-
Human Reproduction Update Jan 2020Women diagnosed with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) suffer from an unfavorable cardiometabolic risk profile, which is already established by child-bearing age. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Women diagnosed with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) suffer from an unfavorable cardiometabolic risk profile, which is already established by child-bearing age.
OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE
The aim of this systematic review along with an individual participant data meta-analysis is to evaluate whether cardiometabolic features in the offspring (females and males aged 1-18 years) of women with PCOS (OPCOS) are less favorable compared to the offspring of healthy controls.
SEARCH METHODS
PubMed, Embase and gray literature databases were searched by three authors independently (M.N.G., M.A.W and J.C.) (last updated on 1 February 2018). Relevant key terms such as 'offspring' and 'PCOS' were combined. Outcomes were age-specific standardized scores of various cardiometabolic parameters: BMI, blood pressure, glucose, insulin, lipid profile and the sum scores of various cardiometabolic features (metabolic sum score). Linear mixed models were used for analyses with standardized beta (β) as outcome.
OUTCOMES
Nine relevant observational studies could be identified, which jointly included 1367 children: OPCOS and controls, originating from the Netherlands, Chile and the USA. After excluding neonates, duplicate records and follow-up screenings, a total of 885 subjects remained. In adjusted analyses, we observed that OPCOS (n = 298) exhibited increased plasma levels of fasting insulin (β = 0.21(95%CI: 0.01-0.41), P = 0.05), insulin-resistance (β = 0.21(95%CI: 0.01-0.42), P = 0.04), triglycerides (β = 0.19(95%CI: 0.02-0.36), P = 0.03) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol concentrations (β = 0.31(95%CI: 0.08-0.54), P < 0.01), but a reduced birthweight (β = -116(95%CI: -195 to 38), P < 0.01) compared to controls (n = 587). After correction for multiple testing, however, differences in insulin and triglycerides lost their statistical significance. Interaction tests for sex revealed differences between males and females when comparing OPCOS versus controls. A higher 2-hour fasting insulin was observed among female OPCOS versus female controls (estimated difference for females (βf) = 0.45(95%CI: 0.07 to 0.83)) compared to the estimated difference between males ((βm) = -0.20(95%CI: -0.58 to 0.19)), with interaction-test: P = 0.03. Low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol differences in OPCOS versus controls were lower among females (βf = -0.39(95%CI: -0.62 to 0.16)), but comparable between male OPCOS and male controls (βm = 0.27(95%CI: -0.03 to 0.57)), with interaction-test: P < 0.01. Total cholesterol differences in OPCOS versus controls were also lower in females compared to the difference in male OPCOS and male controls (βf = -0.31(95%CI: -0.57 to 0.06), βm = 0.28(95%CI: -0.01 to 0.56), interaction-test: P = 0.01). The difference in HDL-cholesterol among female OPCOS versus controls (βf = 0.53(95%CI: 0.18-0.88)) was larger compared to the estimated mean difference among OPCOS males and the male controls (βm = 0.13(95%CI: -0.05-0.31), interaction-test: P < 0.01). Interaction test in metabolic sum score revealed a significant difference between females (OPCOS versus controls) and males (OPCOS versus controls); however, sub analyses performed in both sexes separately did not reveal a difference among females (OPCOS versus controls: βf = -0.14(95%CI: -1.05 to 0.77)) or males (OPCOS versus controls: βm = 0.85(95%CI: -0.10 to 1.79)), with P-value < 0.01.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS
We observed subtle signs of altered cardiometabolic health in OPCOS. Therefore, the unfavorable cardiovascular profile of women with PCOS at childbearing age may-next to a genetic predisposition-influence the health of their offspring. Sensitivity analyses revealed that these differences were predominantly observed among female offspring aged between 1 and 18 years. Moreover, studies with minimal risk of bias should elucidate the influence of a PCOS diagnosis in mothers on both sexes during fetal development and subsequently during childhood.
Topics: Adolescent; Blood Glucose; Body Mass Index; Cardiovascular Diseases; Child; Child, Preschool; Cholesterol, HDL; Female; Humans; Infant; Insulin; Insulin Resistance; Male; Metabolome; Netherlands; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome; Triglycerides
PubMed: 31867675
DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmz036 -
Reproductive Biomedicine Online Sep 2021The optimal time interval between myomectomy and pregnancy is unclear and no specific guidelines exist. The aim of this review was to study the time interval from...
