-
JAMA Aug 2019Maternal hypothyroidism and hyperthyroidism are risk factors for preterm birth. Milder thyroid function test abnormalities and thyroid autoimmunity are more prevalent,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Maternal hypothyroidism and hyperthyroidism are risk factors for preterm birth. Milder thyroid function test abnormalities and thyroid autoimmunity are more prevalent, but it remains controversial if these are associated with preterm birth.
OBJECTIVE
To study if maternal thyroid function test abnormalities and thyroid autoimmunity are risk factors for preterm birth.
DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION
Studies were identified through a search of the Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar databases from inception to March 18, 2018, and by publishing open invitations in relevant journals. Data sets from published and unpublished prospective cohort studies with data on thyroid function tests (thyrotropin [often referred to as thyroid-stimulating hormone or TSH] and free thyroxine [FT4] concentrations) or thyroid peroxidase (TPO) antibody measurements and gestational age at birth were screened for eligibility by 2 independent reviewers. Studies in which participants received treatment based on abnormal thyroid function tests were excluded.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
The primary authors provided individual participant data that were analyzed using mixed-effects models.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was preterm birth (<37 weeks' gestational age).
RESULTS
From 2526 published reports, 35 cohorts were invited to participate. After the addition of 5 unpublished data sets, a total of 19 cohorts were included. The study population included 47 045 pregnant women (mean age, 29 years; median gestational age at blood sampling, 12.9 weeks), of whom 1234 (3.1%) had subclinical hypothyroidism (increased thyrotropin concentration with normal FT4 concentration), 904 (2.2%) had isolated hypothyroxinemia (decreased FT4 concentration with normal thyrotropin concentration), and 3043 (7.5%) were TPO antibody positive; 2357 (5.0%) had a preterm birth. The risk of preterm birth was higher for women with subclinical hypothyroidism than euthyroid women (6.1% vs 5.0%, respectively; absolute risk difference, 1.4% [95% CI, 0%-3.2%]; odds ratio [OR], 1.29 [95% CI, 1.01-1.64]). Among women with isolated hypothyroxinemia, the risk of preterm birth was 7.1% vs 5.0% in euthyroid women (absolute risk difference, 2.3% [95% CI, 0.6%-4.5%]; OR, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.12-1.90]). In continuous analyses, each 1-SD higher maternal thyrotropin concentration was associated with a higher risk of preterm birth (absolute risk difference, 0.2% [95% CI, 0%-0.4%] per 1 SD; OR, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.00-1.09] per 1 SD). Thyroid peroxidase antibody-positive women had a higher risk of preterm birth vs TPO antibody-negative women (6.6% vs 4.9%, respectively; absolute risk difference, 1.6% [95% CI, 0.7%-2.8%]; OR, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.15-1.56]).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Among pregnant women without overt thyroid disease, subclinical hypothyroidism, isolated hypothyroxinemia, and TPO antibody positivity were significantly associated with higher risk of preterm birth. These results provide insights toward optimizing clinical decision-making strategies that should consider the potential harms and benefits of screening programs and levothyroxine treatment during pregnancy.
Topics: Adult; Autoantibodies; Autoimmune Diseases; Female; Gestational Age; Humans; Hypothyroidism; Infant, Newborn; Iodide Peroxidase; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Premature Birth; Thyroid Diseases; Thyroid Function Tests; Thyrotropin; Thyroxine
PubMed: 31429897
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.10931 -
Human Reproduction Update Sep 2023The number of frozen embryo transfers (FET) has increased dramatically over the past decade. Based on current evidence, there is no difference in pregnancy rates when... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The number of frozen embryo transfers (FET) has increased dramatically over the past decade. Based on current evidence, there is no difference in pregnancy rates when natural cycle FET (NC-FET) is compared to artificial cycle FET (AC-FET) in subfertile women. However, NC-FET seems to be associated with lower risk of adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes compared with AC-FET cycles. Currently, there is no consensus about whether NC-FET needs to be combined with luteal phase support (LPS) or not. The question of how to prepare the endometrium for FET has now gained even more importance and taken the dimension of safety into account as it should not simply be reduced to the basic question of effectiveness.
OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE
The objective of this project was to determine whether NC-FET, with or without LPS, decreases the risk of adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes compared with AC-FET.
