-
International Journal of Gynaecology... May 2024Adverse pregnancy outcomes, which can be caused by multiple factors, present a significant threat to the health of mothers and their babies. Cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA)... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Adverse pregnancy outcomes, which can be caused by multiple factors, present a significant threat to the health of mothers and their babies. Cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) from placental trophoblast cells might be able to reflect placental and fetal status. Previous studies have yielded controversial results regarding the association of FF or cffDNA with various adverse pregnancy outcomes. A previous study has attempted to systematically assess the association between low fetal fraction (FF) and adverse pregnancy outcomes, but it failed to perform quantitative analyses due to the few studies included. In the present study, we attempted to quantitatively assess the association of FF (or cffDNA) with adverse pregnancy outcomes and further analyze the causes of heterogeneity.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate the association of high/low FF or cffDNA with adverse pregnancy outcomes.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science from January 1, 1990, to June 15, 2022 in this meta-analysis.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Studies on the relationships of adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with FF or cell free DNA were included. Non-English literature was excluded.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data about pregnancy outcomes and cell free DNA were extracted and meta-analyzed. Subgroup analysis was performed by different outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS
There were 11 studies included involving 8280 participants. No significant heterogeneity was observed among the studies (I = 27%, 25%), and a fixed-effect model was used for weighted quantitative analysis. The results revealed that the FF or cffDNA during pregnancy was significantly associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes in pregnant women (OR = 1.57, 95% CI [1.24, 1.99], P = 0.233). The overall incidence of the maternal adverse outcomes was 8% (95% CI: 5-13). Subgroup analysis of different outcomes showed an evident association between low FF or cffDNA and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) (OR = 1.76, 95% CI [1.36, 2.27], P = 0.581). There was no evidence that the occurrence of spontaneous preterm birth (sPTB) and placental abnormality was associated with FF or cffDNA. No association was observed between low FF or cffDNA during pregnancy and adverse outcomes in fetuses (OR = 1.39, 95% CI [0.99, 1.94], P = 0.242). The overall incidence of adverse outcomes in fetuses was 8% (95% CI: 6-11). There were controversies over the association between high FF or cffDNA and HDP, and sPTB and small for gestational age infant, among different studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Pregnant women with low FF or cffDNA during the first or second trimester of pregnancy have an overall increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, especially HDP. However, the association between FF and various pregnancy outcomes needs to be further explored by more prospective studies.
PubMed: 38766692
DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.15612 -
Progress in Neuro-psychopharmacology &... Jul 2024Increasing evidence suggests that the physiological changes of pregnancy may impact pharmacokinetics of antiseizure medications (ASM), and this may affect treatment... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Increasing evidence suggests that the physiological changes of pregnancy may impact pharmacokinetics of antiseizure medications (ASM), and this may affect treatment outcomes. The aim of this study was to quantify the pregnancy impact on the ASM pharmacokinetics.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed/EMBASE in November 2022 and updated in August 2023 for studies comparing levels of ASM in the same individuals during pregnancy and in the preconception/postpartum period. Alteration ratios between the 3rd trimester and baseline were estimated. We also performed a random-effects meta-analysis calculating between-timepoint differences in mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) for dose-adjusted plasma concentrations (C/D ratios). Study quality was assessed using the ClinPK guidelines.
RESULTS
A total of 65 studies investigating 15 ASMs in 674 pregnancies were included. The largest differences were reported for lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine and levetiracetam (alteration ratio 0.42, range 0.07-2.45, 0.42, range 0.08-0.82 and 0.52, range 0.04-2.77 respectively): accordingly, C/D levels were lower in the 3rd trimester for lamotrigine, levetiracetam and the main oxcarbazepine metabolite monohydroxycarbazepine (MD = -12.33 × 10, 95%CI = -16.08 to -8.58 × 10 (μg/mL)/(mg/day), p < 0.001, MD = -7.16 (μg/mL)/(mg/day), 95%CI = -9.96 to -4.36, p < 0.001, and MD = -4.87 (μg/mL)/(mg/day), 95%CI = -9.39 to -0.35, p = 0.035, respectively), but not for oxcarbazepine (MD = 1.16 × 10 (μg/mL)/(mg/day), 95%CI = -2.55 to 0.24 × 10, p = 0.10). The quality of studies was acceptable with an average rating score of 11.5.
