国产二区图片欧美| 日本av免费视频播放| 天堂俺去俺来也www色官网| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 最近2019中文字幕mv第一页| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| av不卡在线播放| 成年美女黄网站色视频大全免费| 天天躁日日躁夜夜躁夜夜| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久| 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 黄片播放在线免费| 亚洲精品一二三| www.精华液| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| 国产精品秋霞免费鲁丝片| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 亚洲精品视频女| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 我要看黄色一级片免费的| 免费观看在线日韩| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 久久精品人人爽人人爽视色| xxxhd国产人妻xxx| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 国产片内射在线| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 9色porny在线观看| 亚洲人成77777在线视频| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看| 又大又黄又爽视频免费| 午夜免费观看性视频| 亚洲 欧美一区二区三区| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清一级| 在线观看www视频免费| 色吧在线观看| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 久久精品亚洲av国产电影网| 一个人免费看片子| 天堂8中文在线网| 一级毛片黄色毛片免费观看视频| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o| 亚洲综合色惰| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 性色avwww在线观看| 亚洲人成电影观看| 在线观看人妻少妇| 综合色丁香网| 男女免费视频国产| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 亚洲综合色网址| 精品少妇黑人巨大在线播放| 在现免费观看毛片| 最黄视频免费看| 成年动漫av网址| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 乱人伦中国视频| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看 | 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 一级毛片黄色毛片免费观看视频| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 日韩中文字幕视频在线看片| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 在线 av 中文字幕| 最新中文字幕久久久久| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区 | 欧美+日韩+精品| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 中文字幕人妻熟女乱码| 午夜福利乱码中文字幕| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 日产精品乱码卡一卡2卡三| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 中文字幕色久视频| 岛国毛片在线播放| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 色婷婷av一区二区三区视频| 一本一本久久a久久精品综合妖精 国产伦在线观看视频一区 | 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 卡戴珊不雅视频在线播放| 亚洲精品视频女| 在线观看人妻少妇| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 亚洲伊人色综图| 中国国产av一级| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| 丰满乱子伦码专区| 一级毛片黄色毛片免费观看视频| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 色哟哟·www| 老司机影院毛片| 超碰97精品在线观看| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| 啦啦啦在线观看免费高清www| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的| 桃花免费在线播放| 亚洲国产日韩一区二区| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| 亚洲av男天堂| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 日本黄色日本黄色录像| 久久精品夜色国产| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 成人免费观看视频高清| 久久久精品区二区三区| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 久久久久国产网址| 欧美成人午夜精品| av网站在线播放免费| 亚洲成人av在线免费| 飞空精品影院首页| 欧美精品av麻豆av| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看|