Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 31
Filter
1.
J Affect Disord Rep ; 13: 100585, 2023 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2310832

ABSTRACT

Background: The current study aimed at assessing the levels of perinatal depression (i.e., both antenatal and postnatal) during the fourth wave of the COVID-19 outbreak in a group of Italian women, as well as to evaluate the role of loneliness, anxiety, and lack of maternal support in cumulatively predicting perinatal depression. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 200 Italian women recruited during a peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy (i.e., from September to December 2021) from a single prenatal clinic in Southern Italy. A non-parametric binomial test was conducted to assess whether the perinatal depression frequencies of the current sample differed from those found in a pre-Covid reference group. Additionally, hierarchical multiple linear regression analyses assessing whether loneliness, anxiety, and maternal support affected women's perinatal depression were also conducted. Results: The general prevalence of perinatal depression was significantly higher in participants recruited during the fourth wave of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the pre-Covid reference group (29% vs. 9.2%). However, results showed that, contrary to postnatal depression (18.2% vs. 19.9%), only the prevalence of antenatal depression was significantly higher compared to the pre-Covid reference group (39.6% vs. 6.4%). Furthermore, loneliness and anxiety, but not maternal support, were associated with higher levels of PD. Limitations: Limitations concerned the cross-sectional nature of the study and the relatively small sample size. Conclusions: This study sheds light on the need to address perinatal mental health of women during major stressful events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

2.
Am J Perinatol ; 2023 Apr 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2292715

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to report the use casirivimab/imdevimab therapy in pregnant women with moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). STUDY DESIGN: We report 12 cases of unvaccinated pregnant patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 treated with casirivimab/imdevimab. RESULTS: Twelve unvaccinated pregnant patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 received casirivimab/imdevimab at the dose of 1200/1200 mg by intravenous infusion over 60 minutes. All women were managed outpatient. None experienced severe adverse drug reaction and none progressed to severe disease. CONCLUSION: Casirivimab/imdevimab should be considered for outpatient treatment of unvaccinated pregnant women with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 to decrease the risk of severe disease. KEY POINTS: · Casirivimab/imdevimab is not well studied in pregnant women.. · Casirivimab/imdevimab in pregnant women with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 decreases the risk of severe disease.. · Casirivimab/imdevimab in pregnant women with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 is well tolerated..

3.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 11(2)2023 Feb 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2255524

ABSTRACT

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been used as a rescue strategy for pregnant women affected by COVID-19. To explore its impact on maternal-fetal health, we included all observational studies reporting maternal, fetal, delivery and neonatal outcomes in women who underwent mAbs infusion for COVID-19. Primary outcome was the percentage of preterm delivery. We used meta-analyses of proportions to combine data for maternal, fetal, delivery and neonatal outcome of women treated with mAbs for COVID-19 and reported pooled proportions and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for categorical variables or mean difference (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals for continuous variables. Preterm birth was observed in 22.8% of cases (95% CI 12.9-34.3). Fetal distress was reported in 4.2% (95% CI 1.6-8.2). Gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia were observed in 3.0% (95% CI 0.8-6.8) and 3.4% (95% CI 0.8-7.5) of cases, respectively. Fetal growth restriction was observed in 3.2% of fetuses (95% CI 0.8-7.0). Secondary prophylaxis with mAbs is currently considered the best treatment option for people with mild to moderate COVID-19 disease. More attention should be paid to infants born from mothers who were treated with mAbs, for the risk of immunosuppression.

4.
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med ; 36(1): 2187254, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2253766

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the lockdown due to COVID-19 pandemic, utilization of emergency care units has been reported to be reduced for obstetrical and gynaecological reasons. The aim of this systematic review is to assess if this phenomenon reduced the rate of hospitalizations for any reason and to evaluate the main reasons for seeking care in this subset of the population. METHODS: The search was conducted using the main electronic databases from January 2020 to May 2021. The studies were identified with the use of a combination of: "emergency department" OR "A&E" OR "emergency service" OR "emergency unit" OR "maternity service" AND "COVID-19" OR "COVID-19 pandemic" OR "SARS-COV-2" and "admission" OR "hospitalization". All the studies that evaluated women going to obstetrics & gynecology emergency department (ED) during the COVID-19 pandemic for any reason were included. RESULTS: The pooled proportion (PP) of hospitalizations increased from 22.7 to 30.6% during the lockdown periods, in particular from 48.0 to 53.9% for delivery. The PP of pregnant women suffering from hypertensive disorders increased (2.6 vs 1.2%), as well as women having contractions (52 vs 43%) and rupture of membranes (12.0 vs 9.1%). Oppositely, the PP of women having pelvic pain (12.4 vs 14.4%), suspected ectopic pregnancy (1.8 vs 2.0), reduced fetal movements (3.0 vs 3.3%), vaginal bleeding both for obstetrical (11.7 vs 12.8%) and gynecological issues (7.4 vs 9.2%) slightly reduced. CONCLUSION: During the lockdown, an increase in the proportion of hospitalizations for obstetrical and gynecological reasons has been registered, especially for labor symptoms and hypertensive disorders.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Medical Services , Gynecology , Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced , Female , Pregnancy , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Communicable Disease Control , Retrospective Studies
5.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 20(1)2022 12 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2245281

