-
Obesity Research & Clinical Practice 2021Systematic review and meta-analysis conducted to investigate the effect of stratified pre-pregnancy maternal body mass index on twenty maternal and fetal/neonatal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Systematic review and meta-analysis conducted to investigate the effect of stratified pre-pregnancy maternal body mass index on twenty maternal and fetal/neonatal adverse outcomes.
METHODS
PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, Embase, Web of Science databases were searched from inception till July 11, 2020. Cohort studies were included. The pooled odds ratio with 95% confidence interval was reported considering the random effect and the quality effect model. The sub-group analysis and meta-regression were conducted for BMI cut-offs, geographical region, source of BMI, and sample size.
RESULTS
Overall, 86 studies representing 20,328,777 pregnant women were included in this meta-analysis. Our study reveals that overweight and obese mothers are at increased odds of cesarean delivery, elective cesarean delivery, emergency cesarean delivery, gestational diabetes, gestational hypertension, induction of labor, postpartum hemorrhage, pre-eclampsia, pre-term premature rupture of membrane, and the fetuses/neonates of overweight and obese mothers are at increased risk of admission in the newborn intensive care unit, APGAR scores less than 7 at 5 min, large for gestational age, macrosomia, extreme pre-term birth in pregnant mothers compared with standard BMI mothers. However, the underweight mothers showed increased odds for small for gestational age infant and pre-term birth, whereas obese mothers were at higher risk for post-term birth and stillbirths. The subgroup and meta-regression analyses have shown the impact of BMI cut-offs, geographical region, source of BMI, and sample size on several maternal, fetal/neonatal adverse outcomes.
CONCLUSION
The meta-analysis confirmed the association of elevated pre-pregnancy maternal BMI with higher odds of adverse maternal and fetal/neonatal outcomes.
Topics: Body Mass Index; Diabetes, Gestational; Female; Fetal Macrosomia; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth
PubMed: 34782256
DOI: 10.1016/j.orcp.2021.10.005 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2021Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with a range of adverse pregnancy outcomes for mother and infant. The prevention of GDM using lifestyle interventions... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with a range of adverse pregnancy outcomes for mother and infant. The prevention of GDM using lifestyle interventions has proven difficult. The gut microbiome (the composite of bacteria present in the intestines) influences host inflammatory pathways, glucose and lipid metabolism and, in other settings, alteration of the gut microbiome has been shown to impact on these host responses. Probiotics are one way of altering the gut microbiome but little is known about their use in influencing the metabolic environment of pregnancy. This is an update of a review last published in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To systematically assess the effects of probiotic supplements used either alone or in combination with pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions on the prevention of GDM.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (20 March 2020), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and cluster-randomised trials comparing the use of probiotic supplementation with either placebo or diet for the prevention of the development of GDM. Cluster-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion but none were identified. Quasi-randomised and cross-over design studies were not eligible for inclusion in this review. Studies presented only as abstracts with no subsequent full report of study results were only included if study authors confirmed that data in the abstract came from the final analysis. Otherwise, the abstract was left awaiting classification.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. Data were checked for accuracy.
MAIN RESULTS
In this update, we included seven trials with 1647 participants. Two studies were in overweight and obese women, two in obese women and three did not exclude women based on their weight. All included studies compared probiotics with placebo. The included studies were at low risk of bias overall except for one study that had an unclear risk of bias. We excluded two studies, eight studies were ongoing and three studies are awaiting classification. Six included studies with 1440 participants evaluated the risk of GDM. It is uncertain if probiotics have any effect on the risk of GDM compared to placebo (mean risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 1.20; 6 studies, 1440 women; low-certainty evidence). The evidence was low certainty due to substantial heterogeneity and wide CIs that included both appreciable benefit and appreciable harm. Probiotics increase the risk of pre-eclampsia compared to placebo (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.29; 4 studies, 955 women; high-certainty evidence) and may increase the risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.01, 4 studies, 955 women), although the CIs for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy also indicated probiotics may have no effect. There were few differences between groups for other primary outcomes. Probiotics make little to no difference in the risk of caesarean section (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.17; 6 studies, 1520 women; high-certainty evidence), and probably make little to no difference in maternal weight gain during pregnancy (MD 0.30 kg, 95% CI -0.67 to 1.26; 4 studies, 853 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Probiotics probably make little to no difference in the incidence of large-for-gestational age infants (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.36; 4 studies, 919 infants; moderate-certainty evidence) and may make little to no difference in neonatal adiposity (2 studies, 320 infants; data not pooled; low-certainty evidence). One study reported adiposity as fat mass (MD -0.04 kg, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.04), and one study reported adiposity as percentage fat (MD -0.10%, 95% CI -1.19 to 0.99). We do not know the effect of probiotics on perinatal mortality (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.02; 3 studies, 709 infants; low-certainty evidence), a composite measure of neonatal morbidity (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.35; 2 studies, 623 infants; low-certainty evidence), or neonatal hypoglycaemia (mean RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.92; 2 studies, 586 infants; low-certainty evidence). No included studies reported on perineal trauma, postnatal depression, maternal and infant development of diabetes or neurosensory disability.