COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy.

Despite a recent endorsement from official and professional bodies unequivocally recommending COVID-19 vaccination, vaccine hesitancy among pregnant people remains high. The accumulated evidence demonstrates that pregnant people are a special risk group for COVID-19, with an increased risk of intensive care unit admission, extracorporeal membranous oxygenation requirement, preterm birth, and perinatal death. These risks are further increased with some variants of concern, and vaccination of pregnant people reduces the COVID-19-related increase in maternal or fetal morbidity. Data from more than 180,000 vaccinated persons show that immunization against COVID-19 with an mRNA vaccine is safe for pregnant people. Many observational studies comparing perinatal outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant people have had reassuring findings and did not demonstrate harmful effects on pregnancy or the newborn. Immunization with mRNA vaccines does not increase the risk of miscarriage, preterm delivery, low birthweight, maternal or neonatal intensive care unit admission, fetal death, fetal abnormality, or pulmonary embolism. Moreover, observational data corroborate the findings of randomized trials that mRNA vaccination is highly effective at preventing severe SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant people, emphasizing that the potential maternal and fetal benefits of vaccination greatly outweigh the potential risks of vaccination. Ensuring pregnant people have unrestricted access to COVID-19 vaccination should be a priority in every country worldwide.

Clinical risk factors of adverse outcomes among women with COVID-19 in the pregnancy and postpartum period: A sequential, prospective meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This sequential, prospective meta-analysis (sPMA) sought to identify risk factors among pregnant and postpartum women with COVID-19 for adverse outcomes related to: disease severity, maternal morbidities, neonatal mortality and morbidity, adverse birth outcomes. DATA SOURCES: We prospectively invited study investigators to join the sPMA via professional research networks beginning in March 2020. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Eligible studies included those recruiting at least 25 consecutive cases of COVID-19 in pregnancy within a defined catchment area. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: We included individual patient data from 21 participating studies. Data quality was assessed, and harmonized variables for risk factors and outcomes were constructed. Duplicate cases were removed. Pooled estimates for the absolute and relative risk of adverse outcomes comparing those with and without each risk factor were generated using a two-stage meta-analysis. RESULTS: We collected data from 33 countries and territories, including 21,977 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy or postpartum. We found that women with comorbidities (pre-existing diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease) versus those without were at higher risk for COVID-19 severity and pregnancy health outcomes (fetal death, preterm birth, low birthweight). Participants with COVID-19 and HIV were 1.74 times (95% CI: 1.12, 2.71) more likely to be admitted to the ICU. Pregnant women who were underweight before pregnancy were at higher risk of ICU admission (RR 5.53, 95% CI: 2.27, 13.44), ventilation (RR 9.36, 95% CI: 3.87, 22.63), and pregnancy-related death (RR 14.10, 95% CI: 2.83, 70.36). Pre-pregnancy obesity was also a risk factor for severe COVID-19 outcomes including ICU admission (RR 1.81, 95% CI: 1.26,2.60), ventilation (RR 2.05, 95% CI: 1.20,3.51), any critical care (RR 1.89, 95% CI: 1.28,2.77), and pneumonia (RR 1.66, 95% CI: 1.18,2.33). Anemic pregnant women with COVID-19 also had increased risk of ICU admission (RR 1.63, 95% CI: 1.25, 2.11) and death (RR 2.36, 95% CI: 1.15, 4.81). CONCLUSION: We found that pregnant women with comorbidities including diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease were at increased risk for severe COVID-19-related outcomes, maternal morbidities, and adverse birth outcomes. We also identified several less commonly-known risk factors, including HIV infection, pre-pregnancy underweight, and anemia. Although pregnant women are already considered a high-risk population, special priority for prevention and treatment should be given to pregnant women with these additional risk factors.

