Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Correlation of umbilical cord weight with birth weight
  1. S Bolisetty,
  2. T H H G Koh,
  3. S Hammond,
  4. K Panaretto,
  5. J Whitehall
  1. Department of Neonatology, Kirwan Hospital for Women, Townsville, Queensland 4817, Australia
  1. Correspondence to:
    Dr Bolisetty, Alice Springs Hospital, PO Box 2234, Alice Springs, NT 0871, Australia;

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

It is not uncommon to see wasted umbilical cords in growth retarded babies, or bulky cords in macrosomic infants, but there are no published data on the weights of the umbilical cords.

We measured the weight of the umbilical cord of 96 consecutive healthy term (37–40 weeks) infants soon after birth. The length and weight of the cord excluding the first 5 cm from the infant's abdomen was measured after it had been emptied of blood by manual squeezing. Table 1 shows the results.

Mean (SE) weights of umbilical cord, placenta, and the infant were 41.4 (1.7), 590.1 (12.4), and 3445 (42.9) g respectively. There was a significant positive correlation between cord weight and length and placental weight and birth weight.

This is the first known study to measure umbilical cord weight and examine its correlation with placental and birth weight. It supports the common observation that the appearance of the umbilical cord is proportional to the baby's size at birth. Total cord weight is dependent on cord length, which in turn is greatly influenced by fetal movements.1, 2 The value of the study would be enhanced by including parallel data on the weight of the cord per unit of its length.

Table 1

Correlation of umbilical cord weight and length with placental and birth weight using Pearson correlation coefficient