-
American Journal of Obstetrics and... May 2023Green-stained amniotic fluid, often referred to as meconium-stained amniotic fluid, is present in 5% to 20% of patients in labor and is considered an obstetric hazard.... (Review)
Review
Green-stained amniotic fluid, often referred to as meconium-stained amniotic fluid, is present in 5% to 20% of patients in labor and is considered an obstetric hazard. The condition has been attributed to the passage of fetal colonic content (meconium), intraamniotic bleeding with the presence of heme catabolic products, or both. The frequency of green-stained amniotic fluid increases as a function of gestational age, reaching approximately 27% in post-term gestation. Green-stained amniotic fluid during labor has been associated with fetal acidemia (umbilical artery pH <7.00), neonatal respiratory distress, and seizures as well as cerebral palsy. Hypoxia is widely considered a mechanism responsible for fetal defecation and meconium-stained amniotic fluid; however, most fetuses with meconium-stained amniotic fluid do not have fetal acidemia. Intraamniotic infection/inflammation has emerged as an important factor in meconium-stained amniotic fluid in term and preterm gestations, as patients with these conditions have a higher rate of clinical chorioamnionitis and neonatal sepsis. The precise mechanisms linking intraamniotic inflammation to green-stained amniotic fluid have not been determined, but the effects of oxidative stress in heme catabolism have been implicated. Two randomized clinical trials suggest that antibiotic administration decreases the rate of clinical chorioamnionitis in patients with meconium-stained amniotic fluid. A serious complication of meconium-stained amniotic fluid is meconium aspiration syndrome. This condition develops in 5% of cases presenting with meconium-stained amniotic fluid and is a severe complication typical of term newborns. Meconium aspiration syndrome is attributed to the mechanical and chemical effects of aspirated meconium coupled with local and systemic fetal inflammation. Routine naso/oropharyngeal suctioning and tracheal intubation in cases of meconium-stained amniotic fluid have not been shown to be beneficial and are no longer recommended in obstetrical practice. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials suggested that amnioinfusion may decrease the rate of meconium aspiration syndrome. Histologic examination of the fetal membranes for meconium has been invoked in medical legal litigation to time the occurrence of fetal injury. However, inferences have been largely based on the results of in vitro experiments, and extrapolation of such findings to the clinical setting warrants caution. Fetal defecation throughout gestation appears to be a physiologic phenomenon based on ultrasound as well as in observations in animals.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Meconium Aspiration Syndrome; Meconium; Amniotic Fluid; Chorioamnionitis; Pregnancy Complications; Inflammation; Heme
PubMed: 37012128
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.11.1283 -
Obstetrics and Gynecology Jun 2021To estimate the risk of maternal and neonatal sepsis associated with chorioamnionitis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the risk of maternal and neonatal sepsis associated with chorioamnionitis.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, BIOSIS, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were systematically searched for full-text articles in English from inception until May 11, 2020.
METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION
We screened 1,251 studies. Randomized controlled trials, case-control, or cohort studies quantifying a relationship between chorioamnionitis and sepsis in mothers (postpartum) or neonates born at greater than 22 weeks of gestation were eligible. Studies were grouped for meta-analyses according to exposures of histologic or clinical chorioamnionitis and outcomes of maternal or neonatal sepsis.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS
One hundred three studies were included, and 55 met criteria for meta-analysis (39 studies of preterm neonates, 10 studies of general populations of preterm and term neonates, and six studies of late preterm and term neonates). Study details and quantitative data were abstracted. Random-effects models were used to generate pooled odds ratios (ORs); most studies only reported unadjusted results. Histologic chorioamnionitis was associated with confirmed and any early-onset neonatal sepsis (unadjusted pooled ORs 4.42 [95% CI 2.68-7.29] and 5.88 [95% CI 3.68-9.41], respectively). Clinical chorioamnionitis was also associated with confirmed and any early-onset neonatal sepsis (unadjusted pooled ORs 6.82 [95% CI 4.93-9.45] and 3.90 [95% CI 2.74-5.55], respectively). Additionally, histologic and clinical chorioamnionitis were each associated with higher odds of late-onset sepsis in preterm neonates. Confirmed sepsis incidence was 7% (early-onset) and 22% (late-onset) for histologic and 6% (early-onset) and 26% (late-onset) for clinical chorioamnionitis-exposed neonates. Three studies evaluated chorioamnionitis and maternal sepsis and were inconclusive.
