-
The British Journal of Psychiatry : the... May 2017Maternal anxiety negatively influences child outcomes. Reliable estimates have not been established because of varying published prevalence rates.To establish summary... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Maternal anxiety negatively influences child outcomes. Reliable estimates have not been established because of varying published prevalence rates.To establish summary estimates for the prevalence of maternal anxiety in the antenatal and postnatal periods.We searched multiple databases including MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO to identify studies published up to January 2016 with data on the prevalence of antenatal or postnatal anxiety. Data were extracted from published reports and any missing information was requested from investigators. Estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses.We reviewed 23 468 abstracts, retrieved 783 articles and included 102 studies incorporating 221 974 women from 34 countries. The prevalence for self-reported anxiety symptoms was 18.2% (95% CI 13.6-22.8) in the first trimester, 19.1% (95% CI 15.9-22.4) in the second trimester and 24.6% (95% CI 21.2-28.0) in the third trimester. The overall prevalence for a clinical diagnosis of any anxiety disorder was 15.2% (95% CI 9.0-21.4) and 4.1% (95% CI 1.9-6.2) for a generalised anxiety disorder. Postnatally, the prevalence for anxiety symptoms overall at 1-24 weeks was 15.0% (95% CI 13.7-16.4). The prevalence for any anxiety disorder over the same period was 9.9% (95% CI 6.1-13.8), and 5.7% (95% CI 2.3-9.2) for a generalised anxiety disorder. Rates were higher in low- to middle-income countries.Results suggest perinatal anxiety is highly prevalent and merits clinical attention. Research is warranted to develop evidence-based interventions.
Topics: Anxiety Disorders; Female; Global Health; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Trimesters; Prevalence; Puerperal Disorders
PubMed: 28302701
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.bp.116.187179 -
Maternal and Child Health Journal Jul 2022Anemia is one of the most critical health conditions affecting people worldwide. The disease is silent, with a slow progression and a few physical symptoms. Anemia... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Anemia is one of the most critical health conditions affecting people worldwide. The disease is silent, with a slow progression and a few physical symptoms. Anemia during pregnancy carries the risk of premature birth, low birth weight, and fetus malformations and can impose additional costs on society and families. Therefore, the aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of anemia in pregnant women worldwide.
METHODS
In this work, we have conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the studies that have examined the prevalence of anemia in pregnant women globally. The Google Scholar, Cochrane, ScienceDirect, Medline (PubMed), and Web of Science (WoS) databases were searched for articles published between 1991 and 2021. The search keywords were anemia, pregnancy, prevalence, and meta-analysis. In order to analyze the eligible studies, the stochastic effects model was used, and the heterogeneity of the studies was examined using the I index. Data analysis was performed within the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software (Version 2).
RESULTS
The search resulted in 338 deduplicated studies, of which 52 studies with a total sample size of 1,244,747 people were included in this review. According to the results of the meta-analysis, the overall prevalence of anemia in pregnant women is 36.8% (95% confidence interval: 31.5-42.4%). The highest prevalence of anemia is mild at 70.8 (95% CI 58.1-81) and highest in the third trimester of pregnancy with the prevalence of 48.8 (95% CI 38.7-58.9), while the highest prevalence of anemia in pregnant women was in Africa with the prevalence of 41.7 (95% CI 32.3-49.4).
CONCLUSION
The results of this study show a high prevalence of anemia among pregnant women worldwide, and the highest of this prevalence is mild anemia. The prevalence of anemia in the third trimester was higher than in the first and second trimesters. Anemia in pregnant women in developing countries is significantly higher than in developed countries due to pregnancy's economic, sociological, and health factors.
Topics: Anemia; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Trimester, Third; Pregnant Women; Prevalence
PubMed: 35608810
DOI: 10.1007/s10995-022-03450-1 -
Lancet (London, England) Jan 2023Malaria in the first trimester of pregnancy is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. Artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) are a highly effective,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Pregnancy outcomes after first-trimester treatment with artemisinin derivatives versus non-artemisinin antimalarials: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Malaria in the first trimester of pregnancy is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. Artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) are a highly effective, first-line treatment for uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria, except in the first trimester of pregnancy, when quinine with clindamycin is recommended due to concerns about the potential embryotoxicity of artemisinins. We compared adverse pregnancy outcomes after artemisinin-based treatment (ABT) versus non-ABTs in the first trimester of pregnancy.