SEARCH METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out. A literature search was performed using the following databases: CINAHL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE from inception to 10 October 2022. Observational studies, including cohort studies, and registries comparing obstetric and neonatal outcomes between singleton pregnancies after NC-FET and those after AC-FET were sought. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. We calculated pooled odds ratios (ORs), pooled risk differences (RDs), pooled adjusted ORs, and prevalence estimates with 95% CI using a random effect model, while heterogeneity was assessed by the I2.
OUTCOMES
The conducted search identified 2436 studies, 890 duplicates were removed and 1546 studies were screened. Thirty studies (NC-FET n = 56 445; AC-FET n = 57 231) were included, 19 of which used LPS in NC-FET. Birthweight was lower following NC-FET versus AC-FET (mean difference 26.35 g; 95% CI 11.61-41.08, I2 = 63%). Furthermore NC-FET compared to AC-FET resulted in a lower risk of large for gestational age (OR 0.88, 95% 0.83-0.94, I2 = 54%), macrosomia (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.71-0.93, I2 = 68%), low birthweight (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.77-0.85, I2 = 41%), early pregnancy loss (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.61-0.86, I2 = 70%), preterm birth (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.75-0.85, I2 = 20%), very preterm birth (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.53-0.84, I2 = 0%), hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.50-0.65, I2 = 61%), pre-eclampsia (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.42-0.60, I2 = 44%), placenta previa (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.73-0.97, I2 = 0%), and postpartum hemorrhage (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.38-0.48, I2 = 53%). Stratified analyses on LPS use in NC-FET suggested that, compared to AC-FET, NC-FET with LPS decreased preterm birth risk, while NC-FET without LPS did not (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.70-0.81). LPS use did not modify the other outcomes. Heterogeneity varied from low to high, while quality of the evidence was very low to moderate.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS
This study confirms that NC-FET decreases the risk of adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes compared with AC-FET. We estimate that for each adverse outcome, use of NC-FET may prevent 4 to 22 cases per 1000 women. Consequently, NC-FET should be the preferred treatment in women with ovulatory cycles undergoing FET. Based on very low quality of evidence, the risk of preterm birth be decreased when LPS is used in NC-FET compared to AC-FET. However, because of many uncertainties-the major being the debate about efficacy of the use of LPS-future research is needed on efficacy and safety of LPS and no recommendation can be made about the use of LPS.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Female; Humans; Birth Weight; Premature Birth; Luteal Phase; Lipopolysaccharides; Cryopreservation; Embryo Transfer; Pregnancy Rate; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37172270
DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmad011 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2022Despite the widespread use of antenatal corticosteroids to prevent respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) in preterm infants, there is currently no consensus as to the type... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Despite the widespread use of antenatal corticosteroids to prevent respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) in preterm infants, there is currently no consensus as to the type of corticosteroid to use, dose, frequency, timing of use or the route of administration. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects on fetal and neonatal morbidity and mortality, on maternal morbidity and mortality, and on the child and adult in later life, of administering different types of corticosteroids (dexamethasone or betamethasone), or different corticosteroid dose regimens, including timing, frequency and mode of administration.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (9 May 2022) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all identified published and unpublished randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any two corticosteroids (dexamethasone or betamethasone or any other corticosteroid that can cross the placenta), comparing different dose regimens (including frequency and timing of administration) in women at risk of preterm birth. We planned to exclude cross-over trials and cluster-randomised trials. We planned to include studies published as abstracts only along with studies published as full-text manuscripts.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Data were checked for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 11 trials (2494 women and 2762 infants) in this update, all of which recruited women who were at increased risk of preterm birth or had a medical indication for preterm birth. All trials were conducted in high-income countries. Dexamethasone versus betamethasone Nine trials (2096 women and 2319 infants) compared dexamethasone versus betamethasone. All trials administered both drugs intramuscularly, and the total dose in the course was consistent (22.8 mg or 24 mg), but the regimen varied. We assessed one new study to have no serious risk of bias concerns for most outcomes, but other studies were at moderate (six trials) or high (two trials) risk of bias due to selection, detection and attrition bias. Our GRADE assessments ranged between high- and low-certainty, with downgrades due to risk of bias and imprecision. Maternal outcomes The only maternal primary outcome reported was chorioamnionitis (death and puerperal sepsis were not reported). Although the rate of chorioamnionitis was