-
Journal of Perinatal Medicine Sep 2023Although the vaccination against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS Cov-2) is considered safe during pregnancy, vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Although the vaccination against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS Cov-2) is considered safe during pregnancy, vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women is high. The results of published observational studies addressing the issue of Covid-19 vaccination's efficacy and safety during pregnancy need to be summarized.
CONTENT
This systematic review compares the incidence of major maternal and neonatal outcomes between SARS Cov-2 vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant women. The included studies enrolled pregnant women of any age and any trimester. Medline-Pubmed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and grey literature were searched until the 28th of May 2022, and 2,947 studies were found.
SUMMARY
Seven observational cohort studies, enrolling 67,274 pregnant women, were selected. When comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant women, SARS Cov-2 vaccines were not associated with major maternal and neonatal adverse events. The rate of SARS Cov-2 infections among vaccinated pregnant women compared to unvaccinated is significantly reduced by 43%.
OUTLOOK
SARS Cov-2 vaccination in pregnant women is effective and safe. The results are promising, but caution is advised due to some limitations: only observational studies addressing this issue were found. Parallelly, the enrolled populations and the intervention (vaccination type and the number of doses) were not homogeneous.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Female; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Vaccination; PubMed; SARS-CoV-2; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious
PubMed: 36800343
DOI: 10.1515/jpm-2022-0463 -
The Journal of Maternal-fetal &... Dec 2023To measure the prevalence of maternal anxiety, depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in those exposed to natural disasters.
OBJECTIVE
To measure the prevalence of maternal anxiety, depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in those exposed to natural disasters.
METHODS
A literature search of the PubMed database and www.clinicaltrials.gov from January 1990 through June 2020 was conducted. A PRISMA review of the available literature regarding the incidence and prevalence of maternal anxiety, depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) following natural disasters was performed. A natural disaster was defined as one of the following: pandemic, hurricane, earthquake and post-political conflict/displacement of people. Studies were selected that were population-based, prospective or retrospective. Case reports and case series were not used. The primary outcome was the prevalence of maternal anxiety, depression and PTSD in the post-disaster setting. Two independent extractors (I.F. & H.G.) assessed study quality using an adapted version of the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment tool. Given the small number of studies that met inclusion criteria, all 22 studies were included, regardless of rating. Data were extracted and aggregate rates of depression, anxiety, and PTSD were calculated to provide synthesized rates of maternal mental health conditions among participants.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 8357 pregnant or birthing persons in the antepartum and postpartum periods were studied. The prevalence of post-pandemic anxiety, depression and PTSD were calculated to be 48.2%, 27.3%, and 22.9%. Post-earthquake depression and PTSD rates were 38.8% and 22.4%. The prevalence of post-hurricane anxiety, depression and PTSD were 17.4%, 22.5%, and 8.2%. The rates of post-political conflict anxiety, depression and PTSD were 48.8%, 31.6% and 18.5%.
CONCLUSION
Given the high rates of anxiety, depression and PTSD among pregnant and birthing persons living through the challenges of natural disasters, obstetrician-gynecologists must be able to recognize this group of patients, and provide a greater degree of psychosocial support.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic; Depression; Retrospective Studies; Prospective Studies; Anxiety; Earthquakes
PubMed: 37031972
DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2023.2199345 -
BMJ Open Sep 2023We conducted a systematic review to evaluate associations between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes and maternal non-obstetric serious...
OBJECTIVE
We conducted a systematic review to evaluate associations between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes and maternal non-obstetric serious adverse events (SAEs), taking into consideration confounding and temporal biases.
METHODS
Electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE ALL, Embase Classic+Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched to June 2021 for observational studies assessing associations between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and maternal non-obstetric SAEs and adverse birth outcomes, including preterm birth, spontaneous abortion, stillbirth, small-for-gestational-age birth and congenital anomalies. Studies of live attenuated vaccines, single-arm cohort studies and abstract-only publications were excluded. Records were screened using a liberal accelerated approach initially, followed by a dual independent approach for full-text screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Pairwise meta-analyses were conducted, where two or more studies met methodological criteria for inclusion. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess evidence certainty.
