Does parity affect pregnancy outcomes in the elderly gravida?

  • Gil Shechter-MaorEmail author
  • Dana Sadeh-Mestechkin
  • Yael Ganor Paz
  • Rivka Sukenik Halevy
  • Ofer Markovitch
  • Tal Biron-Shental
Maternal-Fetal Medicine



To identify whether older primiparas have more complications than do women who continue to deliver children into their late reproductive age. Patients of at least 35 years of age at delivery were included. Within this cohort, data from primiparous and multiparous women were compared.


This retrospective study was based on electronic medical records from a single academic center, with more than 7000 deliveries annually. The impact of parity on maternal complications was assessed using a multivariate logistic regression model that adjusted for baseline maternal characteristics and medical history.


During the study period, there were 54 283 deliveries in our medical center. A total of 13,982 (25.7%) patients were at least 35 years old at delivery. The rate of twin pregnancy was higher in the primiparous group (1.9%) as compared to the multiparous group (0.8%, 95% CI 0.30–0.64, P < 0.001), as was the incidence of delivery prior to 34 weeks (6.1% of the primiparas versus 2.9% of the multiparas, P < 0.001, OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.75–2.68); hypertensive disorders (3.9% versus 1.7%, P < 0.001, 95% CI 0.33–0.57); diabetes (4.6% versus 3.2%, P = 0.003, 95% CI 0.55–0.88); and IUGR (10.5% versus 4.7%, P < 0.001, 95% CI 0.35–049), respectively. The increased risk for pre-term delivery, hypertensive disorders, diabetes, and IUGR was maintained after logistic regression analysis.


We found that pregnancy complications typical to older parous women are significantly more common among primiparas, indicating that not only older age, but also having a first child relatively late in the reproductive period contributes to adverse pregnancy outcomes.


Advanced maternal age Elderly gravida Parity Pregnancy complications Pregnancy outcome Primiparity 



We thank Navah Jelin, MSc for help with the statistical analysis and Faye Schreiber, MSc for editing the manuscript.

Author contributions

GSM: literature review, data collection, writing manuscript, and data analysis; DS-M: data collection, manuscript writing; YG-P: data collection, and manuscript writing; RSH: manuscript writing; OM: manuscript writing; TB-S: data analysis and manuscript writing.


The study was not funded.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The Meir Medical Center Ethics Committee reviewed and approved the study. The study data were obtained from the hospital database and informed consent was not required.


  1. 1.
    Jacobsson B, Ladfors L, Milsom I (2004) Advanced maternal age and adverse perinatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol 104(4):727–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mills M, Rindfuss RR, McDonald P, te Velde E (2011) Why do people postpone parenthood? Reasons and social policy incentives. Hum Reprod Update 17(6):848–860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hollander D, Breen JL (1990) Pregnancy in the older gravida: how old is old? Obstet Gynecol Surv 45(2):106–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mathews TJ, Hamilton BE (2016) Mean Age of Mothers is on the Rise: united States, 2000-2014. NCHS Data Brief. 232:1–8Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carolan MC, Davey MA, Biro M, Kealy M (2013) Very advanced maternal age and morbidity in Victoria, Australia: a population based study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 13:80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Joseph KS, Allen AC, Dodds L, Turner LA, Scott H, Liston R (2005) The perinatal effects of delayed childbearing. Obstet Gynecol 105(6):1410–1418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Khalil A, Syngelaki A, Maiz N, Zinevich Y, Nicolaides KH (2013) Maternal age and adverse pregnancy outcome: a cohort study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 42(6):634–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kenny LC, Lavender T, McNamee R, O’Neill SM, Mills T, Khashan AS (2013) Advanced maternal age and adverse pregnancy outcome: evidence from a large contemporary cohort. PLoS One 8(2):e56583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harlev A, Walfisch A, Oran E, Har-Vardi I, Friger M, Lunenfeld E et al (2018) The effect of fertility treatment on adverse perinatal outcomes in women aged at least 40 years. Intern J Gynaecol Obstet 140(1):98–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weissmann-Brenner A, Simchen MJ, Zilberberg E, Kalter A, Dulitzky M (2015) Combined effect of fetal sex and advanced maternal age on pregnancy outcomes. Med Sci Monit 21:1124–1130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lean SC, Derricott H, Jones RL, Heazell AEP (2017) Advanced maternal age and adverse pregnancy outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 12(10):e0186287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bianco A, Stone J, Lynch L, Lapinski R, Berkowitz G, Berkowitz RL (1996) Pregnancy outcome at age 40 and older. Obstet Gynecol 87(6):917–922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Smith GC (2017) Screening and prevention of stillbirth. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 38:71–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Simon E, Caille A, Perrotin F, Giraudeau B (2013) Mixing nulliparous and multiparous women in randomised controlled trials of preeclampsia prevention is debatable: evidence from a systematic review. PLoS One 8(6):e66677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gaudineau A (2013) Prevalence, risk factors, maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality of intrauterine growth restriction and small-for-gestational age. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 42(8):895–910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Macdonald-Wallis C, Tilling K, Fraser A, Nelson SM, Lawlor DA (2011) Established preeclampsia risk factors are related to patterns of blood pressure change in normal term pregnancy: findings from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. J Hypertens 29(9):1703–1711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Duckitt K, Harrington D (2005) Risk factors for pre-eclampsia at antenatal booking: systematic review of controlled studies. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 330(7491):565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ananth CV, Chauhan SP (2012) Epidemiology of twinning in developed countries. Seminars Perinatol 36(3):156–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Usta IM, Nassar AH (2008) Advanced maternal age. Part I: obstetric complications. Am J Perinatol 25(8):521–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Delbaere I, Verstraelen H, Goetgeluk S, Martens G, De Backer G, Temmerman M (2007) Pregnancy outcome in primiparae of advanced maternal age. EurJ Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 135(1):41–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Murphy SL, Mathews TJ, Martin JA, Minkovitz CS, Strobino DM (2017) Annual Summary of vital statistics: 2013–2014. Pediatrics 139(6):e20163239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Leduc D, Biringer A, Lee L, Dy J (2013) Induction of labour. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 35(9):840–860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Walker KF, Bugg GJ, Macpherson M, McCormick C, Grace N, Wildsmith C et al (2016) Randomized trial of labor induction in women 35 years of age or older. New Engl J Med 374(9):813–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gilbert WM, Nesbitt TS, Danielsen B (1999) Childbearing beyond age 40: pregnancy outcome in 24,032 cases. Obstet Gynecol 93(1):9–14PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyMeir Medical Center, Tel Aviv UniversityKfar SabaIsrael
  2. 2.Sackler School of MedicineTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael
  3. 3.Genetics InstituteMeir Medical CenterKfar SabaIsrael

Personalised recommendations