-
International Journal of Environmental... Aug 2022Pregestational type 1 (T1DM) and type 2 (T2DM) diabetes mellitus and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are associated with increased rates of adverse maternal and... (Review)
Review
Pregestational type 1 (T1DM) and type 2 (T2DM) diabetes mellitus and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are associated with increased rates of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Adverse outcomes are more common in women with pregestational diabetes compared to GDM; although, conflicting results have been reported. This systematic review aims to summarise and synthesise studies that have compared adverse pregnancy outcomes in pregnancies complicated by pregestational diabetes and GDM. Three databases, Pubmed, EBSCOhost and Scopus were searched to identify studies that compared adverse outcomes in pregnancies complicated by pregestational T1DM and T2DM, and GDM. A total of 20 studies met the inclusion criteria and are included in this systematic review. Thirteen pregnancy outcomes including caesarean section, preterm birth, congenital anomalies, pre-eclampsia, neonatal hypoglycaemia, macrosomia, neonatal intensive care unit admission, stillbirth, Apgar score, large for gestational age, induction of labour, respiratory distress syndrome and miscarriages were compared. Findings from this review confirm that pregestational diabetes is associated with more frequent pregnancy complications than GDM. Taken together, this review highlights the risks posed by all types of maternal diabetes and the need to improve care and educate women on the importance of maintaining optimal glycaemic control to mitigate these risks.
Topics: Cesarean Section; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetes, Gestational; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth
PubMed: 36078559
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191710846 -
Scientific Reports Aug 2021Understanding changes in oral flora during pregnancy, its association to maternal health, and its implications to birth outcomes is essential. We searched PubMed,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Understanding changes in oral flora during pregnancy, its association to maternal health, and its implications to birth outcomes is essential. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library in May 2020 (updated search in April and June 2021), and conducted a systematic review and meta-analyses to assess the followings: (1) oral microflora changes throughout pregnancy, (2) association between oral microorganisms during pregnancy and maternal oral/systemic conditions, and (3) implications of oral microorganisms during pregnancy on birth outcomes. From 3983 records, 78 studies were included for qualitative assessment, and 13 studies were included in meta-analysis. The oral microflora remains relatively stable during pregnancy; however, pregnancy was associated with distinct composition/abundance of oral microorganisms when compared to postpartum/non-pregnant status. Oral microflora during pregnancy appears to be influenced by oral and systemic conditions (e.g. gestational diabetes mellitus, pre-eclampsia, etc.). Prenatal dental care reduced the carriage of oral pathogens (e.g. Streptococcus mutans). The Porphyromonas gingivalis in subgingival plaque was more abundant in women with preterm birth. Given the results from meta-analyses were inconclusive since limited studies reported outcomes on the same measuring scale, more future studies are needed to elucidate the association between pregnancy oral microbiota and maternal oral/systemic health and birth outcomes.
Topics: Female; Humans; Microbiota; Mouth; Periodontal Diseases; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth; Publication Bias; Risk
PubMed: 34413437
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-96495-1 -
JAMA Pediatrics Jun 2022Animal studies have found that antenatal corticosteroids affect many organs across multiple stages of life. However, the long-term outcomes in human children are not... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Animal studies have found that antenatal corticosteroids affect many organs across multiple stages of life. However, the long-term outcomes in human children are not well understood.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of long-term outcomes associated with preterm exposure to antenatal corticosteroids compared with no exposure in all children as well as children with preterm and full-term birth.
DATA SOURCES
Academic databases were searched for articles published from January 1, 2000, to October 29, 2021, including Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar. References of articles were also searched for relevant studies.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cohort studies that assessed long-term neurodevelopmental, psychological, or other outcomes at 1 year or older in those who had preterm exposure to antenatal corticosteroids were included. No language restrictions were set.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two reviewers independently extracted data using a piloted data extraction form. Data on study population, pregnancy characteristics, exposure to antenatal corticosteroids, and outcomes were collected. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guidelines were followed, and random-effects models were used for the meta-analysis.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was an author-defined composite of any adverse neurodevelopmental and/or psychological disorder. The secondary outcomes included specific measures of psychological disorders; neurodevelopmental delay; and anthropometric, metabolic, and cardiorespiratory outcomes.
