Vol 94, No 3 (2023)
Research paper
Published online: 2022-07-26

open access

Page views 2406
Article views/downloads 417
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Foetal macrosomia — incidence, determinants and neonatal outcomes: 10-years retrospective review, 2010–2019

Marta Buraczewska1, Mateusz Bonin, Jaroslaw Meyer-Szary, Amelia Wawer, Patrycja Wieczorek, Olga Gapska, Karolina Filipczyk, Paulina Samusik, Ewa Michalik, Iwona Sadowska-Krawczenko
Ginekol Pol 2023;94(3):233-241.


Objectives: Prevalence of macrosomia differs worldwide according to studied population and has been variable over last few decades. The objective of the study was to determine the trends in incidence and clinical characteristics of infants with macrosomia born in two diverse Polish neonatal centres from 2010–2019. Material and methods: Trends in the incidence of macrosomia, maternal age, delivery mode and neonatal complications were analysed over a 10 year period based on birth medical records. Results: The total number of 43 165 term neonates were analysed with macrosomia incidence of 16.63% (n = 7179). The prevalence of macrosomia was stable from 2010–2019 irrespectively of referentiality and geographical area. Mean maternal age increased over the decade with higher age of mothers of macrosomic neonates. Recognizability of gestation diabetes among pregnant women increased from 9.61% in 2010 to 15.27% in 2019 and it was comparable in mothers of macrosomic infants. The percentage of caesarean sections was higher in macrosomic neonates and gradually increased over last decade. The highest percentage of birth injuries was observed in the first grade of macrosomia (4000–4499 g). The number of neonatal complications including lower Apgar score, respiratory and cardiology symptoms correlated with severity of macrosomia, with highest morbidity in children above 5000 g. Conclusions: The prevalence of macrosomia in the studied cohort remained invariable over the last decade. Macrosomia is associated with an increased rate of caesarean sections, higher maternal age and increased neonatal morbidity. A higher macrosomia grade is related to a worse neonatal outcome. Further studies on other risk factors of macrosomia are needed.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file


  1. Salihu HM, Dongarwar D, King LM, et al. Trends in the incidence of fetal macrosomia and its phenotypes in the United States, 1971–2017. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2020; 301(2): 415–426.
  2. Henriksen T. The macrosomic fetus: a challenge in current obstetrics. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2008; 87(2): 134–145.
  3. Ørskou J, Kesmodel U, Henriksen TB, et al. An increasing proportion of infants weigh more than 4000 grams at birth. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2001; 80(10): 931–936.
  4. Lahmann PH, Wills RA, Coory M. Trends in birth size and macrosomia in Queensland, Australia, from 1988 to 2005. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2009; 23(6): 533–541.
  5. Morikawa M, Cho K, Yamada T, et al. Fetal macrosomia in Japanese women. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2013; 39(5): 960–965.
  6. Lu Y, Zhang J, Lu X, et al. Secular trends of macrosomia in southeast China, 1994-2005. BMC Public Health. 2011; 11: 818.
  7. Weissmann-Brenner A, Simchen MJ, Zilberberg E, et al. Maternal and neonatal outcomes of macrosomic pregnancies. Med Sci Monit. 2012; 18(9): PH77–PH81.
  8. Asplund CA, Seehusen DA, Callahan TL, et al. Percentage change in antenatal body mass index as a predictor of neonatal macrosomia. Ann Fam Med. 2008; 6(6): 550–554.
  9. Alberico S, Montico M, Barresi V, et al. The role of gestational diabetes, pre-pregnancy body mass index and gestational weight gain on the risk of newborn macrosomia: results from a prospective multicentre study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014; 14: 23.
  10. do Nascimento MI, Pereira DF, Lopata C, et al. Trends in the prevalence of live macrosomic newborns according to gestational age strata, in Brazil, 2001–2010, and 2012–2014. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2017; 39(8): 376–383.
  11. Frank CE, Speechley KN, Macnab JJ, et al. Infants born large for gestational age and developmental attainment in early childhood. Int J Pediatr. 2018; 2018: 9181497.
  12. Bamberg C, Hinkson L, Henrich W. Prenatal detection and consequences of fetal macrosomia. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2013; 33(3): 143–148.
  13. Wang Y, Gao E, Wu J, et al. Fetal macrosomia and adolescence obesity: results from a longitudinal cohort study. Int J Obes (Lond). 2009; 33(8): 923–928.
  14. Kc K, Shakya S, Zhang H. Gestational diabetes mellitus and macrosomia: a literature review. Ann Nutr Metab. 2015; 66 (Suppl 2): 14–20.
  15. Zhang X, Decker A, Platt RW, et al. How big is too big? The perinatal consequences of fetal macrosomia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 198(5): 517.e1–517.e6.
  16. Boulet SL, Alexander GR, Salihu HM, et al. Macrosomic births in the united states: determinants, outcomes, and proposed grades of risk. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 188(5): 1372–1378.
  17. Salihu HM, Dongarwar D, King LM, et al. Phenotypes of fetal macrosomia and risk of stillbirth among term deliveries over the previous four decades. Birth. 2020; 47(2): 202–210.
  18. Wielgos M, Bomba-Opoń D, Breborowicz GH, et al. Recommendations of the Polish Society of Gynecologists and Obstetricians regarding caesarean sections. Ginekol Pol. 2018; 89(11): 644–657.
  19. World Health Organization Human Reproduction Programme, 10 April 2015. WHO Statement on caesarean section rates. Reprod Health Matters. 2015; 23(45): 149–150.
  20. Dai RX, He XJ, Hu CL. The association between advanced maternal age and macrosomia: a meta-analysis. Child Obes. 2019; 15(3): 149–155.
  21. Lavery JA, Friedman AM, Keyes KM, et al. Gestational diabetes in the United States: temporal changes in prevalence rates between 1979 and 2010. BJOG. 2017; 124(5): 804–813.
  22. Wierzba W, Śliwczyński A, Karnafel W, et al. Gestational diabetes mellitus/hyperglycaemia during pregnancy in Poland in the years 2010-2012 based on the data from the National Health Fund. Ginekol Pol. 2017; 88(5): 244–248.
  23. Szymańska M, Bomba-Opoń DA, Celińska AM, et al. [Diagnostic of gestational diabetes mellitus and the prevalence of LGA (Large for Gestational Age)]. Ginekol Pol. 2008; 79(3): 177–181.
  24. Schaefer-Graf UM, Kjos SL, Kilavuz O, et al. Determinants of fetal growth at different periods of pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus or impaired glucose tolerance. Diabetes Care. 2003; 26(1): 193–198.
  25. Chauhan SP, Grobman WA, Gherman RA, et al. Suspicion and treatment of the macrosomic fetus: a review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 193(2): 332–346.
  26. Turkmen S, Johansson S, Dahmoun M. Foetal macrosomia and foetal-maternal outcomes at birth. J Pregnancy. 2018; 2018: 4790136.
  27. Hua XG, Jiang W, Hu R, et al. Large for gestational age and macrosomia in pregnancies without gestational diabetes mellitus. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2020; 33(21): 3549–3558.