METHODS
For this systematic review and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Malaria in Pregnancy Library for prospective cohort studies published between Nov 1, 2015, and Dec 21, 2021, containing data on outcomes of pregnancies exposed to ABT and non-ABT in the first trimester. The results of this search were added to those of a previous systematic review that included publications published up until November, 2015. We included pregnancies enrolled before the pregnancy outcome was known. We excluded pregnancies with missing estimated gestational age or exposure information, multiple gestation pregnancies, and if the fetus was confirmed to be unviable before antimalarial treatment. The primary endpoint was adverse pregnancy outcome, defined as a composite of either miscarriage, stillbirth, or major congenital anomalies. A one-stage IPD meta-analysis was done by use of shared-frailty Cox models. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42015032371.
FINDINGS
We identified seven eligible studies that included 12 cohorts. All 12 cohorts contributed IPD, including 34 178 pregnancies, 737 with confirmed first-trimester exposure to ABTs and 1076 with confirmed first-trimester exposure to non-ABTs. Adverse pregnancy outcomes occurred in 42 (5·7%) of 736 ABT-exposed pregnancies compared with 96 (8·9%) of 1074 non-ABT-exposed pregnancies in the first trimester (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0·71, 95% CI 0·49-1·03). Similar results were seen for the individual components of miscarriage (aHR=0·74, 0·47-1·17), stillbirth (aHR=0·71, 0·32-1·57), and major congenital anomalies (aHR=0·60, 0·13-2·87). The risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes was lower with artemether-lumefantrine than with oral quinine in the first trimester of pregnancy (25 [4·8%] of 524 vs 84 [9·2%] of 915; aHR 0·58, 0·36-0·92).
INTERPRETATION
We found no evidence of embryotoxicity or teratogenicity based on the risk of miscarriage, stillbirth, or major congenital anomalies associated with ABT during the first trimester of pregnancy. Given that treatment with artemether-lumefantrine was associated with fewer adverse pregnancy outcomes than quinine, and because of the known superior tolerability and antimalarial effectiveness of ACTs, artemether-lumefantrine should be considered the preferred treatment for uncomplicated P falciparum malaria in the first trimester. If artemether-lumefantrine is unavailable, other ACTs (except artesunate-sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine) should be preferred to quinine. Continued active pharmacovigilance is warranted.
FUNDING
Medicines for Malaria Venture, WHO, and the Worldwide Antimalarial Resistance Network funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
Topics: Female; Pregnancy; Humans; Antimalarials; Pregnancy Outcome; Quinine; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Abortion, Spontaneous; Stillbirth; Prospective Studies; Artemether; Artemether, Lumefantrine Drug Combination; Malaria, Falciparum; Malaria; Drug Combinations; Ethanolamines
PubMed: 36442488
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01881-5 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Sep 2011We undertook a systematic review to assess normative levels of vitamin D in early pregnancy and association with subsequent pregnancy outcomes. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
We undertook a systematic review to assess normative levels of vitamin D in early pregnancy and association with subsequent pregnancy outcomes.
STUDY DESIGN
Medline and Embase databases and reference lists were searched. Inclusion criteria were pregnant populations, blood sample taken during the first trimester, and serum hydroxyvitamin D levels assessed.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies reported vitamin D levels in first trimester (n = 11-3730), and 5 examined pregnancy outcomes. Mean vitamin D concentrations differed when stratified by ethnicity: white (mean [SD]: 29.4 [11.7] to 73.1 [27.1] nmol/L) and nonwhite (15.2 [12.1] to 43 [12] nmol/L). Most studies used general population cut points to define deficiency and found a large proportion of women deficient. Two articles examined risk of preeclampsia and reported differing findings, whereas 2 of 3 found low levels associated with increased risk of small-for-gestational age births.
CONCLUSION
There is no clear definition of vitamin D deficiency in pregnancy and insufficient evidence to suggest low vitamin D levels in early pregnancy are associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes.