RESULTS
Of 9443 records screened, 63 studies were included. Twenty-nine studies (24 cohort and 5 case-control) evaluated seasonal influenza vaccination (trivalent and/or quadrivalent) versus no vaccination and were the focus of our prioritised syntheses; 34 studies of pandemic vaccines (2009 A/H1N1 and others), combinations of pandemic and seasonal vaccines, and seasonal versus seasonal vaccines were also reviewed. Control for confounding and temporal biases was inconsistent across studies, limiting pooling of data. Meta-analyses for preterm birth, spontaneous abortion and small-for-gestational-age birth demonstrated no significant associations with seasonal influenza vaccination. Immortal time bias was observed in a sensitivity analysis of meta-analysing risk-based preterm birth data. In descriptive summaries for stillbirth, congenital anomalies and maternal non-obstetric SAEs, no significant association with increased risk was found in any studies. All evidence was of very low certainty.
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence of very low certainty suggests that seasonal influenza vaccination during pregnancy is not associated with adverse birth outcomes or maternal non-obstetric SAEs. Appropriate control of confounding and temporal biases in future studies would improve the evidence base.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Female; Pregnancy; Humans; Abortion, Spontaneous; Stillbirth; Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype; Influenza, Human; Premature Birth
PubMed: 37673449
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066182 -
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth Nov 2023To quantify the extent of incompleteness and misclassification of maternal and pregnancy related deaths, and to identify general and context-specific factors associated... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To quantify the extent of incompleteness and misclassification of maternal and pregnancy related deaths, and to identify general and context-specific factors associated with incompleteness and/or misclassification of maternal death data.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of incompleteness and/or misclassification of maternal and pregnancy-related deaths. We conducted a narrative synthesis to identify methods used to capture and classify maternal deaths, as well as general and context specific factors affecting the completeness and misclassification of maternal death recording. We conducted a meta-analysis of proportions to obtain estimates of incompleteness and misclassification of maternal death recording, overall and disaggregated by income and surveillance system types.
FINDINGS
Of 2872 title-abstracts identified, 29 were eligible for inclusions in the qualitative synthesis, and 20 in the meta-analysis. Included studies relied principally on record linkage and review for identifying deaths, and on review of medical records and verbal autopsies to correctly classify cause of death. Deaths to women towards the extremes of the reproductive age range, those not classified by a medical examiner or a coroner, and those from minority ethnic groups in their setting were more likely misclassified or unrecorded. In the meta-analysis, we found maternal death recording to be incomplete by 34% (95% CI: 28-48), with 60% sensitivity (95% CI: 31-81.). Overall, we found maternal mortality was under-estimated by 39% (95% CI: 30-48) due to incompleteness and/or misclassification. Reporting of deaths away from the intrapartum, due to indirect causes or occurring at home were less complete than their counterparts. There was substantial between and within group variability across most results.
CONCLUSION
Maternal deaths were under-estimated in almost all contexts, but the extent varied across settings. Countries should aim towards establishing Civil Registration and Vital Statistics systems where they are not instituted. Efforts to improve the completeness and accuracy of maternal cause of death recording, such as Confidential Enquiries into Maternal Deaths, are needed even where CRVS is considered to be well-functioning.