lower with dexamethasone, we did not find conclusive evidence of a difference between the two drugs (risk ratio (RR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48 to 1.06; 1 trial, 1346 women; moderate-certainty evidence). The proportion of women experiencing maternal adverse effects of therapy was lower with dexamethasone; however, there was not conclusive evidence of a difference between interventions (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.13; 2 trials, 1705 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Infant outcomes We are unsure whether the choice of drug makes a difference to the risk of any known death after randomisation, because the 95% CI was compatible with both appreciable benefit and harm with dexamethasone (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.63; 5 trials, 2105 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). The choice of drug may make little or no difference to the risk of RDS (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.22; 5 trials, 2105 infants; high-certainty evidence). While there may be little or no difference in the risk of intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH), there was substantial unexplained statistical heterogeneity in this result (average (a) RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.81; 4 trials, 1902 infants; I² = 62%; low-certainty evidence). We found no evidence of a difference between the two drugs for chronic lung disease (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.34; 1 trial, 1509 infants; moderate-certainty evidence), and we are unsure of the effects on necrotising enterocolitis, because there were few events in the studies reporting this outcome (RR 5.08, 95% CI 0.25 to 105.15; 2 studies, 441 infants; low-certainty evidence). Longer-term child outcomes Only one trial consistently followed up children longer term, reporting at two years' adjusted age. There is probably little or no difference between dexamethasone and betamethasone in the risk of neurodevelopmental disability at follow-up (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.22; 2 trials, 1151 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). It is unclear whether the choice of drug makes a difference to the risk of visual impairment (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.15; 1 trial, 1227 children; low-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference between the drugs for hearing impairment (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.16; 1 trial, 1227 children; moderate-certainty evidence), motor developmental delay (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.20; 1 trial, 1166 children; moderate-certainty evidence) or intellectual impairment (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.20; 1 trial, 1161 children; moderate-certainty evidence). However, the effect estimate for cerebral palsy is compatible with both an important increase in risk with dexamethasone, and no difference between interventions (RR 2.50, 95% CI 0.97 to 6.39; 1 trial, 1223 children; low-certainty evidence). No trials followed the children beyond early childhood. Comparisons of different preparations and regimens of corticosteroids We found three studies that included a comparison of a different regimen or preparation of either dexamethasone or betamethasone (oral dexamethasone 32 mg versus intramuscular dexamethasone 24 mg; betamethasone acetate plus phosphate versus betamethasone phosphate; 12-hourly betamethasone versus 24-hourly betamethasone). The certainty of the evidence for the main outcomes from all three studies was very low, due to small sample size and risk of bias. Therefore, we were limited in our ability to draw conclusions from any of these studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall, it remains unclear whether there are important differences between dexamethasone and betamethasone, or between one regimen and another. Most trials compared dexamethasone versus betamethasone. While for most infant and early childhood outcomes there may be no difference between these drugs, for several important outcomes for the mother, infant and child the evidence was inconclusive and did not rule out significant benefits or harms. The evidence on different antenatal corticosteroid regimens was sparse, and does not support the use of one particular corticosteroid regimen over another.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Betamethasone; Child; Child, Preschool; Chorioamnionitis; Dexamethasone; Female; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Lung; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn
PubMed: 35943347
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006764.pub4 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Sep 2020To determine the clinical manifestations, risk factors, and maternal and perinatal outcomes in pregnant and recently pregnant women with suspected or confirmed... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To determine the clinical manifestations, risk factors, and maternal and perinatal outcomes in pregnant and recently pregnant women with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19).
DESIGN
Living systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, Cochrane database, WHO COVID-19 database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang databases from 1 December 2019 to 6 October 2020, along with preprint servers, social media, and reference lists.
STUDY SELECTION
Cohort studies reporting the rates, clinical manifestations (symptoms, laboratory and radiological findings), risk factors, and maternal and perinatal outcomes in pregnant and recently pregnant women with suspected or confirmed covid-19.
DATA EXTRACTION
At least two researchers independently extracted the data and assessed study quality. Random effects meta-analysis was performed, with estimates pooled as odds ratios and proportions with 95% confidence intervals. All analyses will be updated regularly.