RESULTS
A total of 30 studies met the inclusion criteria, and involved more than 1.25 million children who were at least 1 year of age when the outcomes were assessed. Exposure to a single course of antenatal corticosteroids for children with extremely preterm birth was associated with a significant reduction in risk of neurodevelopmental impairment (adjusted odds ratio, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.57-0.84]; I2 = 0%; low certainty). For children with late-preterm birth, exposure to antenatal corticosteroids was associated with a higher risk of investigation for neurocognitive disorders (n = 25 668 children; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.12 [95% CI, 1.05-1.20]; low certainty). For children with full-term birth, exposure to antenatal corticosteroids was associated with a higher risk of mental or behavioral disorders (n = 641 487 children; aHR, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.36-1.60]; low certainty) as well as proven or suspected neurocognitive disorders (n = 529 205 children; aHR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.10-1.21]; low certainty).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Results of this study showed that exposure to a single course of antenatal corticosteroids was associated with a significantly lower risk of neurodevelopmental impairment in children with extremely preterm birth but a significantly higher risk of adverse neurocognitive and/or psychological outcomes in children with late-preterm and full-term birth, who made up approximately half of those with exposure to antenatal corticosteroids. The findings suggest a need for caution in administering antenatal corticosteroids.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Female; Humans; Odds Ratio; Pregnancy; Premature Birth
PubMed: 35404395
DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2022.0483 -
Clinical Gastroenterology and... Jan 2022Biologics are used routinely in pregnant women with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but large-scale data reporting adverse pregnancy outcomes among biologic users are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Biologics are used routinely in pregnant women with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but large-scale data reporting adverse pregnancy outcomes among biologic users are lacking. We sought to estimate the prevalence of adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with IBD on biologic therapies.
METHODS
We searched major databases from inception to June 2020 for studies estimating the prevalence of adverse pregnancy outcomes in IBD when using biologics (anti-tumor necrosis factor [TNF], anti-integrins, and anticytokines). Prevalence and relative risk (RR) were pooled using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Forty-eight studies were included in the meta-analysis comprising 6963 patients. Biologic therapy in IBD pregnancies was associated with a pooled prevalence of 8% (95% CI, 6%-10%; I = 87.4%) for early pregnancy loss, 9% (95% CI, 7%-11%; I = 89.9%) for preterm birth, 0% (95% CI, 0%-0%; I = 0%) for stillbirth, 8% (95% CI, 5%-10%; I = 87.0%) for low birth weight, and 1% (95% CI, 1%-2%; I = 78.3%) for congenital malformations. These rates are comparable with those published in the general population. In subgroup analyses of a small number of studies, the prevalence of early pregnancy loss and preterm birth were higher in vedolizumab vs anti-TNF users. Meta-regression did not show an association of disease activity or concomitant thiopurine on adverse outcomes. Continued TNF inhibitor use during the third trimester was not associated with risk of preterm birth (RR, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.77-2.60; I = 0%), low birth weight (RR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.80-2.18; I = 0%), or congenital malformations (RR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.47-3.49; I = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS
Adverse pregnancy outcomes among pregnant IBD women using biologics are comparable with that of the general population. PROSPERO protocol #CRD42019135721.
Topics: Biological Products; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors
PubMed: 32931960
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.09.021 -
JAMA Nov 2022Unintended pregnancy is common in the US and is associated with adverse maternal and infant health outcomes; however, estimates of these associations specific to current... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Unintended pregnancy is common in the US and is associated with adverse maternal and infant health outcomes; however, estimates of these associations specific to current US populations are lacking.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate associations of unintended pregnancy with maternal and infant health outcomes during pregnancy and post partum with studies relevant to current clinical practice and public health in the US.