Topics: Pregnancy; Humans; Female; Maternal Death; Maternal Mortality; Reproduction; Family; Ethnicity; Cause of Death
PubMed: 37968585
DOI: 10.1186/s12884-023-06077-4 -
BMJ Global Health Oct 2023Maternal vaccination is a promising strategy to reduce the burden of vaccine-preventable diseases for mothers and infants. We aimed to provide an up-to-date overview of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Maternal vaccination is a promising strategy to reduce the burden of vaccine-preventable diseases for mothers and infants. We aimed to provide an up-to-date overview of the efficacy and safety of all available maternal vaccines.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov on 1 February 2022, for phase III and IV randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared maternal vaccination against any pathogen with placebo or no vaccination. Primary outcomes were laboratory-confirmed or clinically confirmed disease in mothers and infants. Secondary safety outcomes included intrauterine growth restriction, stillbirth, maternal death, preterm birth, congenital malformations and infant death. Random effects meta-analysis were used to calculate pooled risk ratio's (RR). Quality appraisal was performed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
RESULTS
Six RCTs on four maternal vaccines, influenza, tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis (Tdap), pneumococcal and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) were eligible. The overall risk of bias and certainty of evidence varied from low to high. Maternal influenza vaccination significantly reduced the number of laboratory-confirmed influenza cases (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.79, event rate 57 vs 98, 2 RCTs, n=6003, I=0%), and clinically confirmed influenza cases in mothers (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99, event rate 418 vs 472, 2 RCTs, n=6003, I=0%), and laboratory-confirmed influenza in infants (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.85, event rate 98 vs 148, 2 RCTs, n=5883, I=0%), although this was not significant for clinically confirmed influenza in infants (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.05, event rate 1371 vs 1378, 2 RCTs, n=5883, I=0%). No efficacy data were available on maternal Tdap vaccination. Maternal pneumococcal vaccination did not reduce laboratory-confirmed and clinically confirmed middle ear disease (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.02, event rate 9 vs 18, 1 RCT, n=133 and RR 0.88 95% CI 0.69 to 1.12, event rate 42 vs 47, 1 RCT, n=133, respectively), and clinically confirmed lower-respiratory tract infection (LRTI) (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.43, event rate 18 vs 34, 1 RCT, n=70) in infants. Maternal RSV vaccination did not reduce laboratory-confirmed RSV LRTI in infants (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.01, event rate 103 vs 71, 1 RCT, n=4527). There was no evidence of a significant effect of any of the maternal vaccines on the reported safety outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
The few RCTs with low event rates suggest that, depending on the type of maternal vaccine, the vaccine might effectively prevent disease and within its size does not show safety concerns in mothers and infants.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42021235115.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Female; Humans; Infant; Influenza, Human; Influenza Vaccines; Mothers; Vaccination; Respiratory Tract Infections; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37899087
DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012376 -
Scandinavian Journal of Surgery : SJS :... Sep 2023Non-obstetric surgery is fairly common in pregnant women. We performed a systematic review to update data on non-obstetric surgery in pregnant women. The aim of this... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Non-obstetric surgery is fairly common in pregnant women. We performed a systematic review to update data on non-obstetric surgery in pregnant women. The aim of this review was to evaluate the effects of non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy on pregnancy, fetal and maternal outcomes.
METHODS
A systematic literature search of MEDLINE and Scopus was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The search span was from January 2000 to November 2022. Thirty-six studies matched the inclusion criteria, and 24 publications were identified through reference mining; 60 studies were included in this review. Outcome measures were miscarriage, stillbirth, preterm birth, low birth weight, low Apgar score, and infant and maternal morbidity and mortality rates.
RESULTS
We obtained data for 80,205 women who underwent non-obstetric surgery and data for 16,655,486 women who did not undergo surgery during pregnancy. Prevalence of non-obstetric surgery was between 0.23% and 0.74% (median 0.37%). Appendectomy was the most common procedure with median prevalence of 0.10%. Near half (43%) of the procedures were performed during the second trimester, 32% during the first trimester, and 25% during the third trimester. Half of surgeries were scheduled, and half were emergent. Laparoscopic and open techniques were used equally for abdominal cavity. Women who underwent non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy had increased rate of stillbirth (odds ratio (OR) 2.0) and preterm birth (OR 2.1) compared to women without surgery. Surgery during pregnancy did not increase rate of miscarriage (OR 1.1), low 5 min Apgar scores (OR 1.1), the fetus being small for gestational age (OR 1.1) or congenital anomalies (OR 1.0).
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence of non-obstetric surgery has decreased during last decades, but still two out of 1000 pregnant women have scheduled surgery during pregnancy. Surgery during pregnancy increases the risk of stillbirth, and preterm birth. For abdominal cavity surgery, both laparoscopic and open approaches are feasible.
