Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T15:21:14.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Term Twins With Discordant Birth Weights: Observations at Birth and One Year

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Alistair G. S. Philip
Alistair G. S. Philip*
Affiliation:
The Departments of Pediatrics of the University of Hawaii, Honolulu and the University of Vermont, Burlington

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Sixteen pairs of term discordant twins (weight discrepancy of more than 20% when the, lighter twin was compared to the heavier) were evaluated at birth. Weight, length, head circumference, anterior fontanel area, and combined ossification of the knee epiphyses were measured, and ponderal index (weight/length ratio) calculated. The most severely growth retarded infants had markedly decreased ossification and larger anterior fontanels.

Eleven pairs had physical measurements at one year of age. With individual exceptions, the lighter twins at birth remained smaller in all dimensions. Despite these persistent differences between twin pairs, the values for length at one year of age were within normal limits for both the heavier and lighter twins. Infants without ossification at birth had a greater incremental linear growth by one year than those infants with ossification.

Keywords

Birth weightGrowth retardationFontanel sizeOssificationFollow-up studyTwins
Type
Research Article
Information
Acta geneticae medicae et gemellologiae: twin research , Volume 30 , Issue 3 , July 1981 , pp. 203 - 212
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1981

References

REFERENCES

1.Babson, SG, Kangas, J, Young, N, Bramhall, JL (1964): Growth and development of twins of dissimilar size at birth. Pediatrics 33:327–333.Google Scholar
2.Babson, SG, Phillips, DS (1973): Growth and development of twins dissimilar in size at birth. N Engl J Med 289:937–940.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Benirschke, K (1966): Multiple birth: Signal for scrutiny. Hosp Pract 12:25–31.Google Scholar
4.Buckler, JMH, Robinson, AH (1974): Matched development of a pair of monozygous twins of grossly different size at birth. Arch Dis Child 49:472–476.Google Scholar
5.Cruise, MO (1973): A longitudinal study of the growth of low birth weight infants. I: Velocity and distance growth, birth to 3 years. Pediatrics 51:620–628.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Davies, DP, Beverley, D (1979): Changes in body proportions over the first year of life: Comparisons between “light-for-dates” and “appropriate-for-dates” term infants. Early Hum Dev 3:263–265.Google Scholar
7.Drillien, CM (1970): The small-for-date infant: Etiology and prognosis. Pediatr Clin N Am 17:9–24.Google Scholar
8.Dubowitz, LMS, Dubowitz, V, Goldberg, C (1970): Clinical assessment of gestational age in the newborn infant. J Pediatr 77:1–10.Google Scholar
9.Falkner, F (1978): Implications for growth in human twins. In Falkner, F and Tanner, JM (eds): “Human Growth.” New York: Plenum Publishing Co., pp 397–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Fujikura, T, Froehlich, LA (1974): Mental and motor development in monozygotic co-twins with dissimilar birth weights. Pediatrics 53:884–889.Google Scholar
11.Gruenwald, P (1970): Environmental influences on twins apparent at birth. Biol Neonate 15:79–93.Google Scholar
12.Hohenauer, L (1971): Prenatal nutrition and subsequent development. Lancet 1:644–645.Google Scholar
13.Janus-Kukulska, A, Kiepurska-Zkzienicka, J (1974): Development of premature twins with dissimilar birth weight. I: Physical development. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 22:120–124, supplement.Google Scholar
14.Kaelber, CT, Pugh, TF (1969): Influence of intra-uterine relations on the intelligence of twins. N Engl J Med 280:1030–1034.Google Scholar
15.Lubchenco, LO (1970): Assessment of gestational age and development at birth. Pediatr Clin N Am 17:125–145.Google Scholar
16.Miller, HC, Hassanein, K (1971): Diagnosis of impaired fetal growth in newborn infants. Pediatrics 48:511–522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Ounsted, M, Ounsted, C (1973): “On fetal growth rate.” Clinics in Developmental Medicine No. 46. Spastics International Publications.Google Scholar
18.Philip, AGS (1974): Fontanel size and epiphyseal ossification in neonates with intra-uterine growth retardation. J Pediatr 84:204–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Philip, AGS (1975): Fontanel size and epiphyseal ossification in neonatal twins discordant by birth weight. J Pediatr 86:417–419.Google Scholar
20.Philip, AGS (1978): Fetal growth retardation: Femurs, fontanels and follow-up. Pediatrics 62:446–453.Google Scholar
21.Schmidt, R, Schreier, K (1978): Der Einfluss einer Massigen intrauterinen Mangelernährung auf die spätere Körperliche und geistige Entwicklung von Zwillingen. Mschr Kinderheilk 126:81–86.Google Scholar
22.Scott, KE, Usher, R (1964): Epiphyseal development in fetal malnutrition syndrome. N Engl J Med 270:822–824.Google Scholar
23.Smart, JL, Adlard, BPF, Dobbing, J (1974): Further studies of body growth and brain development in “small-for-dates” rats. Biol Neonate 25:135–150.Google Scholar
24.Wilson, RS (1979): Twin growth: Initial deficit, recovery and trends in concordance from birth to nine years. Ann Human Biol 6:205–220.Google Scholar
25.Woods, DL, Malan, AF (1977): Assessment of gestational age in twins. Arch Dis Child 52:735–737.Google Scholar