CONCLUSIONS
Data for lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine (and monohydroxycarbazepine) and levetiracetam demonstrate major changes in pharmacokinetics during pregnancy, suggesting the importance of therapeutic drug monitoring to assist clinicians in optimizing treatment outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Pregnancy; Anticonvulsants; Female; Pregnancy Complications; Levetiracetam; Lamotrigine; Epilepsy; Oxcarbazepine
PubMed: 38762161
DOI: 10.1016/j.pnpbp.2024.111030 -
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica May 2024Benzodiazepine (BDZP) and/or z-hypnotic dispensing during pregnancy has increased globally, as have rates of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Benzodiazepine (BDZP) and/or z-hypnotic dispensing during pregnancy has increased globally, as have rates of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the association between gestational exposure to BDZP and/or z-hypnotics and diagnosis of ASD or ADHD in offspring.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and SCOPUS from inception till December 2023 for relevant English-language articles. Outcomes of interest were risk of ASD and ADHD, two independent primary outcomes, in children exposed anytime during pregnancy to BDZP and/or z-hypnotics versus those unexposed. Secondary outcomes were trimester-wise analyses. Using a random effects model, we pooled the overall and trimester-wise hazard ratios (HRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), separately for risk of ASD and ADHD.
RESULTS
We found six eligible retrospective cohort studies and no case-control studies. There was no increased risk of ASD associated with anytime gestational BDZP and/or z-hypnotic exposure (primary outcome, HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.81-1.50; 4 studies; n = 3,783,417; 80,270 exposed, 3,703,147 unexposed) nor after first trimester exposure (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.83-1.58; 3 studies; n = 1,539,335; 70,737 exposed, 1,468,598 unexposed) or later trimester exposures. A very small but significantly increased risk of ADHD was noted with anytime gestational exposure to these drugs (primary outcome, HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03-1.12; 4 studies; n = 2,000,777; 78,912 exposed, 1,921,865 unexposed) and also with (only) second trimester exposure (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03-1.12; 3 studies; n = 1,539,281; 33,355 exposed, 1,505,926 unexposed). Findings were consistent in sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSION
Gestational exposure to benzodiazepines or z-hypnotics was not associated with an increased risk of ASD and with only a marginally increased risk of ADHD in offspring. Given the likelihood of confounding by indication and by unmeasured variables in the original studies, our findings should reassure women who need these medications for severe anxiety or insomnia during pregnancy.
PubMed: 38751163
DOI: 10.1111/acps.13696 -
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth May 2024Fetal movement monitoring is one of the strategies used to assess the fetus's health. Until now, most studies focused on the decreased fetal movement and neonatal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Fetal movement monitoring is one of the strategies used to assess the fetus's health. Until now, most studies focused on the decreased fetal movement and neonatal outcome, although this systematic review and meta-analysis is designed to assess the association between increased fetal movements (IFM) with perinatal outcomes.
METHOD
The electronic databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE were systematically searched for studies investigating the perinatal outcome of women with increased fetal movements from inception to July 2023. Following that, a random-effect meta-analysis model was used to obtain the combined diagnostic and predictive parameters including perinatal mortality (still birth and early neonatal mortality), operative delivery, Apgar score, neonatal resuscitation at birth and NICU Admission.
RESULTS
After the initial screening, seven studies examining the association between increased third trimester fetal movement and various perinatal outcomes were included. Meta-analysis revealed a significant reduction in the risk of cesarean delivery among patients with IFM compared to controls, suggesting a potential protective effect during childbirth. However, no statistically significant difference was observed in birth weight, small or large for gestational age births, neonatal intensive care unit admission, maternal age, umbilical cord around the neck, gestational diabetes mellitus, and hypertension, indicating that IFM may not be a major predictor of adverse perinatal outcomes or maternal conditions. Notably, IFM was significantly associated with a higher likelihood of labor induction.