Topics: Infant; Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Female; Humans; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth; Stillbirth; Abortion, Spontaneous; Fetus
PubMed: 37329286
DOI: 10.1177/14574969231175569 -
Reproductive Toxicology (Elmsford, N.Y.) Sep 2023There is emerging evidence suggesting that folate status during pregnancy may play a role in fetal programming of metabolic disease. Therefore, this systematic review... (Review)
Review
There is emerging evidence suggesting that folate status during pregnancy may play a role in fetal programming of metabolic disease. Therefore, this systematic review aims to summarize and systematize the current evidence surrounding the relationship between maternal folate status during pregnancy and offspring metabolic programming, focusing on both animal and human studies. PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases were searched in order to identify studies conducted on pregnant women or in animals studying the association between maternal folate exposure and at least one metabolic syndrome outcome in offspring after birth (weight, blood pressure, glucose regulation parameters, triglycerides and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels). The quality of included studies was assessed using SYRCLE Risk of Bias Tools for animal studies and NHLBI Study Quality Assessment Tools for observational studies and randomized controlled trials. Among the 10 "good" or "fair" studies that investigated excessive folate exposure during the perigestational period, 7 animal studies and 1 human study reported a positive association with development of metabolic outcomes in offspring. On the other hand, 6 of the 7 "good" or "fair" included human studies compared adequate versus low folate exposure, showing a lack of association (n = 3) or a protective effect (n = 3) regarding offspring's dysmetabolism. In conclusion, there is strong evidence from animal trials suggesting that excessive folate intake in early phases of development programs for metabolic dysfunction. While human evidence regarding excessive maternal folate exposure is currently scarce, human studies suggest that folate adequacy in pregnancy is not detrimental for metabolic function of the offspring.
Topics: Animals; Pregnancy; Humans; Female; Folic Acid; Maternal Exposure
PubMed: 37442213
DOI: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2023.108439 -
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth Sep 2023There is a dearth of robust evidence regarding the correlation between psoriasis with maternal and neonatal outcomes, making it challenging to establish definitive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
There is a dearth of robust evidence regarding the correlation between psoriasis with maternal and neonatal outcomes, making it challenging to establish definitive recommendations for the management of these patients. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to review the evidence with regard to the impact of maternal psoriasis on maternal and neonatal outcomes.
METHODS
Following the PRISMA guideline, a systematic search of English articles using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library was conducted. The search was performed from inception to 22 of May 2022.
RESULT
A significant association was observed between psoriasis and maternal outcomes, including cesarean delivery [OR = 1.25 (95% CI: 1.13-1.30, p-value = 0.001)], (pre)eclampsia [OR = 1.29 (95% CI: 1.15-1.44, p-value = 0.0001)], gestational diabetes [Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.23 (95% Confidence Intervals (CI): 1.15-1.30, p-value = 0.001)], gestational hypertension [OR = 1.31 (95% CI: 1.18-1.45, p-value = 0.001)] and preterm birth [OR = 1.22 (95% CI: 1.10-1.35, p-value = 0.001)]. Also, there was a significant association between psoriasis and neonatal outcomes, including small for gestational age [OR = 1.07 (95% CI: 1.02-1.11, p-value = 0.053)], low birth weight [OR = 1.19 (95% CI: 1.02-1.38, p-value = 0.001)] and stillbirth [OR = 1.27 (95% CI: 1.04-1.55, p-value = 0.023)].
CONCLUSION
Maternal psoriasis could negatively impact maternal and neonatal outcomes. Our results strengthen the importance of close monitoring of the mothers' psoriasis status before and during pregnancy.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth; Stillbirth; Diabetes, Gestational; Pre-Eclampsia
PubMed: 37777747
DOI: 10.1186/s12884-023-06006-5 -
SAGE Open Medicine 2023Preeclampsia is one of the most frequent pregnancy disorders, with a global incidence of 2%-8%. Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D is an essential mineral for human health; some...