CONCLUSION
Both histologic and clinical chorioamnionitis were associated with early- and late-onset sepsis in neonates. Overall, our findings support current guidelines for preventative neonatal care. There was insufficient evidence to determine the association between chorioamnionitis and maternal sepsis.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO, CRD42020156812.
Topics: Chorioamnionitis; Female; Gestational Age; Humans; Incidence; Infant, Newborn; Neonatal Sepsis; Postpartum Period; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; Sepsis; Term Birth; Time Factors
PubMed: 33957655
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004377 -
BMJ Open Nov 2019To estimate the prevalence and incidence of placenta previa complicated by placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) and to examine the different criteria being used for the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the prevalence and incidence of placenta previa complicated by placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) and to examine the different criteria being used for the diagnosis.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov and MEDLINE were searched between August 1982 and September 2018.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Studies reporting on placenta previa complicated by PAS diagnosed in a defined obstetric population.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two independent reviewers performed the data extraction using a predefined protocol and assessed the risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies, with difference agreed by consensus. The primary outcomes were overall prevalence of placenta previa, incidence of PAS according to the type of placenta previa and the reported clinical outcomes, including the number of peripartum hysterectomies and direct maternal mortality. The secondary outcomes included the criteria used for the prenatal ultrasound diagnosis of placenta previa and the criteria used to diagnose and grade PAS at birth.
RESULTS
A total of 258 articles were reviewed and 13 retrospective and 7 prospective studies were included in the analysis, which reported on 587 women with placenta previa and PAS. The meta-analysis indicated a significant (p<0.001) heterogeneity between study estimates for the prevalence of placenta previa, the prevalence of placenta previa with PAS and the incidence of PAS in the placenta previa cohort. The median prevalence of placenta previa was 0.56% (IQR 0.39-1.24) whereas the median prevalence of placenta previa with PAS was 0.07% (IQR 0.05-0.16). The incidence of PAS in women with a placenta previa was 11.10% (IQR 7.65-17.35).
CONCLUSIONS
The high heterogeneity in qualitative and diagnostic data between studies emphasises the need to implement standardised protocols for the diagnoses of both placenta previa and PAS, including the type of placenta previa and grade of villous invasiveness.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42017068589.
Topics: Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Incidence; Peripartum Period; Placenta Accreta; Placenta Previa; Pregnancy; Prevalence; Ultrasonography, Prenatal
PubMed: 31722942
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031193 -
European Journal of Obstetrics,... Sep 2023A Cesarean Scar Pregnancy (CSP) is a variant of uterine ectopic pregnancy defined by full or partial implantation of the gestational sac in the scar of a previous... (Review)
Review
A Cesarean Scar Pregnancy (CSP) is a variant of uterine ectopic pregnancy defined by full or partial implantation of the gestational sac in the scar of a previous cesarean section. The continuous increase of Cesarean Deliveries is causing a parallel increase in CSP and its complications. Considering its high morbidity, the most usual recommendation has been termination of pregnancy in the first trimester; however, several cases progress to viable births. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the outcome of CSP managed expectantly and understand whether sonographic signs could correlate to the outcomes. An online-based search of PubMed and Cochrane Library Databases was used to gather studies including women diagnosed with a CSP who were managed expectantly. The description of all cases was analysed by the authors in order to obtain information for each outcome. 47 studies of different types were retrieved, and the gestational outcome was available in 194 patients. Out of these, 39 patients (20,1%) had a miscarriage and 16 (8,3%) suffered foetal death. 