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low-certainty evidence from six trials has not clearly identified the effect of probiotics on the risk of GDM. However, high-certainty evidence suggests there is an increased risk of pre-eclampsia with probiotic administration. There were no other clear differences between probiotics and placebo among the other primary outcomes. The certainty of evidence for this review's primary outcomes ranged from low to high, with downgrading due to concerns about substantial heterogeneity between studies, wide CIs and low event rates. Given the risk of harm and little observed benefit, we urge caution in using probiotics during pregnancy. The apparent effect of probiotics on pre-eclampsia warrants particular consideration. Eight studies are currently ongoing, and we suggest that these studies take particular care in follow-up and examination of the effect on pre-eclampsia and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. In addition, the underlying potential physiology of the relationship between probiotics and pre-eclampsia risk should be considered.
Topics: Bias; Cesarean Section; Diabetes, Gestational; Female; Humans; Obesity; Overweight; Placebos; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Probiotics; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33870484
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009951.pub3 -
Obstetrics and Gynecology Apr 2022To estimate the optimal duration of postpartum magnesium sulphate to prevent eclampsia. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the optimal duration of postpartum magnesium sulphate to prevent eclampsia.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched from inception until January 2020 and limited to English-language human randomized controlled trials. Search strategy included the key works "eclampsia," "magnesium sulphate," and "postpartum."
METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION
Title, abstract, and full-text review was performed using Covidence data-management software. Of the 3,629 articles screened, 10 studies were included in the final review. Studies were included if they compared two different time points of magnesium sulphate postpartum in women with either preeclampsia or eclampsia.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION AND RESULTS
Two authors reviewed studies independently. RevMan software was used to calculate risk difference (RD) for categorical outcomes and mean difference for continuous outcomes. Shorter duration of magnesium sulphate (12 hours or less) was not associated with increased risk of eclampsia compared with 24-hour postpartum regimens (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.01, I2 70%). Studies randomizing women with preeclampsia did not show increased risk of eclampsia with shorter regimens (RD 0, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01, I2 0%), nor did trials randomizing those with eclampsia (RD -0.04, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.07, I2 87%). Secondary outcomes, including flushing, duration of Foley catheter insertion, time to ambulation, and duration of hospital stay, were all reduced with shorter-duration magnesium sulphate.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that a shorter duration of postpartum magnesium sulphate does not increase the risk for eclamptic seizure; however, data remain underpowered to render firm conclusions.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO, CRD42020182432.
Topics: Eclampsia; Female; Humans; Magnesium Sulfate; Postpartum Period; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy
PubMed: 35271534
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004720 -
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association... Apr 2021The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on maternal and newborn health is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the association between severe acute respiratory... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on maternal and newborn health is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the association between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection during pregnancy and adverse pregnancy outcomes.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies with comparison data on SARS-CoV-2 infection and severity of COVID-19 during pregnancy. We searched for eligible studies in MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, medRxiv and Cochrane databases up to Jan. 29, 2021, using Medical Subject Headings terms and keywords for "severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 OR SARS-CoV-2 OR coronavirus disease 2019 OR COVID-19" AND "pregnancy." We evaluated the methodologic quality of all included studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Our primary outcomes were preeclampsia and preterm birth. Secondary outcomes included stillbirth, gestational diabetes and other pregnancy outcomes. We calculated summary odds ratios (ORs) or weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS
We included 42 studies involving 438 548 people who were pregnant. Compared with no SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy, COVID-19 was associated with preeclampsia (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.73), preterm birth (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.39) and stillbirth (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.90). Compared with mild COVID-19, severe COVID-19 was strongly associated with preeclampsia (OR 4.16, 95% CI 1.55 to 11.15), preterm birth (OR 4.29, 95% CI 2.41 to 7.63), gestational diabetes (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.09 to 3.64) and low birth weight (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.12).