DATA SOURCES
Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, and MEDLINE databases (January 1, 2000, to June 15, 2022) and manual review of reference lists.
STUDY SELECTION
Epidemiologic studies relevant to US populations that compared key maternal and infant health outcomes for unintended vs intended pregnancies and met prespecified eligibility criteria were included after investigators' independent dual review of abstracts and full-text articles.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Investigators abstracted data from publications on study methods, participant characteristics, settings, pregnancy intention, comparators, confounders, and outcomes; data were validated by a second investigator. Risk of bias was independently dual rated by investigators using criteria developed by the US Preventive Services Task Force. Results of studies controlling for confounders were combined by using a profile likelihood random-effects model.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Prenatal depression, postpartum depression, maternal experience of interpersonal violence, preterm birth, and infant low birth weight.
RESULTS
Thirty-six studies (N = 524 522 participants) were included (14 cohort studies rated good or fair quality; 22 cross-sectional studies); 12 studies used large population-based data sources. Compared with intended pregnancy, unintended pregnancy was significantly associated with higher odds of depression during pregnancy (23.3% vs 13.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.59 [95% CI, 1.35-1.92]; I2 = 85.0%; 15 studies [n = 41 054]) and post partum (15.7% vs 9.6%; aOR, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.40-1.70]; I2 = 7.1%; 10 studies [n = 82 673]), interpersonal violence (14.6% vs 5.5%; aOR, 2.22 [95% CI, 1.41-2.91]; I2 = 64.1%; 5 studies [n = 42 306]), preterm birth (9.4% vs 7.7%; aOR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.12-1.31]; I2 = 1.7%; 10 studies [n = 94 351]), and infant low birth weight (7.3% vs 5.2%; aOR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.21]; I2 = 0.0%; 8 studies [n = 87 547]). Results were similar in sensitivity analyses based on controlling for history of depression for prenatal and postpartum depression and on study design and definition of unintended pregnancy for relevant outcomes. Studies provided limited sociodemographic data and measurement of confounders and outcomes varied.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiologic observational studies relevant to US populations, unintended pregnancy, compared with intended pregnancy, was significantly associated with adverse maternal and infant outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42020192981.
Topics: Female; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Birth Weight; Cross-Sectional Studies; Depression, Postpartum; Infant Health; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Observational Studies as Topic; Pregnancy, Unplanned; Premature Birth; Pregnancy Outcome; Maternal Health; United States; Violence; Pregnancy Complications
PubMed: 36318133
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2022.19097 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Sep 2022To assess the efficacy and safety of vaginal progesterone to prevent recurrent preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a history of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Does vaginal progesterone prevent recurrent preterm birth in women with a singleton gestation and a history of spontaneous preterm birth? Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the efficacy and safety of vaginal progesterone to prevent recurrent preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a history of spontaneous preterm birth.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and CINAHL (from their inception to February 28, 2022), Cochrane databases, Google Scholar, bibliographies, and conference proceedings.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials that compared vaginal progesterone to placebo or no treatment in asymptomatic women with a singleton gestation and a history of spontaneous preterm birth.
METHODS
The primary outcomes were preterm birth <37 and <34 weeks of gestation. The secondary outcomes included adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. Pooled relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. We assessed the risk of bias in the included studies, heterogeneity (I test), small-study effects, publication bias, and quality of evidence; performed subgroup and sensitivity analyses; and calculated 95% prediction intervals and adjusted relative risks.