50 patients (25,8%) had a term delivery and 81 (41,8%) patients had a preterm birth, out of which 27 (13,9%) delivered before 34 weeks of gestation. In 102 (52,6%) patients, a hysterectomy was performed. Placenta Accreta Spectrum (PAS) was a common disorder among CSP and was linked to a higher rate of complications such as foetal death, preterm birth, hysterectomy, haemorrhagic morbidity and surgical complications. Some of the analysed articles showed that sonographic signs with specific characteristics, such as type II and III CSP classification, Crossover Sign - 1, "In the niche" implantation and lower myometrial thickness could be related to worse outcomes of CSP. This article provides a good understanding of CSP as an entity that, although rare, presents with a high rate of relevant morbidity. It is also understood that pregnancies with confirmed PAS had an even higher rate of morbidity. Some sonographic signs were shown to predict the prognosis of these pregnancies and further investigation is necessary to validate one or more signs so they can be used for a more reliable counselling of women with CSP.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Female; Cesarean Section; Premature Birth; Cicatrix; Watchful Waiting; Pregnancy, Ectopic; Pregnancy Outcome; Placenta Accreta; Fetal Death; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37421745
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2023.06.030 -
Nature Communications May 2022Safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy is a particular concern affecting vaccination uptake by this vulnerable group. Here we evaluated evidence... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy is a particular concern affecting vaccination uptake by this vulnerable group. Here we evaluated evidence from 23 studies including 117,552 COVID-19 vaccinated pregnant people, almost exclusively with mRNA vaccines. We show that the effectiveness of mRNA vaccination against RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection 7 days after second dose was 89·5% (95% CI 69·0-96·4%, 18,828 vaccinated pregnant people, I = 73·9%). The risk of stillbirth was significantly lower in the vaccinated cohort by 15% (pooled OR 0·85; 95% CI 0·73-0·99, 66,067 vaccinated vs. 424,624 unvaccinated, I = 93·9%). There was no evidence of a higher risk of adverse outcomes including miscarriage, earlier gestation at birth, placental abruption, pulmonary embolism, postpartum haemorrhage, maternal death, intensive care unit admission, lower birthweight Z-score, or neonatal intensive care unit admission (p > 0.05 for all). COVID-19 mRNA vaccination in pregnancy appears to be safe and is associated with a reduction in stillbirth.
Topics: COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Intensive Care Units, Neonatal; Placenta; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; RNA, Messenger; SARS-CoV-2; Stillbirth; Vaccination
PubMed: 35538060
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-30052-w -
American Journal of Obstetrics &... Jul 2023Various prophylactic antibiotic regimens are used in the management of preterm premature rupture of membranes. We investigated the efficacy and safety of these regimens... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Various prophylactic antibiotic regimens are used in the management of preterm premature rupture of membranes. We investigated the efficacy and safety of these regimens in terms of maternal and neonatal outcomes.
DATA SOURCES
We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to July 20, 2021.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials involving pregnant women with preterm premature rupture of membranes before 37 weeks of gestation and a comparison of ≥2 of the following 10 antibiotic regimens: control/placebo, erythromycin, clindamycin, clindamycin plus gentamicin, penicillins, cephalosporins, co-amoxiclav, co-amoxiclav plus erythromycin, aminopenicillins plus macrolides, and cephalosporins plus macrolides.
METHODS
Two investigators independently extracted published data and assessed the risk of bias with a standard procedure following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Network meta-analysis was conducted using the random-effects model.
RESULTS
A total of 23 studies that recruited a total of 7671 pregnant women were included. Only penicillins (odds ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.77) had significantly superior effectiveness for maternal chorioamnionitis. Clindamycin plus gentamicin reduced the risk of clinical chorioamnionitis, with borderline significance (odds ratio, 0.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.03-1.00). By contrast, clindamycin alone increased the risk of maternal infection. For cesarean delivery, no significant differences were noted among these regimens.