Adverse maternal, fetal, and newborn outcomes among pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Despite a growing body of research on the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy, there is continued controversy given heterogeneity in the quality and design of published studies. METHODS: We screened ongoing studies in our sequential, prospective meta-analysis. We pooled individual participant data to estimate the absolute and relative risk (RR) of adverse outcomes among pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared with confirmed negative pregnancies. We evaluated the risk of bias using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: We screened 137 studies and included 12 studies in 12 countries involving 13 136 pregnant women.Pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection-as compared with uninfected pregnant women-were at significantly increased risk of maternal mortality (10 studies; n=1490; RR 7.68, 95% CI 1.70 to 34.61); admission to intensive care unit (8 studies; n=6660; RR 3.81, 95% CI 2.03 to 7.17); receiving mechanical ventilation (7 studies; n=4887; RR 15.23, 95% CI 4.32 to 53.71); receiving any critical care (7 studies; n=4735; RR 5.48, 95% CI 2.57 to 11.72); and being diagnosed with pneumonia (6 studies; n=4573; RR 23.46, 95% CI 3.03 to 181.39) and thromboembolic disease (8 studies; n=5146; RR 5.50, 95% CI 1.12 to 27.12).Neonates born to women with SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to be admitted to a neonatal care unit after birth (7 studies; n=7637; RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.08); be born preterm (7 studies; n=6233; RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.29) or moderately preterm (7 studies; n=6071; RR 2.92, 95% CI 1.88 to 4.54); and to be born low birth weight (12 studies; n=11 930; RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.40). Infection was not linked to stillbirth. Studies were generally at low or moderate risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis indicates that SARS-CoV-2 infection at any time during pregnancy increases the risk of maternal death, severe maternal morbidities and neonatal morbidity, but not stillbirth or intrauterine growth restriction. As more data become available, we will update these findings per the published protocol.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and perinatal outcomes of COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy.

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, I2 = 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, I2 = 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.

An internally validated prediction model for critical COVID-19 infection and intensive care unit admission in symptomatic pregnant women.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant women are at an increased risk of mortality and morbidity owing to COVID-19. Many studies have reported on the association of COVID-19 with pregnancy-specific adverse outcomes, but prediction models utilizing large cohorts of pregnant women are still lacking for estimating the risk of maternal morbidity and other adverse events. OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to develop a prediction model to quantify the risk of progression to critical COVID-19 and intensive care unit admission in pregnant women with symptomatic infection. STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study including 8 hospitals from 4 countries (the United Kingdom, Austria, Greece, and Turkey). The data extraction was from February 2020 until May 2021. Included were consecutive pregnant and early postpartum women (within 10 days of birth); reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome was progression to critical illness requiring intensive care. The secondary outcomes included maternal death, preeclampsia, and stillbirth. The association between the primary outcome and 12 candidate predictors having a known association with severe COVID-19 in pregnancy was analyzed with log-binomial mixed-effects regression and reported as adjusted risk ratios. All the potential predictors were evaluated in 1 model and only the baseline factors in another. The predictive accuracy was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Of the 793 pregnant women who were positive for SARS-CoV-2 and were symptomatic, 44 (5.5%) were admitted to intensive care, of whom 10 died (1.3%). The 'mini-COvid Maternal Intensive Therapy' model included the following demographic and clinical variables available at disease onset: maternal age (adjusted risk ratio, 1.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.95; P=.015); body mass index (adjusted risk ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.66; P=.010); and diagnosis in the third trimester of pregnancy (adjusted risk ratio, 3.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.78-8.46; P=.001). The optimism-adjusted area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.73. The 'full-COvid Maternal Intensive Therapy' model included body mass index (adjusted risk ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.95; P=.015), lower respiratory symptoms (adjusted risk ratio, 5.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.81-21.4; P=.007), neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (adjusted risk ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.36-1.89; P<.001); and serum C-reactive protein (adjusted risk ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-1.44; P<.001), with an optimism-adjusted area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.85. Neither model showed signs of a poor fit. Categorization as high-risk by either model was associated with a shorter diagnosis to intensive care unit admission interval (log-rank test P<.001, both), higher maternal death (5.2% vs 0.2%; P<.001), and preeclampsia (5.7% vs 1.0%; P<.001). A spreadsheet calculator is available for risk estimation. CONCLUSION: At presentation with symptomatic COVID-19, pregnant and recently postpartum women can be stratified into high- and low-risk for progression to critical disease, even where resources are limited. This can support the nature and place of care. These models also highlight the independent risk for severe disease associated with obesity and should further emphasize that even in the absence of other comorbidities, vaccination is particularly important for these women. Finally, the model also provides useful information for policy makers when prioritizing national vaccination programs to quickly protect those at the highest risk of critical and fatal COVID-19.