RESULTS
Ten studies (2958 women) met the inclusion criteria: 7 with a sample size <150 (small studies) and 3 with a sample size >600 (large studies). Among the 7 small studies, 4 were at high risk of bias, 2 were at some concerns of bias, and only 1 was at low risk of bias. All the large studies were at low risk of bias. Vaginal progesterone significantly decreased the risk of preterm birth <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.81; I=75%; 95% prediction interval, 0.31-1.32; very low-quality evidence) and <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.92; I=66%; 95% prediction interval, 0.23-1.68; very low-quality evidence), and the risk of admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (relative risk, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.85; I=67%; 95% prediction interval, 0.16-1.79; low-quality evidence). There were no significant differences between the vaginal progesterone and the placebo or no treatment groups in other adverse perinatal and maternal outcomes. Subgroup analyses revealed that vaginal progesterone decreased the risk of preterm birth <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.55; I=0%) and <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.49; I=0%) in the small but not in the large studies (relative risk, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.88-1.09; I=0% for preterm birth <37 weeks; and relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.13; I=0% for preterm birth <34 weeks). Sensitivity analyses restricted to studies at low risk of bias indicated that vaginal progesterone did not reduce the risk of preterm birth <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.09) and <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.15). There was clear evidence of substantial small-study effects in the meta-analyses of preterm birth <37 and <34 weeks of gestation because of funnel plot asymmetry and the marked differences in the pooled relative risks obtained from fixed-effect and random-effects models. The adjustment for small-study effects resulted in a markedly reduced and nonsignificant effect of vaginal progesterone on preterm birth <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.10) and <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-1.42).
CONCLUSION
There is no convincing evidence supporting the use of vaginal progesterone to prevent recurrent preterm birth or to improve perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a history of spontaneous preterm birth.
Topics: Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Intensive Care Units, Neonatal; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; Progesterone; Vagina
PubMed: 35460628
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.04.023 -
JAMA Internal Medicine Feb 2022Excessive gestational weight gain (GWG) is common and associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. Antenatal lifestyle interventions limit GWG; yet benefits of different... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Excessive gestational weight gain (GWG) is common and associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. Antenatal lifestyle interventions limit GWG; yet benefits of different intervention types and specific maternal and neonatal outcomes are unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the association of different types of diet and physical activity-based antenatal lifestyle interventions with GWG and maternal and neonatal outcomes.
DATA SOURCES
A 2-stage systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Health Technology Assessment Database was conducted from February 1, 2017, to May 31, 2020. Search results from the present study were integrated with those from a previous systematic review from 1990 to February 2017.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized trials reporting GWG and maternal and neonatal outcomes.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data were extracted for random-effects meta-analyses to calculate the summary effect estimates and 95% CIs.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Outcomes were clinically prioritized, with mean GWG as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, cesarean section, preterm delivery, large or small for gestational age neonates, neonatal intensive care unit admission, or fetal death.
RESULTS
A total of 117 randomized clinical trials of antenatal lifestyle interventions (involving 34 546 women) were included. Overall lifestyle intervention was associated with reduced GWG (-1.15 kg; 95% CI, -1.40 to -0.91), risk of gestational diabetes (odds ratio [OR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70-0.89), and total adverse maternal outcomes (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.84-0.94) vs routine care. Compared with routine care, diet was associated with less GWG (-2.63 kg; 95% CI, -3.87 to -1.40) than physical activity (-1.04 kg; 95% CI, -1.33 to -0.74) or mixed interventions (eg, unstructured lifestyle support, written information with weight monitoring, or behavioral support alone) (-0.74 kg; 95% CI, -1.06 to -0.43). Diet was associated with reduced risk of gestational diabetes (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.45-0.82), preterm delivery (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.22-0.84), large for gestational age neonate (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.08-0.47), neonatal intensive care admission (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.95), and total adverse maternal (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61-0.92) and neonatal outcomes (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.26-0.72). Physical activity was associated with reduced GWG and reduced risk of gestational diabetes (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.47-0.75), hypertensive disorders (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48-0.90), cesarean section (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.95), and total adverse maternal outcomes (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.71-0.86). Diet with physical activity was associated with reduced GWG (-1.35 kg; 95% CI, -1.95 to -0.75) and reduced risk of gestational diabetes (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54-0.96) and total adverse maternal outcomes (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69-0.95). Mixed interventions were associated with reduced GWG only.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This systematic review and meta-analysis found level 1 evidence that antenatal structured diet and physical activity-based lifestyle interventions were associated with reduced GWG and lower risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. The findings support the implementation of such interventions in routine antenatal care and policy around the world.