CONCLUSION
The findings suggest that IFM may have a protective effect against cesarean delivery. Additionally, IFM does not appear to be significantly associated with maternal age, umbilical cord around the neck, gestational diabetes mellitus and hypertension. However, the observed significant association with labor induction warrants further investigation.
Topics: Humans; Pregnancy; Fetal Movement; Female; Pregnancy Trimester, Third; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy Outcome; Cesarean Section; Perinatal Mortality; Apgar Score
PubMed: 38750467
DOI: 10.1186/s12884-024-06547-3 -
Medicine May 2024Folic acid is the synthetic form of vitamin B9, found in supplements and fortified foods, while folate occurs naturally in foods. Folic acid and its derivatives are...
Folic acid is the synthetic form of vitamin B9, found in supplements and fortified foods, while folate occurs naturally in foods. Folic acid and its derivatives are extremely important in the synthesis of nucleic acids (DNA and ribose nucleic acid [RNA]) and different proteins. It acts as a coenzyme for the transfer of 1 carbon in the biosynthesis of purine, pyrimidine, and amino acids. Folic acid is critically important in rapidly proliferating tissues, including fetus and trophoblastic tissue to prevent neural tube defect (NTD). The main objective of this review is to identify the role of folic acid to prevent NTD among pregnancy mothers. Electronic databases including Web of Science, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane library used to systematically search without limitation of publication date and status. In pregnancy, the first trimester is a significant time for neural tube closure. Decreased blood folic acid levels inhibit DNA replication, repair, RNA synthesis, histone and DNA methylation, methionine production, and homocysteine remethylation reactions that cause NTDs in pregnancy. Therefore, folic acid supplementation is critically important for childbearing mothers before conception and in the first trimester pregnancy. As a result, women are recommended to take 400 microgram FA/day from preconception until the end of the first trimester to prevent NTD-affected pregnancies. This allows the developing neural tissue to acquire critical mass and provides the preferred rostrocaudal orientation so that these divisions contribute to the elongation of the developing neural tube in embryos.
Topics: Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Dietary Supplements; Folic Acid; Neural Tube Defects; Vitamin B Complex
PubMed: 38728462
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000038154 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2024Prenatal ultrasound is widely used to screen for structural anomalies before birth. While this is traditionally done in the second trimester, there is an increasing use... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Prenatal ultrasound is widely used to screen for structural anomalies before birth. While this is traditionally done in the second trimester, there is an increasing use of first-trimester ultrasound for early detection of lethal and certain severe structural anomalies.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in detecting fetal structural anomalies before 14 and 24 weeks' gestation in low-risk and unselected pregnant women and to compare the current two main prenatal screening approaches: a single second-trimester scan (single-stage screening) and a first- and second-trimester scan combined (two-stage screening) in terms of anomaly detection before 24 weeks' gestation.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science), Social Sciences Citation Index (Web of Science), Arts & Humanities Citation Index and Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science) from 1 January 1997 to 22 July 2022. We limited our search to studies published after 1997 and excluded animal studies, reviews and case reports. No further restrictions were applied. We also screened reference lists and citing articles of each of the included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Studies were eligible if they included low-risk or unselected pregnant women undergoing a first- and/or second-trimester fetal anomaly scan, conducted at 11 to 14 or 18 to 24 weeks' gestation, respectively. The reference standard was detection of anomalies at birth or postmortem.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently undertook study selection, quality assessment (QUADAS-2), data extraction and evaluation of the certainty of evidence (GRADE approach). We used univariate random-effects logistic regression models for the meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity.
