SARS-CoV-2 IgG Antibody Levels in Women with IBD Vaccinated during Pregnancy.

INTRODUCTION: Regulatory agencies supported vaccination of pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines, including patients with IBD. No data exist regarding these vaccines in IBD during pregnancy. AIM: To assess the serologic response to two doses of the mRNA SARS-CoV-2 BNT162b2 vaccine in pregnant women with IBD vaccinated during pregnancy, compared to that of pregnant women without IBD, and non-pregnant women with IBD. METHODS: Anti-spike antibody levels were assessed in all women and in cord blood of consenting women. RESULTS: From December 2020 to December 2021, 139 women were assessed: pregnant with IBD-36, pregnant without IBD-61, and not pregnant with IBD-42. Antibodies were assessed in cords of two and nine newborns of women with and without IBD, respectively. Mean gestational ages at administration of the second vaccine doses were 22.0 weeks in IBD and 23.2 weeks in non-IBD, respectively. Mean (SD) duration from the second vaccine dose to serology analysis in pregnant women with IBD, without IBD, and in non-pregnant women with IBD was 10.6 (4.9), 16.4 (6.3), and 4.3 (1.0) weeks, respectively. All women mounted a serologic response. In multivariable analysis, no correlation was found between the specific group and antibody levels. In both pregnancy groups, an inverse correlation between antibody levels and the interval from the second vaccine dose was demonstrated. Cord blood antibody levels exceeded maternal levels in women with and without IBD. CONCLUSION: All patients with IBD mounted a serologic response. The interval between vaccine administration to serology assessment was the most important factor determining antibody levels. A third vaccine dose should be considered in pregnant women with IBD vaccinated at early stages of pregnancy.

Covid-19 third vaccination during pregnancy: maternal and neonatal outcomes-a retrospective study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of Covid-19 (Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2) third booster dose vaccination during pregnancy on maternal and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: This is a multicenter, retrospective computerized database study. Parturients who delivered in Israel between August and December 2021 with full records of Covid-19 disease and vaccination status were included. Those who received third booster during pregnancy were compared to those who received two doses of vaccine during pregnancy and to unvaccinated parturients. Various adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes were evaluated. Parturients who were previously positive with Covid-19 PCR swabs during pregnancy or before pregnancy were excluded. Univariate analysis was followed by multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 2583 women were included in the analysis; 626 received the third booster dose of the BNT162b2 Covid-19 vaccine, 1094 received two doses of the vaccine, and 863 unvaccinated women. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were comparable between the study groups. An adjusted multivariable logistic regression analysis demonstrated that receiving the third booster was not associated with an increase in neither composite adverse maternal or neonatal outcome (aOR 0.9; 95% CI [0.65-1.22], p = 0.47; aOR 0.7; 95% CI [0.53-1.035], p= 0.09, respectively) when compared to those who received two doses of the vaccine. However, administration of the third booster dose during pregnancy was associated with a reduced composite adverse neonatal outcome when compared to unvaccinated women (aOR 0.6; 95% CI [0.42-0.86], p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Receiving the third booster dose of the BNT162b2 Covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy is not associated with an increased risk of any adverse maternal outcomes and may be beneficial for the neonates.

Covid-19 third vaccination during pregnancy: maternal and neonatal outcomes—a retrospective study

Purpose To evaluate the impact of Covid-19 (Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2) third booster dose vaccination during pregnancy on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Methods This is a multicenter, retrospective computerized database study. Parturients who delivered in Israel between August and December 2021 with full records of Covid-19 disease and vaccination status were included. Those who received third booster during pregnancy were compared to those who received two doses of vaccine during pregnancy and to unvaccinated parturients. Various adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes were evaluated. Parturients who were previously positive with Covid-19 PCR swabs during pregnancy or before pregnancy were excluded. Univariate analysis was followed by multivariate analysis. Results A total of 2583 women were included in the analysis;626 received the third booster dose of the BNT162b2 Covid-19 vaccine, 1094 received two doses of the vaccine, and 863 unvaccinated women. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were comparable between the study groups. An adjusted multivariable logistic regression analysis demonstrated that receiving the third booster was not associated with an increase in neither composite adverse maternal or neonatal outcome (aOR 0.9;95% CI [0.65–1.22], p = 0.47;aOR 0.7;95% CI [0.53–1.035], p= 0.09, respectively) when compared to those who received two doses of the vaccine. However, administration of the third booster dose during pregnancy was associated with a reduced composite adverse neonatal outcome when compared to unvaccinated women (aOR 0.6;95% CI [0.42–0.86], p = 0.01). Conclusion Receiving the third booster dose of the BNT162b2 Covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy is not associated with an increased risk of any adverse maternal outcomes and may be beneficial for the neonates.

Delayed presentation of ectopic pregnancy during the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective study of a collateral effect.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the rates of overall diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy (EP), treatment modality and associated complications during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the exact time period in the previous year (pre-COVID-19). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single referral regional center (Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel). Prevalence of the diagnosis of EP, treatment modality and associated complications during the COVID-19 lockdown period in the state of Israel (March 10-May 12, 2020) was compared to patients receiving the same diagnosis during the parallel timeframe in the previous year (2019). RESULTS: Overall there were 29 and 43 cases of EP during the COVID-19 and pre COVID-19 epoch, respectively. COVID-19 period patients presented to the emergency room with significantly higher ß-human chorionic gonadotrophin level; median of 1364 versus 633 IU, P = 0.001. The rate of ruptured EP was; 20.7% versus 4.3% P = 0.031, and surgical approach; 55.2% versus 27.9%, P = 0.001. Significantly higher median volume of blood loss; median volume 852 versus 300 ml, P = 0.042 were observed in patients during the COVID-19 epoch. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic led to delayed presentation of patients with EP, and the requirement of subsequent emergency surgical management and excessive blood loss. Special attention should be given to the decline in routine medical care during the pandemic.

Online Obstetrics and Gynecology Medical Students Clerkship During the Covid-19 Pandemic: a Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: The Covid-19 pandemic and social distancing resulted in the need for an immediate transition of all medical education to online education with a concern that such a pandemic might recur. OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of an online clinical rotation in Obstetrics and Gynecology during the Covid-19 pandemic and to identify effective pedagogical modalities as well as obstacles to online learning. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to the students and staff at the end of the 3-week online rotation. The online curriculum included synchronous learning such as problem-based learning, video demonstrations and discussions, as well as asynchronous pre-recorded lectures. Questions addressed expectations, previous experience, difficulties encountered, effectiveness of different types of pedagogy, and willingness to participate in online education in the future. RESULTS: We received 27 completed questionnaires, 77% response rate. Overall course rating was 4.14/5 from the students and 3.38/5 from the staff. Previous experience in online education had a positive correlation with higher overall course evaluations; however, low expectations of effectiveness of online learning prior to the course did not correlate with the overall course rate. Challenges identified were absence of bedside teaching and lack of feedback. Effective pedagogical modules were problem-based learning and videos. Additionally, 72% stated that online learning should be part of the formal curriculum. CONCLUSION: Further research into tele-teaching should be part of medical school strategic plan to ensure meaningful learning in these emerging modalities not limited to exceptional situations such as pandemics. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-020-01181-y.