Cited by 31Neonatal Respiratory Health ResearchInfant Development and Preterm CareMaternal and Neonatal Healthcare

Gestational age‐related reference values for Apgar score and umbilical cord arterial and venous pH in preterm and term newborns

Open access
Zaigham, Mehreen, Källén, Karin, Olofsson, Per·2019·Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Despite much literature on reference values of acid-base status in umbilical cord blood at birth, there are as yet no studies performed to determine gestational age-dependent references in cord venous blood and no studies on preterm acid-base standards. Similarly, the normal reference range of Apgar scores for term and preterm infants has not yet been determined. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data were obtained from the maternity units of Skåne University Hospital, Malmö and Lund, Sweden, from 2001 to 2010. Validated paired arterial and venous cord pH values were obtained from 27 175 newborns, of whom 18 584 had spontaneous, non-instrumental vaginal deliveries and a 5-minute Apgar score equal to or greater than the median value for the individual gestational week. Simple linear and polynomial regression analyses were performed. Values were reported as mean ± standard deviation and median with 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles. RESULTS: Median 5-minute Apgar score was 7 for gestations shorter than 28 weeks, 8 for 28 weeks, 9 for 29-30 weeks, and 10 from 31 weeks onwards. A linear decline in pH for both cord arterial and venous blood was seen with advancing gestational age (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Median 5-minute Apgar scores were <10 before 31 weeks of gestation. Both umbilical cord arterial and venous pH decreased linearly with increasing gestational age. Further studies are needed to show whether gestational age-related pH reference ranges might be preferred to fixed cut-offs in the estimation of umbilical cord acidemia at birth.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/aogs.13689

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zaigham, M., Källén, K., & Olofsson, P.
Affiliations
Lund University (SE)
Corresponding author
Zaigham, Mehreen
Venue
Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-08-12
Volume
98
Issue
12
Pages
1618-1623
ISSN
  • 0001-6349 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0412
OpenAlex
W2960013749
Cited by
31
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
FWCI
1.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Region Skåne
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Neonatal Respiratory Health Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Development and Preterm Care
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Maternal and Neonatal Healthcare
Keywords
Apgar score, umbilical cord pH, gestational age, reference values, preterm infants, term infants, acid-base status
MeSH terms
Apgar Score, Arteries, Fetal Blood, Gestational Age, Humans, Hydrogen-Ion Concentration, Infant, Newborn, Reference Values, Veins, Premature Birth, Term Birth

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review