Topics: Female; Humans; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Reference Values; Risk Factors; Vitamin D; Vitamin D Deficiency
PubMed: 21640968
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2011.03.058 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2017During pregnancy, fetal cells suitable for genetic testing can be obtained from amniotic fluid by amniocentesis (AC), placental tissue by chorionic villus sampling... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
During pregnancy, fetal cells suitable for genetic testing can be obtained from amniotic fluid by amniocentesis (AC), placental tissue by chorionic villus sampling (CVS), or fetal blood. A major disadvantage of second trimester amniocentesis is that the results are available relatively late in pregnancy (after 16 weeks' gestation). Earlier alternatives are chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and early amniocentesis, which can be performed in the first trimester of pregnancy.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review was to compare the safety and accuracy of all types of AC (i.e. early and late) and CVS (e.g. transabdominal, transcervical) for prenatal diagnosis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (3 March 2017), ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; 3 March 2017), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised trials comparing AC and CVS by either transabdominal or transcervical route.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included a total of 16 randomised studies, with a total of 33,555 women, 14 of which were deemed to be at low risk of bias. The number of women included in the trials ranged from 223 to 4606.Studies were categorized into six comparisons: 1. second trimester AC versus control; 2. early versus second trimester AC; 3. CVS versus second trimester AC; 4. CVS methods; 5. Early AC versus CVS; and 6. AC with or without ultrasound.One study compared second trimester AC with no AC (control) in a low risk population (women = 4606). Background pregnancy loss was around 2%. Second trimester AC compared to no testing increased total pregnancy loss by another 1%. The confidence intervals (CI) around this excess risk were relatively large (3.2% versus 2.3 %, average risk ratio (RR) 1.41, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.00; moderate-quality evidence). In the same study, spontaneous miscarriages were also higher (2.1% versus 1.3%; average RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.52; high-quality evidence). The number of congenital anomalies was similar in both groups (2.0% versus 2.2%, average RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.39; moderate-quality evidence).One study (women = 4334) found that early amniocentesis was not a safe early alternative compared to second trimester amniocentesis because of increased total pregnancy losses (7.6% versus 5.9%; average RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.61; high-quality evidence), spontaneous miscarriages (3.6% versus 2.5%, average RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.98; moderate-quality evidence), and a higher incidence of congential anomalies, including talipes (4.7% versus 2.7%; average RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.38; high-quality evidence).When pregnancy loss after CVS was compared with second trimester AC, there was a clinically significant heterogeneity in the size and direction of the effect depending on the technique used (transabdominal or transcervical), therefore, the results were not pooled. Only one study compared transabdominal CVS with second trimester AC (women = 2234). They found no clear difference between the two procedures in the total pregnancy loss (6.3% versus 7%; average RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.23, low-quality evidence), spontaneous miscarriages (3.0% versus 3.9%; average RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.21; low-quality evidence), and perinatal deaths (0.7% versus 0.6%; average RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.51; low-quality evidence). Transcervical CVS may carry a higher risk of pregnancy loss (14.5% versus 11.5%; average RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.81), but the results were quite heterogeneous.Five studies compared transabdominal and transcervical CVS (women = 7978). There were no clear differences between the two methods in pregnancy losses (average RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.65; very low-quality evidence), spontaneous miscarriages (average RR 1.68, 95% CI 0.79 to 3.58; very low-quality evidence), or anomalies (average RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.12; low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of the evidence to low due to heterogeneity between studies. Transcervical CVS may be more technically demanding than transabdominal CVS, with more failures to obtain sample (2.0% versus 1.1%; average RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.82, moderate-quality evidence).Overall, we found low-quality evidence for outcomes when early amniocentesis was compared to transabdominal CVS. Spontaneous miscarriage was the only outcome supported by moderate-quality evidence, resulting in more miscarriages after early AC compared with transabdominal CVS (2.3% versus 1.3%; average RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.60). There were no clear differences in pregnancy losses (average RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.54; low-quality evidence), or anomalies (average RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.30; very low-quality evidence).We found one study that examined AC with or without ultrasound, which evaluated a type of ultrasound-assisted procedure that is now considered obsolete.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Second trimester amniocentesis increased the risk of pregnancy loss, but it was not possible to quantify this increase precisely from only one study, carried out more than 30 years ago.Early amniocentesis was not as safe as second trimester amniocentesis, illustrated by increased pregnancy loss and congenital anomalies (talipes). Transcervical chorionic villus sampling compared with second trimester amniocentesis may be associated with a higher risk of pregnancy loss, but results were quite heterogeneous.Diagnostic accuracy of different methods could not be assessed adequately because of incomplete karyotype data in most studies.
Topics: Amniocentesis; Chorionic Villi Sampling; Congenital Abnormalities; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Pregnancy Trimester, Second; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28869276
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003252.pub2 -
Contraception Sep 2015We conducted a systematic review of the literature on the effectiveness of medical abortion "reversal" treatment. Since the usual care for women seeking to continue... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
We conducted a systematic review of the literature on the effectiveness of medical abortion "reversal" treatment. Since the usual care for women seeking to continue pregnancies after ingesting mifepristone is expectant management with fetal surveillance, we also performed a systematic review of continuing pregnancy after mifepristone alone.
STUDY DESIGN
We searched PubMed, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Scopus and the Cochrane Library for articles published through March 2015 reporting the proportion of pregnancies continuing after treatment with either mifepristone alone or after an additional treatment following mifepristone aimed at reversing its effect.