CONCLUSION
Penicillins remain the recommended antibiotic regimen for reducing maternal clinical chorioamnionitis. The alternative regimen includes clindamycin plus gentamicin. Clindamycin should not be used alone.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Clindamycin; Chorioamnionitis; Amoxicillin-Potassium Clavulanate Combination; Network Meta-Analysis; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Premature Birth; Erythromycin; Macrolides; Gentamicins; Cephalosporins
PubMed: 37094635
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.100978 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2022Despite the widespread use of antenatal corticosteroids to prevent respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) in preterm infants, there is currently no consensus as to the type... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Despite the widespread use of antenatal corticosteroids to prevent respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) in preterm infants, there is currently no consensus as to the type of corticosteroid to use, dose, frequency, timing of use or the route of administration. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects on fetal and neonatal morbidity and mortality, on maternal morbidity and mortality, and on the child and adult in later life, of administering different types of corticosteroids (dexamethasone or betamethasone), or different corticosteroid dose regimens, including timing, frequency and mode of administration.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (9 May 2022) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all identified published and unpublished randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any two corticosteroids (dexamethasone or betamethasone or any other corticosteroid that can cross the placenta), comparing different dose regimens (including frequency and timing of administration) in women at risk of preterm birth. We planned to exclude cross-over trials and cluster-randomised trials. We planned to include studies published as abstracts only along with studies published as full-text manuscripts.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Data were checked for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 11 trials (2494 women and 2762 infants) in this update, all of which recruited women who were at increased risk of preterm birth or had a medical indication for preterm birth. All trials were conducted in high-income countries. Dexamethasone versus betamethasone Nine trials (2096 women and 2319 infants) compared dexamethasone versus betamethasone. All trials administered both drugs intramuscularly, and the total dose in the course was consistent (22.8 mg or 24 mg), but the regimen varied. We assessed one new study to have no serious risk of bias concerns for most outcomes, but other studies were at moderate (six trials) or high (two trials) risk of bias due to selection, detection and attrition bias. Our GRADE assessments ranged between high- and low-certainty, with downgrades due to risk of bias and imprecision. Maternal outcomes The only maternal primary outcome reported was chorioamnionitis (death and puerperal sepsis were not reported). Although the rate of chorioamnionitis was lower with dexamethasone, we did not find conclusive evidence of a difference between the two drugs (risk ratio (RR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48 to 1.06; 1 trial, 1346 women; moderate-certainty evidence). The proportion of women experiencing maternal adverse effects of therapy was lower with dexamethasone; however, there was not conclusive evidence of a difference between interventions (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.13; 2 trials, 1705 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Infant outcomes We are unsure whether the choice of drug makes a difference to the risk of any known death after randomisation, because the 95% CI was compatible with both appreciable benefit and harm with dexamethasone (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.63; 5 trials, 2105 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). The choice of drug may make little or no difference to the risk of RDS (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.22; 5 trials, 2105 infants; high-certainty evidence). While there may be little or no difference in the risk of intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH), there was substantial unexplained statistical heterogeneity in this result (average (a) RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.81; 4 trials, 1902 infants; I² = 62%; low-certainty evidence). We found no evidence of a difference between the two drugs for chronic lung disease (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.34; 1 trial, 1509 infants; moderate-certainty evidence), and we are unsure of the effects on necrotising enterocolitis, because there were few events in the studies reporting this outcome (RR 5.08, 95% CI 0.25 to 105.15; 2 studies, 441 infants; low-certainty evidence). Longer-term child outcomes Only one trial consistently followed up children longer term, reporting at two years' adjusted age. There is probably little or no difference between dexamethasone and betamethasone in the risk of neurodevelopmental disability at follow-up (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.22; 2 trials, 1151 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). It is unclear whether the choice of drug makes a difference to the risk of visual impairment (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.15; 