RESULTS
192 studies were included. Overall, 10% (95% confidence interval 7% to 12%; 73 studies, 67 271 women) of pregnant and recently pregnant women attending or admitted to hospital for any reason were diagnosed as having suspected or confirmed covid-19. The most common clinical manifestations of covid-19 in pregnancy were fever (40%) and cough (41%). Compared with non-pregnant women of reproductive age, pregnant and recently pregnant women with covid-19 were less likely to have symptoms (odds ratio 0.28, 95% confidence interval 0.13 to 0.62; I2=42.9%) or report symptoms of fever (0.49, 0.38 to 0.63; I2=40.8%), dyspnoea (0.76, 0.67 to 0.85; I2=4.4%) and myalgia (0.53, 0.36 to 0.78; I2=59.4%). The odds of admission to an intensive care unit (odds ratio 2.13, 1.53 to 2.95; I2=71.2%), invasive ventilation (2.59, 2.28 to 2.94; I2=0%) and need for extra corporeal membrane oxygenation (2.02, 1.22 to 3.34; I2=0%) were higher in pregnant and recently pregnant than non-pregnant reproductive aged women. Overall, 339 pregnant women (0.02%, 59 studies, 41 664 women) with confirmed covid-19 died from any cause. Increased maternal age (odds ratio 1.83, 1.27 to 2.63; I2=43.4%), high body mass index (2.37, 1.83 to 3.07; I2=0%), any pre-existing maternal comorbidity (1.81, 1.49 to 2.20; I2=0%), chronic hypertension (2.0, 1.14 to 3.48; I2=0%), pre-existing diabetes (2.12, 1.62 to 2.78; I2=0%), and pre-eclampsia (4.21, 1.27 to 14.0; I2=0%) were associated with severe covid-19 in pregnancy. In pregnant women with covid-19, increased maternal age, high body mass index, non-white ethnicity, any pre-existing maternal comorbidity including chronic hypertension and diabetes, and pre-eclampsia were associated with serious complications such as admission to an intensive care unit, invasive ventilation and maternal death. Compared to pregnant women without covid-19, those with the disease had increased odds of maternal death (odds ratio 2.85, 1.08 to 7.52; I2=0%), of needing admission to the intensive care unit (18.58, 7.53 to 45.82; I2=0%), and of preterm birth (1.47, 1.14 to 1.91; I2=18.6%). The odds of admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (4.89, 1.87 to 12.81, I2=96.2%) were higher in babies born to mothers with covid-19 versus those without covid-19.
CONCLUSION
Pregnant and recently pregnant women with covid-19 attending or admitted to the hospitals for any reason are less likely to manifest symptoms such as fever, dyspnoea, and myalgia, and are more likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit or needing invasive ventilation than non-pregnant women of reproductive age. Pre-existing comorbidities, non-white ethnicity, chronic hypertension, pre-existing diabetes, high maternal age, and high body mass index are risk factors for severe covid-19 in pregnancy. Pregnant women with covid-19 versus without covid-19 are more likely to deliver preterm and could have an increased risk of maternal death and of being admitted to the intensive care unit. Their babies are more likely to be admitted to the neonatal unit.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42020178076.
READERS' NOTE
This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This version is update 1 of the original article published on 1 September 2020 (BMJ 2020;370:m3320), and previous updates can be found as data supplements (https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3320/related#datasupp). When citing this paper please consider adding the update number and date of access for clarity.
Topics: Betacoronavirus; COVID-19; Coronavirus Infections; Female; Global Health; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Intensive Care, Neonatal; Pandemics; Pneumonia, Viral; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Premature Birth; Prognosis; Risk Factors; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 32873575
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.m3320 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2017Current management of preterm prelabour rupture of the membranes (PPROM) involves either initiating birth soon after PPROM or, alternatively, adopting a 'wait and see'... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Current management of preterm prelabour rupture of the membranes (PPROM) involves either initiating birth soon after PPROM or, alternatively, adopting a 'wait and see' approach (expectant management). It is unclear which strategy is most beneficial for mothers and their babies. This is an update of a Cochrane review published in 2010 (Buchanan 2010).