MAIN RESULTS
Eighty-seven studies covering 7,057,859 fetuses (including 25,202 with structural anomalies) were included. No study was deemed low risk across all QUADAS-2 domains. Main methodological concerns included risk of bias in the reference standard domain and risk of partial verification. Applicability concerns were common in studies evaluating first-trimester scans and two-stage screening in terms of patient selection due to frequent recruitment from single tertiary centres without exclusion of referrals. We reported ultrasound accuracy for fetal structural anomalies overall, by severity, affected organ system and for 46 specific anomalies. Detection rates varied widely across categories, with the highest estimates of sensitivity for thoracic and abdominal wall anomalies and the lowest for gastrointestinal anomalies across all tests. The summary sensitivity of a first-trimester scan was 37.5% for detection of structural anomalies overall (95% confidence interval (CI) 31.1 to 44.3; low-certainty evidence) and 91.3% for lethal anomalies (95% CI 83.9 to 95.5; moderate-certainty evidence), with an overall specificity of 99.9% (95% CI 99.9 to 100; low-certainty evidence). Two-stage screening had a combined sensitivity of 83.8% (95% CI 74.7 to 90.1; low-certainty evidence), while single-stage screening had a sensitivity of 50.5% (95% CI 38.5 to 62.4; very low-certainty evidence). The specificity of two-stage screening was 99.9% (95% CI 99.7 to 100; low-certainty evidence) and for single-stage screening, it was 99.8% (95% CI 99.2 to 100; moderate-certainty evidence). Indirect comparisons suggested superiority of two-stage screening across all analyses regarding sensitivity, with no significant difference in specificity. However, the certainty of the evidence is very low due to the absence of direct comparisons.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
A first-trimester scan has the potential to detect lethal and certain severe anomalies with high accuracy before 14 weeks' gestation, despite its limited overall sensitivity. Conversely, two-stage screening shows high accuracy in detecting most fetal structural anomalies before 24 weeks' gestation with high sensitivity and specificity. In a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 fetuses, the first-trimester scan is expected to correctly identify 113 out of 124 fetuses with lethal anomalies (91.3%) and 665 out of 1776 fetuses with any anomaly (37.5%). However, 79 false-positive diagnoses are anticipated among 98,224 fetuses (0.08%). Two-stage screening is expected to correctly identify 1448 out of 1776 cases of structural anomalies overall (83.8%), with 118 false positives (0.1%). In contrast, single-stage screening is expected to correctly identify 896 out of 1776 cases before 24 weeks' gestation (50.5%), with 205 false-positive diagnoses (0.2%). This represents a difference of 592 fewer correct identifications and 88 more false positives compared to two-stage screening. However, it is crucial to acknowledge the uncertainty surrounding the additional benefits of two-stage versus single-stage screening, as there are no studies directly comparing them. Moreover, the evidence supporting the accuracy of first-trimester ultrasound and two-stage screening approaches primarily originates from studies conducted in single tertiary care facilities, which restricts the generalisability of the results of this meta-analysis to the broader population.
Topics: Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Bias; Congenital Abnormalities; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Pregnancy Trimester, Second; Sensitivity and Specificity; Ultrasonography, Prenatal
PubMed: 38721874
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014715.pub2 -
Anaesthesia May 2024Prescribed opioid analgesics are frequently used to manage pain in pregnancy. However, the available literature regarding the teratogenic potential of opioid use during... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Prescribed opioid analgesics are frequently used to manage pain in pregnancy. However, the available literature regarding the teratogenic potential of opioid use during pregnancy has not been systematically summarised. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the quality of the evidence on these potential risks and calculate a pooled estimate of risk for any opioid analgesic and individual opioids.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase and CINAHL for published studies assessing the risk of major congenital malformations in infants following first-trimester exposure to opioid analgesics compared with a reference group, excluding studies examining opioid agonist therapy or illicit opioid use. We assessed the risk of bias using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Intervention tool. We pooled adjusted risk estimates from studies rated at serious risk of bias or better in a random-effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Of 12 identified studies, 11 were at high risk of bias (eight serious; three critical). Relative to unexposed infants, those exposed to any opioid use during the first trimester of pregnancy were not at an increased risk of major congenital malformations overall (relative risk 1.04, 95%CI 0.98-1.11); cardiovascular malformations (relative risk 1.07, 95%CI 0.96-1.20); or central nervous system malformations (relative risk 1.06, 95%CI 0.92-1.21). Raised risk estimates were observed for gastrointestinal malformations (relative risk 1.40, 95%CI 0.38-5.16) and cleft palate (relative risk 1.57, 95%CI 0.48-5.13) following any opioid exposure and atrial septal defects (relative risk 1.20, 95%CI 1.05-1.36) following codeine exposure.
