Fetal leg posture in uncomplicated breech and cephalic pregnancies

Abstract

These findings show that the intra-uterine position does influence the fetal postural and motor development. However, it seems unlikely that intra-uterine movement restriction can solely be held accountable for the observed differences in leg position between breech and cephalic fetuses.

Breech presentation is associated with lower bone mass and area: findings from the Southampton Women’s Survey

“…However, it has been proposed that poor fetal movement may also be responsible for the failure to attain a cephalic position [19] i.e. reduced movements in breech fetuses may not solely be attributable to fetal position [20]. This is supported by a higher frequency of breech presentation in children with conditions affecting motor development such as cerebral palsy [21]; the incidence increases with disease severity [19].…”

Breech presentation is associated with lower adolescent tibial bone strength

“…An alternative explanation could be that observed bone strength deficits reflect pre-existing impairment in neuromuscular development which predisposes the fetus to breech presentation. In addition to limiting the ability to attain a cephalic position [34], reduced prenatal motor development may contribute with altered limb position to lower skeletal loading [12]. Consistent with this possibility, the frequency of breech presentation is higher in children with developmental conditions affecting neuromuscular function such as cerebral palsy [35] and meningocele [34].…”

“…Babies occupying a breech position during pregnancy have restricted movement of the lower limbs in the third trimester [12]. Whilst the number of movements does not appear to differ [13], this reduced range of movement is likely to contribute to reduced skeletal loading of the lower limbs in breech position [14] during late pregnancy, a period when the stresses placed upon the growing skeleton are usually greatest [15].…”