1 trial, 1227 children; low-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference between the drugs for hearing impairment (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.16; 1 trial, 1227 children; moderate-certainty evidence), motor developmental delay (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.20; 1 trial, 1166 children; moderate-certainty evidence) or intellectual impairment (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.20; 1 trial, 1161 children; moderate-certainty evidence). However, the effect estimate for cerebral palsy is compatible with both an important increase in risk with dexamethasone, and no difference between interventions (RR 2.50, 95% CI 0.97 to 6.39; 1 trial, 1223 children; low-certainty evidence). No trials followed the children beyond early childhood. Comparisons of different preparations and regimens of corticosteroids We found three studies that included a comparison of a different regimen or preparation of either dexamethasone or betamethasone (oral dexamethasone 32 mg versus intramuscular dexamethasone 24 mg; betamethasone acetate plus phosphate versus betamethasone phosphate; 12-hourly betamethasone versus 24-hourly betamethasone). The certainty of the evidence for the main outcomes from all three studies was very low, due to small sample size and risk of bias. Therefore, we were limited in our ability to draw conclusions from any of these studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall, it remains unclear whether there are important differences between dexamethasone and betamethasone, or between one regimen and another. Most trials compared dexamethasone versus betamethasone. While for most infant and early childhood outcomes there may be no difference between these drugs, for several important outcomes for the mother, infant and child the evidence was inconclusive and did not rule out significant benefits or harms. The evidence on different antenatal corticosteroid regimens was sparse, and does not support the use of one particular corticosteroid regimen over another.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Betamethasone; Child; Child, Preschool; Chorioamnionitis; Dexamethasone; Female; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Lung; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn
PubMed: 35943347
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006764.pub4 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Apr 2023This study aimed to determine the incremental yield of prenatal exome sequencing over chromosomal microarray or G-banding karyotype in fetuses with: (1) intrauterine... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to determine the incremental yield of prenatal exome sequencing over chromosomal microarray or G-banding karyotype in fetuses with: (1) intrauterine growth restriction related to placental insufficiency or (2) short long bones, in isolated and nonisolated instances for both scenarios.
DATA SOURCES
Data were collected via electronic searches for relevant citations from January 2010 to April 10, 2022 in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane, and using relevant bibliographies and data generated in-house.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Included were prospective or retrospective cohort studies and/or case series with: (1) n>5 cases of short long bones and/or intrauterine growth restriction undergoing prenatal sequencing with a clearly defined phenotype including assessment of placental function; (2) testing based on prenatal phenotype only; (3) a nondiagnostic chromosomal microarray/karyotype; and (4) known results of genetic testing.
METHODS
Incremental yield was calculated for each study and as a pooled value for the aforementioned groups using a random-effects model. Results were displayed in forest plots with 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was assessed statistically using Higgins' I. Publication bias was assessed graphically using funnel plots. Quality assessment was performed using modified Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy criteria (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews registration number CRD42022324680).
RESULTS
Nineteen studies were included (n=452 cases). The apparent incremental yields with prenatal sequencing were: (1) 4% (95% confidence interval, -5.0 to 12; I=0%) in isolated intrauterine growth restriction with evidence of placental insufficiency, (2) 30% (95% confidence interval, 13-47; I=1%) in intrauterine growth restriction with additional structural anomalies, (3) 48% (95% confidence interval, 26-70; I=73%) in isolated short long bones, and (4) 68% (95% confidence interval, 58-77; I=51%) in short long bones with additional skeletal anomalies. Of the 37 short long bone cases with a diagnosis, 32 had a skeletal dysplasia, with thanatophoric dysplasia and osteogenesis imperfecta being the most common (both 21.6% [n=8/37]). In fetuses with short long bones and additional skeletal features, osteogenesis imperfecta was the most common diagnosis (28% [n=57/204]). Where documented, the inheritance patterns were de novo in 75.4% (n=150) of cases.
CONCLUSION
Prenatal sequencing adds substantially to incremental yield over chromosomal microarray in fetuses with short long bones or multisystem intrauterine growth restriction. Robust studies are required to assess the utility of fetal sequencing in isolated intrauterine growth restriction with evidence of placental insufficiency, which cannot be recommended on the basis of current evidence.