CONCLUSIONS
Although the meta-analysis did not indicate substantial increased risk for most malformations examined, this risk remains uncertain due to the methodological limitations of the included studies. Healthcare professionals and pharmaceutical regulators should be aware of the issues related to the quality of research in this field.
PubMed: 38715235
DOI: 10.1111/anae.16307 -
European Journal of Obstetrics,... Jun 2024Ectopic pregnancy (EP) is a pregnancy where the growing blastocyst implants outside the endometrial cavity. EP account approximately for 0.5-1% of all pregnancies, and... (Review)
Review
Ectopic pregnancy (EP) is a pregnancy where the growing blastocyst implants outside the endometrial cavity. EP account approximately for 0.5-1% of all pregnancies, and extrauterine implant is the leading cause of woman mortality in the first trimester of gestation. Non-tubal pregnancies (NTP) account for less than 5% of all EP. NTP are accompanied by a 7-8 times higher risk of maternal mortality when compared to tubal pregnancies, and their treatment might sometimes be very challenging. Subserosal pregnancy (SP) has been defined as rare variant of intramural pregnancy, where a portion of the gestational sac was surrounded only by the serosa of the uterus. Whereas the treatment of the ectopic pregnancies is crucial for patients' lives and for adequate fertility sparing and considering the need for surgical treatment in many cases, an early diagnosis is important; thus we believe it g might be useful to define some criteria to guide subserosal pregnancy identification, and to distinguish it from other types of non-tubal ectopic pregnancy. A systematic review on Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar was performed. Case reports, randomized controlled trials, prospective controlled studies, prospective cohort studies, retrospective studies, and case series were considered eligible. In all databases mentioned were considered manuscripts published from 1990 up to March 2023. Only four articles were eligible for inclusion in this review. All patients underwent to surgical management in laparoscopy. The main risk factors for this type of ectopic pregnancy were previous uterine surgery with opening of the endometrial cavity and assisted reproductive techniques procedures. Considering our results, we propose new classification and diagnostic criteria for subserosal pregnancy, to distinguish it from other types of non-tubal ectopic pregnancies with the aim to preserve fertility following the most correct management.
Topics: Humans; Female; Pregnancy; Pregnancy, Ectopic
PubMed: 38701545
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2024.04.037 -
Surgical Endoscopy Jun 2024When pregnant patients present with nonobstetric pathology, the physicians caring for them may be uncertain about the optimal management strategy. The aim of this...
BACKGROUND
When pregnant patients present with nonobstetric pathology, the physicians caring for them may be uncertain about the optimal management strategy. The aim of this guideline is to develop evidence-based recommendations for pregnant patients presenting with common surgical pathologies including appendicitis, biliary disease, and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).
METHODS
The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Guidelines Committee convened a working group to address these issues. The group generated five key questions and completed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. An expert panel then met to form evidence-based recommendations according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Expert opinion was utilized when the available evidence was deemed insufficient.
RESULTS
The expert panel agreed on ten recommendations addressing the management of appendicitis, biliary disease, and IBD during pregnancy.