INTERPRETATION
COVID-19 may be associated with increased risks of preeclampsia, preterm birth and other adverse pregnancy outcomes.
Topics: COVID-19; Diabetes, Gestational; Female; Humans; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Infant, Newborn; Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical; Observational Studies as Topic; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth; SARS-CoV-2; Stillbirth
PubMed: 33741725
DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.202604 -
PloS One 2020Prediction models for gestational hypertension and preeclampsia have been developed with data and assumptions from developed countries. Their suitability and application...
INTRODUCTION
Prediction models for gestational hypertension and preeclampsia have been developed with data and assumptions from developed countries. Their suitability and application for low resource settings have not been tested. This review aimed to identify and assess the methodological quality of prediction models for gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia with reference to their application in low resource settings.
METHODS
Using combinations of keywords for gestational hypertension, preeclampsia and prediction models seven databases were searched to identify prediction models developed with maternal data obtained before 20 weeks of pregnancy and including at least three predictors (Prospero registration CRD 42017078786). Prediction model characteristics and performance measures were extracted using the CHARMS, STROBE and TRIPOD checklists. The National Institute of Health quality assessment tools for observational cohort and cross-sectional studies were used for study quality appraisal.
RESULTS
We retrieved 8,309 articles out of which 40 articles were eligible for review. Seventy-seven percent of all the prediction models combined biomarkers with maternal clinical characteristics. Biomarkers used as predictors in most models were pregnancy associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) and placental growth factor (PlGF). Only five studies were conducted in a low-and middle income country.
CONCLUSIONS
Most of the studies evaluated did not completely follow the CHARMS, TRIPOD and STROBE guidelines in prediction model development and reporting. Adherence to these guidelines will improve prediction modelling studies and subsequent application of prediction models in clinical practice. Prediction models using maternal characteristics, with good discrimination and calibration, should be externally validated for use in low and middle income countries where biomarker assays are not routinely available.
Topics: Biomarkers; Cohort Studies; Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Humans; Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced; Placenta Growth Factor; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy-Associated Plasma Protein-A
PubMed: 32315307
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230955 -
The Lancet. Psychiatry Nov 2020Many potential environmental risk factors, environmental protective factors, and peripheral biomarkers for ADHD have been investigated, but the consistency and magnitude... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Many potential environmental risk factors, environmental protective factors, and peripheral biomarkers for ADHD have been investigated, but the consistency and magnitude of their effects are unclear. We aimed to systematically appraise the published evidence of association between potential risk factors, protective factors, or peripheral biomarkers, and ADHD.
METHODS
In this umbrella review of meta-analyses, we searched PubMed including MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, from database inception to Oct 31, 2019, and screened the references of relevant articles. We included systematic reviews that provided meta-analyses of observational studies that examined associations of potential environmental risk factors, environmental protective factors, or peripheral biomarkers with diagnosis of ADHD. We included meta-analyses that used categorical ADHD diagnosis criteria according to DSM, hyperkinetic disorder according to ICD, or criteria that were less rigorous than DSM or ICD, such as self-report. We excluded articles that did not examine environmental risk factors, environmental protective factors, or peripheral biomarkers of ADHD; articles that did not include a meta-analysis; and articles that did not present enough data for re-analysis. We excluded non-human studies, primary studies, genetic studies, and conference abstracts. We calculated summary effect estimates (odds ratio [OR], relative risk [RR], weighted mean difference [WMD], Cohen's d, and Hedges' g), 95% CI, heterogeneity I statistic, 95% prediction interval, small study effects, and excess significance biases. We did analyses under credibility ceilings, and assessed the quality of the meta-analyses with AMSTAR 2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2). This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42019145032.
FINDINGS
We identified 1839 articles, of which 35 were eligible for inclusion. These 35 articles yielded 63 meta-analyses encompassing 40 environmental risk factors and environmental protective factors (median cases 16 850, median population 91 954) and 23 peripheral biomarkers (median cases 175, median controls 187). Evidence of association was convincing (class I) for maternal pre-pregnancy obesity (OR 1·63, 95% CI 1·49 to 1·77), childhood eczema (1·31, 1·20 to 1·44), hypertensive disorders during pregnancy (1·29, 1·22 to 1·36), pre-eclampsia (1·28, 1·21 to 1·35), and maternal acetaminophen exposure during pregnancy (RR 1·25, 95% CI 1·17 to 1·34). Evidence of association was highly suggestive (class II) for maternal smoking during pregnancy (OR 1·6, 95% CI 1·45 to 1·76), childhood asthma (1·51, 1·4 to 1·63), maternal pre-pregnancy overweight (1·28, 1·21 to 1·35), and serum vitamin D (WMD -6·93, 95% CI -9·34 to -4·51).