Short-term outcomes of pregnant women with convalescent COVID-19 and factors associated with false-negative polymerase chain reaction test: A prospective cohort study.

AIM: To evaluate the clinical factors associated with false-negative RT-PCR results and to report the outcome of a cohort of pregnant women with COVID-19. METHODS: This cohort study was conducted in a tertiary referral pandemic hospital and included 56 pregnant women. A study including pregnant women with either a laboratory or clinical diagnosis for COVID-19 were included in the study. The primary outcome was clinical factors associated with false-negative RT-PCR results defined as a positive immunoglobulin M assessed by rapid testing in clinically diagnosed patients. Clinical outcomes of laboratory diagnosed patients were also reported. RESULTS: In total, 56 women with either RT-PCR or clinical COVID-19 diagnosis were included in the study. Forty-three women either had RT-PCR positivity or IgM positivity. The clinical outcome of these pregnancies was as follows: mean maternal age 27.7, immunoglobulin M positive patients 76.7%, RT-PCR positive patients 55.8%, maternal comorbidities 11.5%, complications in patients below 20 weeks 34.8%, complications in patients above 20 weeks 65.1%, elevated CRP 83.7%, lymphopenia 30.2%, time from hospital admission to final follow-up days 37 and stillbirth 8.3%. The proportion of women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin M was 100% in the RT-PCR positive group and 56.5% in the clinical diagnosis group (P = .002). The symptom onset to RT-PCR testing interval longer than a week (risk ratio: 2.72, 95% CI: 1.14-5.40, P = .003) and presence of dyspnoea (risk ratio: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.14-0.89, P = .035) were associated with false-negative RT-PCR tests. The area under the curve of these parameters predicting false-negative RT-PCR was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.57-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Symptomatic women with a negative RT-PCR should not be dismissed as potential COVID-19 patients, especially in the presence of prolonged symptom onset-test interval and in women without dyspnoea.

COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy: coverage and safety.