Topics: Humans; Pregnancy; Female; Fetal Growth Retardation; Placental Insufficiency; Exome Sequencing; Retrospective Studies; Osteogenesis Imperfecta; Placenta; Prenatal Diagnosis; Ultrasonography, Prenatal
PubMed: 36209938
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.09.045 -
Revista Panamericana de Salud Publica =... 2020To describe perinatal and neonatal outcomes in newborns exposed to SARS-CoV-2. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To describe perinatal and neonatal outcomes in newborns exposed to SARS-CoV-2.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted by searching PubMed Central, LILACS, and Google Scholar using the keywords 'covid ' AND 'newborn' OR 'child' OR 'infant,' on 18 March 2020, and again on 17 April 2020. One researcher conducted the search and extracted data on demographics, maternal outcomes, diagnostic tests, imaging, and neonatal outcomes.
RESULTS
Of 256 publications identified, 20 met inclusion criteria and comprised neonatal outcome data for 222 newborns whose mothers were suspected or confirmed to be SARS-CoV-2 positive perinatally (17 studies) or of newborns referred to hospital with infection/pneumonia (3 studies). Most (12 studies) were case-series reports; all were from China, except three (Australia, Iran, and Spain). Of the 222 newborns, 13 were reported as positive for SARS-CoV-2; most of the studies reported no or mild symptoms and no adverse perinatal outcomes. Two papers among those from newborns who tested positive reported moderate or severe clinical characteristics. Five studies using data on umbilical cord blood, placenta, and/or amniotic fluid reported no positive results. Nine studies reported radiographic imaging, including 5 with images of pneumonia, increased lung marking, thickened texture, or high-density nodular shadow. Minor, non-specific changes in biochemical variables were reported. Studies that tested breast milk reported negative SARS-CoV-2 results.
CONCLUSIONS
Given the paucity of studies at this time, vertical transmission cannot be confirmed or denied. Current literature does not support abstaining from breastfeeding nor separating mothers and newborns. Further evidence and data collection networks, particularly in the Americas, are needed for establishing definitive guidelines and recommendations.
PubMed: 32454807
DOI: 10.26633/RPSP.2020.54 -
American Journal of Obstetrics &... Aug 2023This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess clinical characteristics related to pathologically proven placenta accreta spectrum without placenta previa. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess clinical characteristics related to pathologically proven placenta accreta spectrum without placenta previa.
DATA SOURCES
A literature search of PubMed, the Cochrane database, and Web of Science was performed from inception to September 7, 2022.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
The primary outcomes were invasive placenta (including increta or percreta), blood loss, hysterectomy, and antenatal diagnosis. In addition, maternal age, assisted reproductive technology, previous cesarean delivery, and previous uterine procedures were investigated as potential risk factors. The inclusion criteria were studies evaluating the clinical presentation of pathologically diagnosed PAS without placenta previa.
METHODS
Study screening was conducted after duplicates were identified and removed. The quality of each study and the publication bias were assessed. Forest plots and I statistics were calculated for each study outcome for each group. The main analysis was a random-effects analysis.
RESULTS
Among 2598 studies that were initially retrieved, 5 were included in the review. With the exception of 1 study, 4 studies were included in the meta-analysis. This meta-analysis showed that placenta accreta spectrum without placenta previa was associated with less risk of invasive placenta (odds ratio, 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.37), blood loss (mean difference, -1.19; 95% confidence interval, -2.09 to -0.28) and hysterectomy (odds ratio, 0.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.53), and more difficult to diagnose prenatally (odds ratio, 0.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.45) than placenta accreta spectrum with placenta previa. In addition, assisted reproductive technology and a previous uterine procedure were strong risk factors for placenta accreta spectrum without placenta previa, whhereas previous cesarean delivery was a strong risk factor for placenta accreta spectrum with placenta previa.
CONCLUSION
The differences in clinical aspects of placenta accreta spectrum with and without placenta previa need to be understood.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Placenta Accreta; Retrospective Studies; Placenta Previa; Hysterectomy; Risk Factors
PubMed: 37211089
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101027