INTERPRETATION
Maternal pre-pregnancy obesity and overweight; pre-eclampsia, hypertension, acetaminophen exposure, and smoking during pregnancy; and childhood atopic diseases were strongly associated with ADHD. Previous familial studies suggest that maternal pre-pregnancy obesity, overweight, and smoking during pregnancy are confounded by familial or genetic factors, and further high-quality studies are therefore required to establish causality.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Biomarkers; Female; Humans; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects; Protective Factors; Risk Factors
PubMed: 33069318
DOI: 10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30312-6 -
Reproductive Biomedicine Online Jan 2021This study aimed to investigate the association of adenomyosis with fertility, pregnancy and neonatal outcomes. An electronic search was conducted using the MEDLINE,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This study aimed to investigate the association of adenomyosis with fertility, pregnancy and neonatal outcomes. An electronic search was conducted using the MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane databases up to April 2020. Seventeen observational studies were included. Adenomyosis was significantly associated with a lower clinical pregnancy rate (odds ratio [OR] 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-0.94) and higher miscarriage rate (OR 2.17; 95% CI 1.25-3.79) after treatment with assisted reproductive technology (ART). The lower clinical pregnancy rate was more significant in the subgroup of patients with short down-regulation protocols. Similar associations were recorded after age adjustment. Adenomyosis was also significantly associated with an increased risk of pre-eclampsia, preterm delivery, Caesarean section, fetal malpresentation, small for gestational age infancy and post-partum haemorrhage, which was confirmed after correction for age and mode of conception. In conclusion, adenomyosis is associated with negative effects on fertility after ART. The potentially protective role of the ultra-long down-regulation protocols needs further evaluation in randomized controlled studies. Adenomyosis is also associated (independently of the mode of conception) with adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes. Proper counselling prior to ART and close monitoring of pregnancy in patients with adenomyosis should be recommended.
Topics: Adenomyosis; Female; Fertility; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Infertility, Female; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Outcome; Pregnancy Rate; Reproductive Techniques, Assisted
PubMed: 33191131
DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.09.023 -
American Journal of Obstetrics &... Feb 2023This study aimed to investigate the potential role of aspirin in reducing the risk of preeclampsia and adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes in twin pregnancies. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to investigate the potential role of aspirin in reducing the risk of preeclampsia and adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes in twin pregnancies.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, Google Scholar, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrial.gov databases were searched.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
The search and selection criteria were restricted to the English language.
METHODS
The primary outcome was the incidence of preeclampsia. The secondary outcomes included gestational hypertension; fetal growth restriction; preterm birth, either spontaneous or iatrogenic, before 34 weeks of gestation; gestational age at birth; neonatal birthweight; and adverse events secondary to the administration of aspirin, including antepartum and postpartum hemorrhage. In addition, subgroup analyses according to chorionicity (dichorionic vs monochorionic), aspirin dose, and gestational age at administration of aspirin (<16 vs ≥16 weeks of gestation) and considering only studies with a daily aspirin dose of ≥100 mg/d were performed. Head-to-head meta-analyses reporting results as summary odds ratios and mean differences were used to analyze categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Quality assessment for randomized controlled trials was independently performed by 2 researchers based on the risk of bias that was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. The conclusion of the meta-analysis on the primary outcome was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.
RESULTS
Overall, 9 studies (2273 twin pregnancies) were included. When considering all studies, the risk of preeclampsia was lower in twin pregnancies treated with aspirin than in those not treated with aspirin (odds ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.85; P=.003), although there was no significant difference in the risk of gestational hypertension (P=.987), fetal growth restriction (P=.9), or adverse maternal and perinatal events (P=.9) in twin pregnancies treated with aspirin compared with those not treated with aspirin. There was no significant difference in the gestational age at birth (P=.2) and neonatal birthweight (P=.06) between women receiving aspirin and those not receiving aspirin. When considering only studies with an aspirin dose of >100 mg/d, the risk of preeclampsia (odds ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.86; P=.02) was significantly lower in pregnancies receiving aspirin than in those not receiving aspirin, Conversely, there was no significant difference in the risk of gestational hypertension (P=.20), fetal growth restriction (P=.1), gestational age at birth (P=.06), and neonatal weight (P=.05) between the 2 groups. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the risk of preeclampsia when considering only studies with an aspirin dose of >80 mg/d (P=.611). The association between the administration of aspirin and preeclampsia persisted when considering an aspirin dose of >100 mg/day or when the medication was started before 16 weeks of gestation. The overall quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation assessment was low.