RESULTS
From 1115 articles retrieved, 1 study met inclusion criteria for abortion reversal, and 13 studies met criteria for continuing pregnancy after mifepristone alone. The one report of abortion reversal was a case series of 7 patients receiving varying doses of progesterone in oil intramuscularly or micronized progesterone orally or vaginally; 1 patient was lost to follow-up. The study was of poor quality and lacked clear information on patient selection. Four of six women continued the pregnancy to term [67%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 30-90%]. Assuming the lost patient aborted resulted in a continuing pregnancy proportion of 57% (95% CI 25-84%). The proportion of pregnancies continuing 1-2 weeks after mifepristone alone varied from 8% (95% CI 3-22%) to 46% (95% CI 37-56%). Continuing pregnancy was more common with lower mifepristone doses and advanced gestational age.
CONCLUSIONS
In the rare case that a woman changes her mind after starting medical abortion, evidence is insufficient to determine whether treatment with progesterone after mifepristone results in a higher proportion of continuing pregnancies compared to expectant management.
IMPLICATIONS
Legislation requiring physicians to inform patients about abortion reversal transforms an unproven therapy into law and represents legislative interference in the patient-physician relationship.
Topics: Abortifacient Agents, Steroidal; Abortion, Induced; Administration, Intravaginal; Female; Gestational Age; Humans; Mifepristone; Patient Preference; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Progesterone; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26057457
DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2015.06.001 -
A systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence of insomnia in the third trimester of pregnancy.BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth Apr 2021Sleep disorders, which are among the foremost important medical care issues, are prevalent in pregnancy. The present study is a meta-analysis of the prevalence of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Sleep disorders, which are among the foremost important medical care issues, are prevalent in pregnancy. The present study is a meta-analysis of the prevalence of insomnia in the third trimester of pregnancy. This study aims to systematically review the overall prevalence of insomnia in the third trimester of pregnancy through conducting a meta-analysis.
METHOD
The literature used in this meta-analysis for the topic discussed above were obtained through searching several databases, including SID, MagIran, IranDoc, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science (WoS), PubMed Science Direct and Google Scholar databases without time limitation until December 2020. Articles developed based on cross-sectional studies were included in the study. The heterogeneity of studies was investigated using the I index. Also, the possible effects of heterogeneity in the studied studies are investigated using meta-regression analysis.
RESULT
In 10 articles and 8798 participants aged between11-40, the overall prevalence of insomnia in the third trimester of pregnancy based on meta-analysis was 42.4% (95% CI: 32.9-52.5%). It was reported that as the sample size increases, the prevalence of insomnia in the third trimester of pregnancy increases. Conversely, as the year of research increases, the prevalence of insomnia in the third trimester of pregnancy decreases. Both of these differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
Insomnia was highly prevalent in the last trimester of pregnancy. Sleep disorders are neglected among pregnant women, and they are considered natural. While sleep disturbances can cause mental and physical problems in pregnant women, they can consequently cause problems for the fetus. As a result, maintaining the physical and mental health of pregnant mothers is very important. It is thus recommended that in addition to having regular visits during pregnancy, pregnant women should also be continuously monitored for sleep-related disorders.
Topics: Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Trimester, Third; Prevalence; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders
PubMed: 33836686
DOI: 10.1186/s12884-021-03755-z -
American Journal of Obstetrics &... Jul 2023This study aimed to compare 2 aspirin dosage regimens for the prevention of preterm preeclampsia (PE): 75 to 81 mg vs 150 to 162 mg taken daily starting in the first... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to compare 2 aspirin dosage regimens for the prevention of preterm preeclampsia (PE): 75 to 81 mg vs 150 to 162 mg taken daily starting in the first trimester of pregnancy.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic search was performed using PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1985 to April 2023.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
The inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials that compared the effect of 2 aspirin dosage regimens during pregnancy for the prevention of PE initiated in the first trimester of pregnancy. The intervention was an aspirin dosage between 150 and 162 mg daily, and the control was an aspirin dosage between 75 and 81 mg daily.
METHODS
Of note, 2 reviewers independently screened all citations, selected studies, and evaluated the risk of bias. The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and applied the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The corresponding authors of the included studies were contacted to validate each of the collected results. The primary outcome was the risk of preterm preeclampsia, and the secondary outcomes included term preeclampsia, any preeclampsia regardless of gestational age, and severe preeclampsia. Relative risks with their 95% confidence interval were calculated for each study and pooled for global analysis.