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect of planned early birth versus expectant management for women with preterm prelabour rupture of the membranes between 24 and 37 weeks' gestation for fetal, infant and maternal well being.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (30 September 2016), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials comparing planned early birth with expectant management for women with PPROM prior to 37 weeks' gestation. We excluded quasi-randomised trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently evaluated trials for inclusion into the review and for methodological quality. Two review authors independently extracted data. We checked data for accuracy. We assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 trials in the review (3617 women and 3628 babies). For primary outcomes, we identified no clear differences between early birth and expectant management in neonatal sepsis (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 1.30, 12 trials, 3628 babies, evidence graded moderate), or proven neonatal infection with positive blood culture (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.21, seven trials, 2925 babies). However, early birth increased the incidence of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.53, 12 trials, 3622 babies, evidence graded high). Early birth was also associated with an increased rate of caesarean section (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.44, 12 trials, 3620 women, evidence graded high).Assessment of secondary perinatal outcomes showed no clear differences in overall perinatal mortality (RR 1.76, 95% CI 0.89 to 3.50, 11 trials, 3319 babies), or intrauterine deaths (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.57, 11 trials, 3321 babies) when comparing early birth with expectant management. However, early birth was associated with a higher rate of neonatal death (RR 2.55, 95% CI 1.17 to 5.56, 11 trials, 3316 babies) and need for ventilation (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.58, seven trials, 2895 babies, evidence graded high). Babies of women randomised to early birth were delivered at a gestational age lower than those randomised to expectant management (mean difference (MD) -0.48 weeks, 95% CI -0.57 to -0.39, eight trials, 3139 babies). Admission to neonatal intensive care was more likely for those babies randomised to early birth (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.24, four trials, 2691 babies, evidence graded moderate).In assessing secondary maternal outcomes, we found that early birth was associated with a decreased rate of chorioamnionitis (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.95, eight trials, 1358 women, evidence graded moderate), and an increased rate of endometritis (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.59, seven trials, 2980 women). As expected due to the intervention, women randomised to early birth had a higher chance of having an induction of labour (RR 2.18, 95% CI 2.01 to 2.36, four trials, 2691 women). Women randomised to early birth had a decreased total length of hospitalisation (MD -1.75 days, 95% CI -2.45 to -1.05, six trials, 2848 women, evidence graded moderate).Subgroup analyses indicated improved maternal and infant outcomes in expectant management in pregnancies greater than 34 weeks' gestation, specifically relating to RDS and maternal infections. The use of prophylactic antibiotics were shown to be effective in reducing maternal infections in women randomised to expectant management.Overall, we assessed all 12 studies as being at low or unclear risk of bias. Some studies lacked an adequate description of methods and the risk of bias could only be assessed as unclear. In five of the studies there were one and/or two domains where the risk of bias was judged as high. GRADE profiling showed the quality of evidence across all critical outcomes to be moderate to high.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
With the addition of five randomised controlled trials (2927 women) to this updated review, we found no clinically important difference in the incidence of neonatal sepsis between women who birth immediately and those managed expectantly in PPROM prior to 37 weeks' gestation. Early planned birth was associated with an increase in the incidence of neonatal RDS, need for ventilation, neonatal mortality, endometritis, admission to neonatal intensive care, and the likelihood of birth by caesarean section, but a decreased incidence of chorioamnionitis. Women randomised to early birth also had an increased risk of labour induction, but a decreased length of hospital stay. Babies of women randomised to early birth were more likely to be born at a lower gestational age.In women with PPROM before 37 weeks' gestation with no contraindications to continuing the pregnancy, a policy of expectant management with careful monitoring was associated with better outcomes for the mother and baby.The direction of future research should be aimed at determining which groups of women with PPROM would not benefit from expectant management. This could be determined by analysing subgroups according to gestational age at presentation, corticosteroid usage, and abnormal vaginal microbiological colonisation. Research should also evaluate long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes of infants.
Topics: Cesarean Section; Chorioamnionitis; Delivery, Obstetric; Female; Fetal Death; Fetal Membranes, Premature Rupture; Gestational Age; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Intensive Care Units, Neonatal; Labor Onset; Length of Stay; Perinatal Mortality; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn; Sepsis; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 28257562
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004735.pub4 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Jul 2018An indirect comparison meta-analysis published in 2013 reported that both vaginal progesterone and cerclage are equally efficacious for preventing preterm birth and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Vaginal progesterone is as effective as cervical cerclage to prevent preterm birth in women with a singleton gestation, previous spontaneous preterm birth, and a short cervix: updated indirect comparison meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
An indirect comparison meta-analysis published in 2013 reported that both vaginal progesterone and cerclage are equally efficacious for preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in women with a singleton gestation, previous spontaneous preterm birth, and a sonographic short cervix. The efficacy of vaginal progesterone has been challenged after publication of the OPPTIMUM study. However, this has been resolved by an individual patient-data meta-analysis (Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218:161-180).