The optimal time interval between myomectomy and pregnancy is unclear and no specific guidelines exist. The aim of this review was to study the time interval from myomectomy to pregnancy and the occurrence of uterine rupture after myomectomy. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies and retrospective studies were used to assess the primary objective, and case reports, cases series or letters to the editor for the secondary objective. Only articles reporting myomectomy performed via the vaginal route, laparotomy, laparoscopy or robot-assisted surgery were selected for inclusion. Among 3852 women who wanted to become pregnant after the surgery, 2889 became pregnant, accounting for 3000 pregnancies (77.9%) and 2097 live births (54.4%). Mean time between myomectomy and pregnancy was estimated at 17.6 months (SD 9.2) for 2451 pregnant women. Among 1016 women, a third were advised to delay attempting to conceive for between 3 and 6 months and another third for between 6 and 12 months. A total of 70 spontaneous uterine ruptures with a mean gestational age of 31 weeks at occurrence were identified. No linear relationship was found between gestational age at the event and time interval from myomectomy to conception (P = 0.706). There are insufficient data to advise a minimal time interval between myomectomy and conception.
Topics: Directive Counseling; Female; Fertilization; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Laparoscopy; Preconception Care; Pregnancy; Time Factors; Time-to-Pregnancy; Uterine Myomectomy
PubMed: 34353724
DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2021.05.016 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2019The hypertensive disorders of pregnancy include pre-eclampsia, gestational hypertension, chronic hypertension, and undefined hypertension. Pre-eclampsia is considerably...
BACKGROUND
The hypertensive disorders of pregnancy include pre-eclampsia, gestational hypertension, chronic hypertension, and undefined hypertension. Pre-eclampsia is considerably more prevalent in low-income than in high-income countries. One possible explanation for this discrepancy is dietary differences, particularly calcium deficiency. Calcium supplementation in the second half of pregnancy reduces the serious consequences of pre-eclampsia, but has limited effect on the overall risk of pre-eclampsia. It is important to establish whether calcium supplementation before, and in early pregnancy (before 20 weeks' gestation) has added benefit. Such evidence could count towards justification of population-level interventions to improve dietary calcium intake, including fortification of staple foods with calcium, especially in contexts where dietary calcium intake is known to be inadequate. This is an update of a review first published in 2017.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effect of calcium supplementation, given before or early in pregnancy and for at least the first half of pregnancy, on pre-eclampsia and other hypertensive disorders, maternal morbidity and mortality, and fetal and neonatal outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Trials Register (31 July 2018), PubMed (13 July 2018), ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; 31 July 2018), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCT) of calcium supplementation, including women not yet pregnant, or women in early pregnancy. Cluster-RCTs, quasi-RCTs, and trials published as abstracts were eligible, but we did not identify any.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data, and checked them for accuracy. They assessed the quality of the evidence for key outcomes using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Calcium versus placeboWe included one study (1355 women), which took place across multiple hospital sites in Argentina, South Africa, and Zimbabwe. Most analyses were conducted only on 633 women from this group who were known to have conceived, or on 579 who reached 20 weeks' gestation; the trial was at moderate risk of bias due to high attrition rates pre-conception. Non-pregnant women with previous pre-eclampsia received either calcium 500 mg daily or placebo, from enrolment until 20 weeks' gestation. All participants received calcium 1.5 g daily from 20 weeks until birth.Primary outcomes: calcium supplementation commencing before conception may make little or no difference to the risk of pre-eclampsia (69/296 versus 82/283, risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.06; low-quality evidence). For pre-eclampsia or pregnancy loss or stillbirth (or both) at any gestational age, calcium may slightly reduce the risk of this composite outcome, however the 95% CI met the line of no effect (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.00; low-quality evidence). Supplementation may make little or no difference to the severe maternal morbidity and mortality index (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.26; low-quality evidence), pregnancy loss or stillbirth at any gestational age (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.61 to 1,14; low-quality evidence), or caesarean section (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.96 to 1,28; low-quality evidence).Calcium supplementation may make little or no difference to the following secondary outcomes: birthweight < 2500 g (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.30; low-quality evidence), preterm birth < 37 weeks (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.10), early preterm birth < 32 weeks (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.12), and