CONCLUSIONS
Conditional recommendations were made in favor of appendectomy over nonoperative treatment of appendicitis, laparoscopic appendectomy over open appendectomy, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy over nonoperative treatment of biliary disease and acute cholecystitis specifically. Based on expert opinion, the panel also suggested either operative or nonoperative treatment of biliary diseases other than acute cholecystitis in the third trimester, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography rather than common bile duct exploration for symptomatic choledocholithiasis, applying the same criteria for emergent surgical intervention in pregnant and non-pregnant IBD patients, utilizing an open rather than minimally invasive approach for pregnant patients requiring emergent surgical treatment of IBD, and managing pregnant patients with active IBD flares in a multidisciplinary fashion at centers with IBD expertise.
Topics: Humans; Pregnancy; Female; Pregnancy Complications; Laparoscopy; Appendicitis; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Appendectomy; Biliary Tract Diseases
PubMed: 38700549
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-10810-1 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2024Despite the known harms, alcohol consumption is common in pregnancy. Rates vary between countries, and are estimated to be 10% globally, with up to 25% in Europe.
BACKGROUND
Despite the known harms, alcohol consumption is common in pregnancy. Rates vary between countries, and are estimated to be 10% globally, with up to 25% in Europe.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy of psychosocial interventions and medications to reduce or stop alcohol consumption during pregnancy.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register (via CRSLive), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PsycINFO, from inception to 8 January 2024. We also searched for ongoing and unpublished studies via ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched references of topic-related systematic reviews and included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials that compared medications or psychosocial interventions, or both, to placebo, no intervention, usual care, or other medications or psychosocial interventions used to reduce or stop alcohol use during pregnancy. Our primary outcomes of interest were abstinence from alcohol, reduction in alcohol consumption, retention in treatment, and women with any adverse event.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.
MAIN RESULTS
We included eight studies (1369 participants) in which pregnant women received an intervention to stop or reduce alcohol use during pregnancy. In one study, almost half of participants had a current diagnosis of alcohol use disorder (AUD); in another study, 40% of participants had a lifetime diagnosis of AUD. Six studies took place in the USA, one in Spain, and one in the Netherlands. All included studies evaluated the efficacy of psychosocial interventions; we did not find any study that evaluated the efficacy of medications for the treatment of AUD during pregnancy. Psychosocial interventions were mainly brief interventions ranging from a single session of 10 to 60 minutes to five sessions of 10 minutes each. Pregnant women received the psychosocial intervention approximately at the end of the first trimester of pregnancy, and the outcome of alcohol use was reassessed 8 to 24 weeks after the psychosocial intervention. Women in the control group received treatment as usual (TAU) or similar treatments such as comprehensive assessment of alcohol use and advice to stop drinking during pregnancy. Globally, we found that, compared to TAU, psychosocial interventions may increase the rate of continuously abstinent participants (risk ratio (RR) 1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14 to 1.57; I =0%; 3 studies; 378 women; low certainty evidence). Psychosocial interventions may have little to no effect on the number of drinks per day, but the evidence is very uncertain (mean difference -0.42, 95% CI -1.13 to 0.28; I = 86%; 2 studies; 157 women; very low certainty evidence). Psychosocial interventions probably have little to no effect on the number of women who completed treatment (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.02; I = 0%; 7 studies; 1283 women; moderate certainty evidence). None of the included studies assessed adverse events of treatments. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence due to risk of bias and imprecision of the estimates.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Brief psychosocial interventions may increase the rate of continuous abstinence among pregnant women who report alcohol use during pregnancy. Further studies should be conducted to investigate the efficacy and safety of psychosocial interventions and other treatments (e.g. medications) for women with AUD. These studies should provide detailed information on alcohol use before and during pregnancy using consistent measures such as the number of drinks per drinking day. When heterogeneous populations are recruited, more detailed information on alcohol use during pregnancy should be provided to allow future systematic reviews to be conducted. Other important information that would enhance the usefulness of these studies would be the presence of other comorbid conditions such as anxiety, mood disorders, and the use of other psychoactive substances.
Topics: Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Acamprosate; Alcohol Abstinence; Alcohol Deterrents; Alcohol Drinking; Bias; Pregnancy Complications; Psychosocial Intervention; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Taurine
PubMed: 38682758
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015042.pub2