CONCLUSION
The administration of aspirin in women with twin pregnancies reduced the risk of preeclampsia. The findings from this study highlighted the need for randomized controlled trials elucidating the actual role of aspirin in affecting maternal and perinatal outcomes in twin pregnancies.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Female; Humans; Pregnancy, Twin; Aspirin; Pre-Eclampsia; Birth Weight; Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced; Fetal Growth Retardation; Premature Birth
PubMed: 36402356
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2022.100803 -
International Journal of Environmental... Jun 2023The aim was to compare the effects of different exercise modalities (aerobic, resistance, aerobic and resistance combined, or mind-body exercise) on gestational diabetes... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The Effects of Exercise during Pregnancy on Gestational Diabetes Mellitus, Preeclampsia, and Spontaneous Abortion among Healthy Women-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
The aim was to compare the effects of different exercise modalities (aerobic, resistance, aerobic and resistance combined, or mind-body exercise) on gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), preeclampsia, spontaneous abortion, withdrawal from the study, and adverse events in healthy pregnant women. A systematic search was conducted in February 2022 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and SPORT Discus to identify eligible randomized trials. The meta-analysis of 18 studies that examined exercise compared to no exercise showed a reduced risk of GDM (RR: 0.66 (95% CI: 0.50 to 0.86)). No subgroup differences were found regarding modality, intensity, or supervision. Exercise did not reduce the risk of preeclampsia (nine studies, RR: 0.65 (95% CI: 0.42 to 1.03)); however, in subgroup analyses, mind-body exercise and low-intensity exercise seemed to be effective in reduction of preeclampsia. There was no effect of exercise on withdrawal or adverse events found. No studies reported on spontaneous abortion, therefore, exercise during pregnancy is beneficial and safe. In the prevention of GDM, any modality and intensity seem equally effective. Subgroup analyses support an association between mind-body exercise and physical activity with low intensity and reduced risk of preeclampsia, but more high-quality randomized studies are needed. PROSPERO: CRD42022307053.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Diabetes, Gestational; Pre-Eclampsia; Abortion, Spontaneous; Exercise; Exercise Therapy
PubMed: 37372656
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20126069 -
Clinical Nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland) Jun 2020Maternal vitamin D deficiency has been associated with an increased risk for preeclampsia. Despite this, the current evidence regarding the efficacy of vitamin D... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Maternal vitamin D deficiency has been associated with an increased risk for preeclampsia. Despite this, the current evidence regarding the efficacy of vitamin D supplementation in preventing preeclampsia is controversial. To assess the impact of vitamin D supplementation on the risk of preeclampsia, we performed a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis of the available randomized clinical trials (RCTs).
METHODS
The primary outcome was preeclampsia. Subgroup analyses were carried out considering the timing of the supplementation, type of intervention and the study design. Meta-regression analysis, including the amount of vitamin D and maternal age, were planned to explore heterogeneity (PROSPERO database registration number: CRD42019119207).
RESULTS
Data were pooled from 27 RCTs comprising 59 arms, which included overall 4777 participants, of whom 2487 were in the vitamin D-treated arm and 2290 in the control arm. Vitamin D administration in pregnancy was associated with a reduced risk of preeclampsia (odd ratio [OR] 0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.26, 0.52; I = 0%). If the vitamin D supplementation was started up to 20 weeks' gestation, the odds was a little lower (OR 0.35, 95% CI: 0.24, 0.50, p < 0.001). The effect was largely independent of the supplementation cessation (until delivery or not), type of intervention (vitamin D alone or in association with calcium), and study design. Increasing dose of vitamin D was associated with reduced incidence of preeclampsia (slope of log OR: -1.1, 95% CI: -1.73, -0.46; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
Results suggest that vitamin D supplementation may be useful in preventing preeclampsia. These data are especially useful for health-care providers who engage in the management of pregnant women at risk for preeclampsia. Our findings are a call for action to definitively address vitamin D supplementation as a possible intervention strategy in preventing preeclampsia in pregnancy.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Avitaminosis; Dietary Supplements; Female; Humans; Incidence; Middle Aged; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Protective Factors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome; Vitamin D; Young Adult
PubMed: 31526611
DOI: 10.1016/j.clnu.2019.08.015