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy of vaginal progesterone and cerclage in preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in women with a singleton gestation, previous spontaneous preterm birth, and a midtrimester sonographic short cervix.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and CINAHL (from their inception to March 2018); Cochrane databases, bibliographies, and conference proceedings.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials comparing vaginal progesterone to placebo/no treatment or cerclage to no cerclage in women with a singleton gestation, previous spontaneous preterm birth, and a sonographic cervical length <25 mm.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
Updated systematic review and adjusted indirect comparison meta-analysis of vaginal progesterone vs cerclage using placebo/no cerclage as the common comparator. The primary outcomes were preterm birth <35 weeks of gestation and perinatal mortality. Pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated.
RESULTS
Five trials comparing vaginal progesterone vs placebo (265 women) and 5 comparing cerclage vs no cerclage (504 women) were included. Vaginal progesterone, compared to placebo, significantly reduced the risk of preterm birth <35 and <32 weeks of gestation, composite perinatal morbidity/mortality, neonatal sepsis, composite neonatal morbidity, and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (RRs from 0.29 to 0.68). Cerclage, compared to no cerclage, significantly decreased the risk of preterm birth <37, <35, <32, and <28 weeks of gestation, composite perinatal morbidity/mortality, and birthweight <1500 g (RRs from 0.64 to 0.70). Adjusted indirect comparison meta-analyses did not show statistically significant differences between vaginal progesterone and cerclage in the reduction of preterm birth or adverse perinatal outcomes.
CONCLUSION
Vaginal progesterone and cerclage are equally effective for preventing preterm birth and improving perinatal outcomes in women with a singleton gestation, previous spontaneous preterm birth, and a midtrimester sonographic short cervix. The choice of treatment will depend on adverse events and cost-effectiveness of interventions and patient/physician's preferences.
Topics: Administration, Intravaginal; Cerclage, Cervical; Cervical Length Measurement; Female; Humans; Infant, Extremely Premature; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Infant, Very Low Birth Weight; Intensive Care Units, Neonatal; Neonatal Sepsis; Perinatal Mortality; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, Second; Pregnancy Trimester, Third; Premature Birth; Progesterone; Progestins; Secondary Prevention
PubMed: 29630885
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.03.028 -
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia E... Aug 2023To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes of women with singleton pregnancies, after spontaneous... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes of women with singleton pregnancies, after spontaneous conception, and with the diagnosis of amniotic sludge before 37 weeks of gestational age.
DATA SOURCES
We conducted a search on the PubMed, Cochrane, Bireme, and Theses databases until June 2022.
SELECTION OF STUDIES
Using the keywords or or , we found 263 articles, 132 of which were duplicates, and 70 were discarded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria.
DATA COLLECTION
The articles retrieved were analyzed by 2 reviewers; 61 were selected for full-text analysis, 18 were included for a qualitative analysis, and 14, for a quantitative analysis.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Among the maternal outcomes analyzed, there was an increased risk of preterm labor (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 1.45-2.03), premature rupture of ovular membranes (95%CI: 1.99-3.79), and clinical (95%CI: 1.41-6.19) and histological chorioamnionitis (95%CI: 1.75-3.12). Regarding the fetal outcomes, there was a significant increase in the risk of morbidity (95%CI: 1.80-3.17), mortality (95%CI: 1.14-18.57), admission to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU; 95%CI: 1.17-1.95), and neonatal sepsis (95%CI: 2.29-7.55).