OBJECTIVES
Preeclampsia is one of the most frequent pregnancy disorders, with a global incidence of 2%-8%. Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D is an essential mineral for human health; some studies suggest link between 25-hydroxyvitamin D deficiency and preeclampsia, while others offer contradictory findings. Thus, the goal of this study is to evaluate the relationships between maternal 25- hydroxyvitamin D concentrations and the risk of preeclampsia. In addition to this, our study also evaluates the effects of 25- hydroxyvitamin D supplementation on the incidence of preeclampsia. Therefore, assessing 25- hydroxyvitamin D's potential as a possible intervention to lower the risk of preeclampsia.
METHODS
The Medline database was queried from inception until July 2021 for randomized controlled trials and observational studies without any restrictions. The studies assessing the association between 25-hydroxyvitamin D deficiency and preeclampsia and the impact of 25-hydroxyvitamin D supplementation on the incidence of preeclampsia were incorporated. The results were reported using a random-effects meta-analysis and the Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio. A -value of <0.05 was considered significant for the analysis.
RESULTS
This analysis includes 34 papers, including 10 randomized controlled trials and 24 observational studies. According to our pooled analysis, 25-hydroxyvitamin D supplementation was significantly associated with a lower risk of preeclampsia in pregnant women (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.40-0.63; = 0.00001), while 25-hydroxyvitamin D deficiency was significantly associated with an increased risk of preeclampsia (OR: 4.30; 95 % CI: 2.57-7.18; < 0.00001, OR: 1.71; 95 % Cl: 1.27-2.32; = 0.0005, OR 1.61; 95 % Cl: 1.21-2.16; = 0.001).
CONCLUSION
Results suggest that 25-hydroxyvitamin D has a significant relationship with preeclampsia as confirmed by the findings that low maternal 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations cause increased risk of preeclampsia while 25-hydroxyvitamin D supplementation reduces the incidence of preeclampsia. Our findings indicate that 25-hydroxyvitamin D supplementation can be used as a possible intervention strategy in preventing one of the most common causes of maternal mortality around the world, preeclampsia.
PubMed: 38020794
DOI: 10.1177/20503121231212093 -
Public Health Jul 2023Lockdown was implemented in many countries during the pandemic, which led to myriad changes in pregnant women's lives. However, the potential impacts of the COVID-19... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Lockdown was implemented in many countries during the pandemic, which led to myriad changes in pregnant women's lives. However, the potential impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on neonatal outcomes remain unclear. We aimed to evaluate the association between the pandemic and neonatal birth weight.
STUDY DESIGN
This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of the previous literature.
METHODS
We searched the MEDLINE and Embase databases up to May 2022 and extracted 36 eligible studies that compared neonatal birth weight between the pandemic and the prepandemic period. The following outcomes were included: mean birth weight, low birth weight (LBW), very low birth weight (VLBW), macrosomia, small for gestational age (SGA), very small for gestational age (VSGA), and large for gestational age (LGA). Statistical heterogeneity among studies was assessed to determine whether a random effects model or fixed effects model was conducted.
RESULTS
Of the 4514 studies identified, 36 articles were eligible for inclusion. A total of 1,883,936 neonates during the pandemic and 4,667,133 neonates during the prepandemic were reported. We identified a significant increase in mean birth weight (pooled mean difference [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 15.06 [10.36, 19.76], I = 0.0%, 12 studies) and a reduction in VLBW (pooled OR [95% CI] = 0.86 [0.77, 0.97], I = 55.4%, 12 studies). No overall effect was identified for other outcomes: LBW, macrosomia, SGA, VSGA, and LGA. There was publication bias for mean birth weight with a borderline significance (Egger's P = 0.050).
CONCLUSION
Pooled results showed the pandemic was significantly associated with an increase in mean birth weight and a reduction in VLBW, but not for other outcomes. This review provided clues about the indirect effects of the pandemic on neonatal birth weight and more healthcare measures needed to improve neonatal long-term health.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Birth Weight; Pregnancy Outcome; Pandemics; Fetal Macrosomia; COVID-19; Communicable Disease Control
PubMed: 37201437
DOI: 10.1016/j.puhe.2023.04.009