BACKGROUND: Concerns have been raised regarding a potential surge of COVID-19 in pregnancy, secondary to the rising numbers of COVID-19 in the community, easing of societal restrictions, and vaccine hesitancy. Although COVID-19 vaccination is now offered to all pregnant women in the United Kingdom; limited data exist on its uptake and safety. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the uptake and safety of COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cohort study of pregnant women who gave birth at St George's University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom, between March 1, 2020, and July 4, 2021. The primary outcome was uptake of COVID-19 vaccination and its determinants. The secondary outcomes were perinatal safety outcomes. Data were collected on COVID-19 vaccination uptake, vaccination type, gestational age at vaccination, and maternal characteristics, including age, parity, ethnicity, index of multiple deprivation score, and comorbidities. Further data were collected on perinatal outcomes, including stillbirth (fetal death at ≥24 weeks' gestation), preterm birth, fetal and congenital abnormalities, and intrapartum complications. Pregnancy and neonatal outcomes of women who received the vaccine were compared with that of a matched cohort of women with balanced propensity scores. Effect magnitudes of vaccination on perinatal outcomes were reported as mean differences or odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Factors associated with antenatal vaccination were assessed with logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Data were available for 1328 pregnant women of whom 140 received at least 1 dose of the COVID-19 vaccine before giving birth and 1188 women who did not; 85.7% of those vaccinated received their vaccine in the third trimester of pregnancy and 14.3% in the second trimester of pregnancy. Of those vaccinated, 127 (90.7%) received a messenger RNA vaccine and 13 (9.3%) a viral vector vaccine. There was evidence of reduced vaccine uptake in younger women (P=.001), women with high levels of deprivation (ie, fifth quintile of the index of multiple deprivation; P=.008), and women of Afro-Caribbean or Asian ethnicity compared with women of White ethnicity (P<.001). Women with prepregnancy diabetes mellitus had increased vaccine uptake (P=.008). In the multivariable model the fifth deprivation quintile (most deprived) (adjusted odds ratio, 0.10; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.10; P=.003) and Afro-Caribbean ethnicity (adjusted odds ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-0.85; P=.044) were significantly associated with lower antenatal vaccine uptake, whereas prepregnancy diabetes mellitus was significantly associated with higher antenatal vaccine uptake (adjusted odds ratio, 10.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.74-83.2; P=.014). In a propensity score-matched cohort, the rates of adverse pregnancy outcomes of 133 women who received at least 1 dose of the COVID-19 vaccine in pregnancy were similar to that of unvaccinated pregnant women (P>.05 for all): stillbirth (0.0% vs 0.2%), fetal abnormalities (2.2% vs 2.5%), postpartum hemorrhage (9.8% vs 9.0%), cesarean delivery (30.8% vs 34.1%), small for gestational age (12.0% vs 12.8%), maternal high-dependency unit or intensive care admission (6.0% vs 4.0%), or neonatal intensive care unit admission (5.3% vs 5.0%). Intrapartum pyrexia (3.7% vs 1.0%; P=.046) was significantly increased but the borderline statistical significance was lost after excluding women with antenatal COVID-19 infection (P=.079). Mixed-effects Cox regression showed that vaccination was not significantly associated with birth at <40 weeks' gestation (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.23; P=.624). CONCLUSION: Of pregnant women eligible for COVID-19 vaccination, less than one-third accepted COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, and they experienced similar pregnancy outcomes with unvaccinated pregnant women. There was lower uptake among younger women, non-White ethnicity, and lower socioeconomic background. This study has contributed to the body of evidence that having COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy does not alter perinatal outcomes. Clear communication to improve awareness among pregnant women and healthcare professionals on vaccine safety is needed, alongside strategies to address vaccine hesitancy. These strategies include postvaccination surveillance to gather further data on pregnancy outcomes, particularly after first-trimester vaccination, and long-term infant follow-up.

Global changes in maternity care provision during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on healthcare systems globally, with a worrying increase in adverse maternal and foetal outcomes. We aimed to assess the changes in maternity healthcare provision and healthcare-seeking by pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies of the effects of the pandemic on provision of, access to and attendance at maternity services (CRD42020211753). We searched MEDLINE and Embase in accordance with PRISMA guidelines from January 1st, 2020 to April 17th 2021 for controlled observational studies and research letters reporting primary data comparing maternity healthcare-seeking and healthcare delivery during compared to before the COVID-19 pandemic. Case reports and series, systematic literature reviews, and pre-print studies were excluded. Meta-analysis was performed on comparable outcomes that were reported in two or more studies. Data were combined using random-effects meta-analysis, using risk ratios (RR) or incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). FINDINGS: Of 4743 citations identified, 56 were included in the systematic review, and 21 in the meta-analysis. We identified a significant decrease in the number of antenatal clinic visits (IRR 0614, 95% CI 0486-0776, P<00001, I2=54.6%) and unscheduled care visits (IRR 0741, 95% CI 0602-0911, P = 00046, I2=00%) per week, and an increase in virtual or remote antenatal care (IRR 4656 95% CI 7762-2794, P<00001, I2=90.6%) and hospitalisation of unscheduled attendees (RR 1214, 95% CI 1118-1319, P<00001, I2=00%). There was a decrease in the use of GA for category 1 Caesarean sections (CS) (RR 0529, 95% CI 0407-0690, P<00001, I2=00%). There was no significant change in intrapartum epidural use (P = 00896) or the use of GA for elective CS (P = 079). INTERPRETATION: Reduced maternity healthcare-seeking and healthcare provision during the COVID-19 pandemic has been global, and must be considered as potentially contributing to worsening of pregnancy outcomes observed during the pandemic.

Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal and perinatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on health-care systems and potentially on pregnancy outcomes, but no systematic synthesis of evidence of this effect has been undertaken. We aimed to assess the collective evidence on the effects on maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes of the pandemic. METHODS: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the effects of the pandemic on maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes. We searched MEDLINE and Embase in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, from Jan 1, 2020, to Jan 8, 2021, for case-control studies, cohort studies, and brief reports comparing maternal and perinatal mortality, maternal morbidity, pregnancy complications, and intrapartum and neonatal outcomes before and during the pandemic. We also planned to record any additional maternal and offspring outcomes identified. Studies of solely SARS-CoV-2-infected pregnant individuals, as well as case reports, studies without comparison groups, narrative or systematic literature reviews, preprints, and studies reporting on overlapping populations were excluded. Quantitative meta-analysis was done for an outcome when more than one study presented relevant data. Random-effects estimate of the pooled odds ratio (OR) of each outcome were generated with use of the Mantel-Haenszel method. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020211753). FINDINGS: The search identified 3592 citations, of which 40 studies were included. We identified significant increases in stillbirth (pooled OR 1·28 [95% CI 1·07-1·54]; I2=63%; 12 studies, 168 295 pregnancies during and 198 993 before the pandemic) and maternal death (1·37 [1·22-1·53; I2=0%, two studies [both from low-income and middle-income countries], 1 237 018 and 2 224 859 pregnancies) during versus before the pandemic. Preterm births before 37 weeks' gestation were not significantly changed overall (0·94 [0·87-1·02]; I2=75%; 15 studies, 170 640 and 656 423 pregnancies) but were decreased in high-income countries (0·91 [0·84-0·99]; I2=63%; 12 studies, 159 987 and 635 118 pregnancies), where spontaneous preterm birth was also decreased (0·81 [0·67-0·97]; two studies, 4204 and 6818 pregnancies). Mean Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale scores were higher, indicating poorer mental health, during versus before the pandemic (pooled mean difference 0·42 [95% CI 0·02-0·81; three studies, 2330 and 6517 pregnancies). Surgically managed ectopic pregnancies were increased during the pandemic (OR 5·81 [2·16-15·6]; I2=26%; three studies, 37 and 272 pregnancies). No overall significant effects were identified for other outcomes included in the quantitative analysis: maternal gestational diabetes; hypertensive disorders of pregnancy; preterm birth before 34 weeks', 32 weeks', or 28 weeks' gestation; iatrogenic preterm birth; labour induction; modes of delivery (spontaneous vaginal delivery, caesarean section, or instrumental delivery); post-partum haemorrhage; neonatal death; low birthweight (<2500 g); neonatal intensive care unit admission; or Apgar score less than 7 at 5 min. INTERPRETATION: Global maternal and fetal outcomes have worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic, with an increase in maternal deaths, stillbirth, ruptured ectopic pregnancies, and maternal depression. Some outcomes show considerable disparity between high-resource and low-resource settings. There is an urgent need to prioritise safe, accessible, and equitable maternity care within the strategic response to this pandemic and in future health crises. FUNDING: None.

How to perform and interpret the lung ultrasound by the obstetricians in pregnant women during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence for the use of lung ultrasound scan (LUS) examinations in coronavirus 2019 pneumonia is rapidly growing. The safe and non-ionizing nature of LUS drew attention, particularly for pregnant women. This study aimed to contribute to the interpretation of LUS findings in pregnant women for the obstetricians. MATERIALS AND METHODS: LUS was performed to pregnant women suspected of or diagnosed as having Severe Acute Respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the first 24 hours of admission. Fourteen areas (3 posterior, 2 lateral, and 2 anterior) were scanned per patient for at least 10 seconds along the indicated anatomical landmarks. The scan was performed in supine, right-sided and left-sided positions, respectively. Each area was given a score between 0 and 3 according to the specific pattern. RESULTS: In this study, 21 still images and 21 videoclips that enabled dynamic and real-time evaluation were provided. Pleural line assessment, physiologic A-lines, pathologic B-lines, light beam pattern, white lung pattern, and specific patterns for quick recognition and evaluation are described. CONCLUSION: The potential advantages and limitations of LUS and its areas of use for obstetricians are discussed. LUS is a promising supplementary imaging tool during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. It is easy to perform and may be feasible in the hands of obstetricians after a brief didactic course. It may be a firstline imaging modality for pregnant women.