CONCLUSION
The results of the present study indicate that the presence of amniotic sludge is a risk marker for preterm delivery. Despite the heterogeneity of the studies analyzed, even in patients with other risk factors for prematurity, such as short cervix and previous preterm delivery, the presence of amniotic sludge increases the risk of premature labor. Moreover, antibiotic therapy seems to be a treatment for amniotic sludge, and it may prolong pregnancy.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Female; Premature Birth; Sewage; Gestational Age; Risk Factors; Databases, Factual
PubMed: 37683661
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1772189 -
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association... May 2021
Meta-Analysis
Topics: COVID-19; Diabetes, Gestational; Female; Humans; Incidence; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth; Severity of Illness Index; Stillbirth
PubMed: 34059502
DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.202604-f -
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology :... Dec 2022Fetal heart-rate irregularities occur in 1-2% of pregnancies and are usually caused by premature atrial contractions (PAC). Although PAC are considered benign, they may... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Fetal heart-rate irregularities occur in 1-2% of pregnancies and are usually caused by premature atrial contractions (PAC). Although PAC are considered benign, they may be associated with cardiac defects and tachyarrhythmia. We aimed to determine the incidence of congenital heart defects (CHDs) and complications in fetuses with PAC.
METHODS
This was a systematic review and meta-analysis conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement for reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from 1990 to June 2021 to identify studies on fetuses with PAC. The primary outcome was CHD; secondary outcomes were complications using the endpoints supraventricular tachyarrhythmia (SVT), cardiac failure and intrauterine fetal demise. Meta-analysis of proportions was performed, subdivided into high-risk and low-risk populations based on reason for referral. Pooled incidences with 95% CIs were calculated.
RESULTS
Of 2443 unique articles identified, 19 cohort studies including 2260 fetuses were included. The pooled incidence of CHD in fetuses with PAC was 2.8% (95% CI, 1.5-4.1%), when 0.6% is the incidence expected in the general population. The pooled incidence of CHD was 7.2% (95% CI, 3.5-10.9%) in the high-risk population and 0.9% (95% CI, 0.0-2.0%) in the low-risk population. SVT occurred in 1.4% (95% CI, 0.6-3.4%) of fetuses diagnosed with PAC. Cardiac failure was described in 16 fetuses (1.4% (95% CI, 0.5-3.5%)), of which eight were CHD-related. Intrauterine fetal demise occurred in four fetuses (0.9% (95% CI, 0.5-1.7%)) and was related to CHD in two cases.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings suggest that the risk of CHD in fetuses with PAC is 4-5 times higher than that in the general population. CHD was present more frequently in the high-risk population. Consequently, an advanced ultrasound examination to diagnose PAC correctly and exclude CHD is recommended. Complications of PAC are rare but can result in fetal demise, thus weekly fetal heart-rate monitoring remains advisable to enable early detection of SVT and to prevent cardiac failure. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Fetal Diseases; Premature Birth; Fetal Death; Atrial Premature Complexes; Fetus; Tachycardia; Arrhythmias, Cardiac; Heart Failure
PubMed: 35763619
DOI: 10.1002/uog.26017 -
Nutrients Sep 2023Although gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) has several short- and long-term adverse effects on the mother and the offspring, no medicine is generally prescribed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Although gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) has several short- and long-term adverse effects on the mother and the offspring, no medicine is generally prescribed to prevent GDM. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effect of inositol supplementation in preventing GDM and related outcomes. Systematic search was performed in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase until 13 September 2023. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared the efficacy of inositols to placebo in pregnant women at high risk for GDM. Our primary outcome was the incidence of GDM, whereas secondary outcomes were oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and maternal and fetal complications. (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021284939). Eight eligible RCTs were identified, including the data of 1795 patients. The incidence of GDM was halved by inositols compared to placebo (RR = 0.42, CI: 0.26-0.67). Fasting, 1-h, and 2-h OGTT glucose levels were significantly decreased by inositols. The stereoisomer myoinositol also reduced the risk of insulin need (RR = 0.29, CI: 0.13-0.68), preeclampsia or gestational hypertension (RR = 0.38, CI: 0.2-0.71), preterm birth (RR = 0.44, CI: 0.22-0.88), and neonatal hypoglycemia (RR = 0.12, CI: 0.03-0.55). Myoinositol decrease the incidence of GDM in pregnancies high-risk for GDM. Moreover, myoinositol supplementation reduces the risk of insulin need, preeclampsia or gestational hypertension, preterm birth, and neonatal hypoglycemia. Based on the present study 2-4 g myoinositol canbe suggested from the first trimester to prevent GDM and related outcomes.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Female; Humans; Diabetes, Gestational; Premature Birth; Pre-Eclampsia; Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Hypoglycemia; Insulin; Inositol
PubMed: 37836508
DOI: 10.3390/nu15194224