pregnancy loss, stillbirth or neonatal death before discharge (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.10; low-quality evidence), no conception, gestational hypertension, gestational proteinuria, severe gestational hypertension, severe pre-eclampsia, severe pre-eclamptic complications index. There was no clear evidence on whether or not calcium might make a difference to perinatal death, or neonatal intensive care unit admission for > 24h, or both (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.60; low-quality evidence).It is unclear what impact calcium supplementation has on Apgar score < 7 at five minutes (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.21; very low-quality evidence), stillbirth, early onset pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, placental abruption, intensive care unit admission > 24 hours, maternal death, hospital stay > 7 days from birth, and pregnancy loss before 20 weeks' gestation.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The single included study suggested that calcium supplementation before and early in pregnancy may reduce the risk of women experiencing the composite outcome pre-eclampsia or pregnancy loss at any gestational age, but the results are inconclusive for all other outcomes for women and babies. Therefore, current evidence neither supports nor refutes the routine use of calcium supplementation before conception and in early pregnancy.To determine the overall benefit of calcium supplementation commenced before or in early pregnancy, the effects found in the study of calcium supplementation limited to the first half of pregnancy need to be added to the known benefits of calcium supplementation in the second half of pregnancy.Further research is needed to confirm whether initiating calcium supplementation pre- or in early pregnancy is associated with a reduction in adverse pregnancy outcomes for mother and baby. Research could also address the acceptability of the intervention to women, which was not covered by this review update.
Topics: Calcium, Dietary; Dietary Supplements; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Cardiovascular; Premature Birth; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31523806
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011192.pub3 -
Acta Neurochirurgica Jul 2020The optimal management of Chiari I malformation during pregnancy remains uncertain. Labor contractions, which increase intracranial pressure, and neuraxial anesthesia...
BACKGROUND
The optimal management of Chiari I malformation during pregnancy remains uncertain. Labor contractions, which increase intracranial pressure, and neuraxial anesthesia both carry the theoretical risk of brainstem herniation given the altered CSF dynamics inherent to the condition. Mode of delivery and planned anesthesia, therefore, require forethought to avoid potentially life-threatening complications. Since the assumed potential risks are significant, we seek to systematically review published literature regarding Chiari I malformation in pregnancy and, therefore, to establish a best practice recommendation based on available evidence.
METHODS
The English-language literature was systematically reviewed from 1991 to 2018 according to PRISMA guidelines to assess all pregnancies reported in patients with Chiari I malformation. After analysis, a total of 34 patients and 35 deliveries were included in this investigation. Additionally, a single case from our institutional experience is presented for illustrative purposes but not included in the statistical analysis.
RESULTS
No instances of brain herniation during pregnancy in patients with Chiari I malformation were reported. Cesarean deliveries (51%) and vaginal deliveries (49%) under neuraxial blockade and general anesthesia were both reported as safe and suitable modes of delivery. Across all publications, only one patient experienced a worsening of neurologic symptoms, which was only later discovered to be the result of a previously undiagnosed Chiari I malformation. Several patients underwent decompressive suboccipital craniectomy to treat the Chiari I malformation during the preconception period (31%), during pregnancy (3%), and after birth (6%). Specific data regarding maternal management were not reported for a large number (21) of these patients (60%). Aside from one abortion in our own institutional experience, there was no report of any therapeutic abortion or of adverse fetal outcome.
CONCLUSIONS
Although devastating maternal complications are frequently feared, very few adverse outcomes have ever been reported in pregnant patients with a Chiari I malformation. The available evidence is, however, rather limited. Based on our survey of available data, we recommend vaginal delivery under neuraxial blockade for truly asymptomatic patients. Furthermore, based on our own experience and physiological conceptual considerations, we recommend limiting maternal Valsalva efforts either via Cesarean delivery under regional or general anesthesia or by choosing assisted vaginal delivery under neuraxial blockade. There is no compelling reason to offer suboccipital decompression for Chiari I malformation during pregnancy. For patients with significant neurologic symptoms prior to conception, decompression prior to pregnancy should be considered.
Topics: Adult; Arnold-Chiari Malformation; Craniotomy; Decompression, Surgical; Delivery, Obstetric; Female; Humans; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Outcome
PubMed: 32306160
DOI: 10.1007/s00701-020-04308-7