Lung ultrasonography in pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic: an interobserver agreement study among obstetricians.

PURPOSE: This study investigated interobserver agreement in lung ultrasonography (LUS) in pregnant women performed by obstetricians with different levels of expertise, with confirmation by an expert radiologist. METHODS: This prospective study was conducted at a tertiary "Coronavirus Pandemic Hospital" in April 2020. Pregnant women suspected to have coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were included. Two blinded experienced obstetricians performed LUS on pregnant women separately and noted their scores for 14 lung zones. Following a theoretical and hands-on practical course, one experienced obstetrician, two novice obstetric residents, and an experienced radiologist blindly evaluated anonymized and randomized still images and videoclips retrospectively. Weighted Cohen's kappa and Krippendorff's alpha tests were used to assess the interobserver agreement. RESULTS: Fifty-two pregnant women were included, with confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis rate of 82.7%. In total, 336 eligible still images and 115 videoclips were included in the final analysis. The overall weighted Cohen's kappa values ranged from 0.706 to 0.912 for the 14 lung zones. There were only seven instances of major disagreement (>1 point) in the evaluation of 14 lung zones of 52 patients (n=728). The overall agreement between the radiologist and obstetricians for the still images (Krippendorff's α=0.856, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.797 to 0.915) and videoclips (Krippendorff's α=0.785; 95% CI, 0.709 to 0.861) was good. CONCLUSION: The interobserver agreement between obstetricians with different levels of experience on still images and videoclips of LUS was good. Following a brief theoretical course, obstetricians' performance of LUS in pregnant women and interpretation of pre-acquired LUS images can be considered consistent.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical features and pregnancy outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and pregnancy. METHODS: Databases (Medline, Embase, Clinicaltrials.gov, Cochrane Library) were searched electronically on 6th April and updated regularly until 8th June 2020. Reports of pregnant women with reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) confirmed COVID-19 were included. Meta-analytical proportion summaries and meta-regression analyses for key clinical outcomes are provided. FINDINGS: 86 studies were included, 17 studies (2567 pregnancies) in the quantitative synthesis; other small case series and case reports were used to extract rarely-reported events and outcome. Most women (73.9%) were in the third trimester; 52.4% have delivered, half by caesarean section (48.3%). The proportion of Black, Asian or minority ethnic group membership (50.8%); obesity (38.2%), and chronic co-morbidities (32.5%) were high. The most commonly reported clinical symptoms were fever (63.3%), cough (71.4%) and dyspnoea (34.4%). The commonest laboratory abnormalities were raised CRP or procalcitonin (54.0%), lymphopenia (34.2%) and elevated transaminases (16.0%). Preterm birth before 37 weeks' gestation was common (21.8%), usually medically-indicated (18.4%). Maternal intensive care unit admission was required in 7.0%, with intubation in 3.4%. Maternal mortality was uncommon (~1%). Maternal intensive care admission was higher in cohorts with higher rates of co-morbidities (beta=0.007, p<0.05) and maternal age over 35 years (beta=0.007, p<0.01). Maternal mortality was higher in cohorts with higher rates of antiviral drug use (beta=0.03, p<0.001), likely due to residual confounding. Neonatal nasopharyngeal swab RT-PCR was positive in 1.4%. INTERPRETATION: The risk of iatrogenic preterm birth and caesarean delivery was increased. The available evidence is reassuring, suggesting that maternal morbidity is similar to that of women of reproductive age. Vertical transmission of the virus probably occurs, albeit in a small proportion of cases. FUNDING: N/A.