RESULTS
Of note, 4 randomized controlled trials were retrieved involving 552 participants. Moreover, 2 randomized controlled trials were at unclear risk of bias, 1 trial at low risk of bias and 1 trial at high risk of bias, which did not have the information for the primary outcome. The pooled analysis demonstrated that an aspirin dosage of 150 to 162 mg was associated with a significant reduction of preterm preeclampsia, compared with an aspirin dosage of 75 to 81 mg (3 studies; 472 participants; relative risk, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.79; P=.01; I=0%). There was no significant effect on the risk of term preeclampsia (3 studies; 472 participants; relative risk, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-2.64; P=.48; I=64%) and all preeclampsia (4 studies; 552 participants; relative risk, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.17-1.05; P=.06; I=58%), but there was a reduction of severe preeclampsia (3 studies; 472 participantst; RR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09-0.62; P=.003; I=0%).
CONCLUSION
When initiated in the first trimester of pregnancy, an aspirin dosage of 150 to 162 mg daily was associated with a lower risk of preterm PE than an aspirin dosage of 75 to 81 mg daily. However, the lack of large, high-quality studies limited the clinical scope of the current results taken alone.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Female; Humans; Aspirin; Pre-Eclampsia; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Gestational Age
PubMed: 37146687
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101000 -
The Journal of Obstetrics and... May 2023To objectively assess the quality of the published clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on the management of pregnancies complicated by placenta accreta spectrum... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To objectively assess the quality of the published clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on the management of pregnancies complicated by placenta accreta spectrum (PAS)disorders.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science databases were searched. The following aspects related to the management of pregnancies with suspected PAS disorders were evaluated: risk factors for PAS, prenatal diagnosis, role of interventional radiology and ureteral stenting, and optimal surgical management. The assessment of risk of bias and quality assessment of the CPGs were performed using the (AGREE II) tool (Brouwers et al., 2010). To define a CPG as of good quality we adopted a cut-off score >60%.
RESULTS
Nine CPGs were included. Specific risk factors for referral were assessed by 44.4% (4/9) of CPGs, mainly consisting in the presence of placenta previa and a prior cesarean delivery or uterine surgery. About 55.6% of CPGs (5/9) suggested ultrasound assessment of women with risk factors for PAS in the second and third trimester of pregnancy and 33.3% (3/9) recommended magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); 88.9% (8/9) of CPGs recommended cesarean delivery at 34-37 weeks of gestation. There was not generally consensus on the use of interventional radiology and ureteral stenting before surgery for PAS. Finally, hysterectomy was the recommend surgical approach by 77.8% (7/9) of the included CPGs.
CONCLUSION
Most of the published CPGs on PAS are generally of good quality. There was general agreement among the different CPGs on PAS as a regard as risk stratification, timing at diagnosis and delivery but not on the indication for MRI, use of interventional radiology and ureteral stenting.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Placenta Accreta; Prenatal Diagnosis; Placenta Previa; Cesarean Section; Pregnancy Trimester, Third; Retrospective Studies; Placenta; Ultrasonography, Prenatal
PubMed: 36796351
DOI: 10.1111/jog.15544 -
Sexually Transmitted Diseases Jun 2021No clear guidelines are available for the management of pregnant women with condyloma acuminata, a human papillomavirus-associated benign neoplasm that develops in the...
No clear guidelines are available for the management of pregnant women with condyloma acuminata, a human papillomavirus-associated benign neoplasm that develops in the genital tract. We performed a systematic review to gain a better understanding of the management of condyloma acuminata during pregnancy. In this review, we mainly focused on treatments. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science to identify studies on the treatment of condyloma acuminata during pregnancy. Thirty articles met the inclusion criteria. The treatment methods described in the literature were laser therapy, cryotherapy, imiquimod, photodynamic therapy, trichloroacetic acid, and local hyperthermia. The most effective treatment remains unclear. Various factors must be considered when deciding how to treat. Based on our assessment of the literature, we recommend cryotherapy as the first-choice treatment and laser therapy as the second-choice treatment. Imiquimod can be considered in cases such as extensive condyloma acuminata that is not easily treated by cryotherapy or laser therapy. In such cases, sufficient informed consent must be obtained from the patient. Cryotherapy, laser therapy, and imiquimod have been administered during all 3 trimesters with no severe adverse effects, but we cautiously recommend reserving laser therapy until the third trimester because of the lower risk of recurrence before delivery. There are still many unclear points regarding the management of condyloma in pregnancy, and further research is needed.
Topics: Condylomata Acuminata; Female; Humans; Imiquimod; Papillomaviridae; Photochemotherapy; Pregnancy; Recurrence
PubMed: 33093288
DOI: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000001322