Topics: Cesarean Section; Diabetes, Gestational; Diet; Exercise; Female; Gestational Weight Gain; Humans; Hypertension; Infant, Newborn; Male; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth; Weight Gain
PubMed: 34928300
DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.6373 -
American Journal of Preventive Medicine Jul 2021Low-dose aspirin is used for pre-eclampsia prophylaxis during pregnancy, but a study that comprehensively investigates both maternal and perinatal outcomes from aspirin... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
Low-dose aspirin is used for pre-eclampsia prophylaxis during pregnancy, but a study that comprehensively investigates both maternal and perinatal outcomes from aspirin administration utilizing stratification methods is lacking. The aim of this study is to comprehensively investigate the maternal and neonatal outcomes related to aspirin prophylaxis during pregnancy in relation to dose and therapy initiation by utilizing a stratification method.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Placebo-controlled randomized trials investigating the effect of low-dose aspirin on maternal or perinatal outcomes with sufficient raw data and published in English from inception to August 2020 were searched for from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Review articles, editorials, case reports, conference abstracts, and nonplacebo-controlled studies were excluded.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
A total of 35 placebo-controlled randomized trials with 46,568 pregnant women were included in this meta-analysis. Aspirin prophylaxis substantially lowered the risk of pre-eclampsia, preterm birth, perinatal mortality, and intrauterine growth retardation without elevated bleeding risks. Low-dose aspirin considerably enhanced neonatal birth weight but did not decrease the risk of gestational hypertension. The subgroup analysis revealed substantially reduced pre-eclampsia risk and enhanced birth weight and gestational age at delivery in women who initiated aspirin before 20 weeks of gestation (RR=0.76, 95% CI=0.64, 0.90, p=0.001). However, the effect of aspirin dose on pregnancy outcomes was insignificant and requires further evaluation.
CONCLUSIONS
Initiation of low-dose aspirin administration before 20 weeks of gestation considerably decreases the incidence of pre-eclampsia and related neonatal outcomes without increasing bleeding risk.
Topics: Aspirin; Female; Gestational Age; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth
PubMed: 33795180
DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2021.01.032 -
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Dec 2022There is a lack of sufficient evidence regarding efficacy and safety of amlodipine on treating hypertension during pregnancy. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
There is a lack of sufficient evidence regarding efficacy and safety of amlodipine on treating hypertension during pregnancy.
OBJECTIVE
To compare antihypertensive efficacy, pregnancy outcome and safety of amlodipine with nifedipine on hypertension during pregnancy.
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, clinicaltrials.gov, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database and China Biology Medicine disc of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to April l5, 2021 was conducted on RCTs comparing amlodipine to nifedipine for the treatment of hypertension during pregnancy. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were done by two independent reviewers. To estimate relative effects from all available evidence, a meta-analysis was conducted.
RESULTS
Seventeen RCTs were included. Amlodipine was found the efficacy is slightly superior to nifedipine on treating hypertension during pregnancy (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.10) with a decreased risk for maternal side effects (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.61). Subgroup analysis found amlodipine can get a better control on SBP (RR - 11.68, 95% CI - 17.98 to - 5.37) and DBP (RR - 7.44, 95% CI - 13.81 to - 1.06) compared with intermediate-/long-acting nifedipine. In addition, there was no difference between amlodipine and nifedipine on pregnancy outcomes including caesarean section, premature labour, placental abruption, FGR, fetal distress, neonatal asphyxia.
CONCLUSIONS
Given the results of this systematic review and meta-analysis, amlodipine can be effectively and safely used for hypertension during pregnancy.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Female; Pregnancy; Humans; Nifedipine; Amlodipine; Hypertension; Pregnancy Outcome; Obstetric Labor, Premature
PubMed: 35305140
DOI: 10.1007/s00404-022-06504-5 -
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