ABSTRACT

Background: Although current guidelines recommend that mothers with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection should be encouraged to initiate and continue breastfeeding, up-to-date literature shows conflicting data regarding breastfeeding experiences in infected women. This survey aimed to report on the psychological impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection on breastfeeding practice and medical counselling in a single tertiary center in Southern Italy. Methods: One-hundred breastfeeding women with SARS-CoV-2 infection at delivery were given an anonymous questionnaire regarding breastfeeding and women's perception of the impact of COVID-19 on breastfeeding. Results: 75% of women reported they had difficulty breastfeeding; among them, 66 (66%) declared that separation from their babies after delivery affected their ability to breastfeed. Incidence of reported difficulties in breastfeeding was higher in women who underwent caesarean section compared to women with vaginal delivery (56/65, 86.2% vs. 19/35, 54.3%, χ2 = 12.322, p < 0.001) and in women with a hospital stay of more than 5 days (48/57, 84.2% vs. 23/37, 62.2%, χ2 = 5.902, p = 0.015). Furthermore, the incidence of difficulties in breastfeeding was higher in women who subsequently decided to use exclusively infant formula compared to women who mixed maternal milk with infant formula and women who breastfed exclusively with maternal milk (48/49, 98% vs. 20/25, 80% vs. 7/26, 26.9%, χ2 = 46.160, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Our survey highlights the importance of healthcare support and information on hygiene practices to decrease the perceived stress related to breastfeeding for infected mothers under restrictions, especially in women undergoing cesarean section and with a long hospital stay.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Infant , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Breast Feeding , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Cesarean Section , Pregnant Women , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical
6.
Am J Perinatol ; 2022 Aug 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2186304

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate safety and efficacy of casirivimab/imdevimab therapy in pregnant women with severe COVID-19 requiring oxygen therapy. METHODS: This was a prospective case series study aimed to evaluate safety and efficacy of casirivimab/imdevimab therapy in unvaccinated pregnant women with severe COVID-19. Inclusion criteria were: SARS CoV-2 infection documented with PCR, pregnancy, severe COVID-19 requiring oxygen therapy, duration of symptoms of 10 days or less, able to provide informed consent. Vaccinated women, and those with mild-to-moderate disease were excluded from the study. Included patients received casirivimab and imdevimab as single intravenous dose of 4000/4000 mg. Women were also treated with low molecular weight heparin, steroids and antibiotics, if necessary. The primary outcome was maternal death. Secondary outcomes were: rate of adverse events during infusion or within 72 hours, and rate of abortion. RESULTS: Thirteen hospitalized unvaccinated pregnant women with severe COVID-19 requiring oxygen and treated with casirivimab/imdevimab were included in the study. We observed no maternal death, and no patients required intubation or admission to intensive care unit. No abortion or fetal loss were recorded. Nine pregnancies were still ongoing, and there were three cesarean deliveries and one vaginal delivery. Two were preterm deliveries (at 31 and 34 weeks), and two were term deliveries. CONCLUSION: Casirivimab/imdevimab therapy may be considered as therapy in unvaccinated pregnant women with severe COVID-19.

7.
Biomedicines ; 10(12)2022 Nov 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2123518

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was, firstly, to analyze the histopathological characteristics of placentas in women with uneventful pregnancies and affected by COVID-19 at the time of delivery; and secondly, to correlate histological findings to maternal and neonatal characteristics. In our single-center prospective observational study, 46 placentas from term uncomplicated singleton pregnancies of patients with a documented SARS-CoV-2 infection at the time of delivery underwent histological examination. Despite a normal feto-maternal outcome, most of the placentas (82.6%) presented signs of maternal vascular malperfusion, while features of fetal vascular malperfusion were found in 54% of cases. No correlation was detected between maternal and neonatal characteristics and the severity of blood circulation disease, and abnormal findings were also described in asymptomatic patients. Moreover, we did not find any maternal symptoms or clinical details allowing for the prediction of abnormal placental findings in pregnancy complicated by COVID-19 infection. Our results suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy could lead to acute placental dysfunction.

9.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet ; 159(3): 651-661, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1925933

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To explore perinatal outcomes in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-vaccinated pregnant women compared with unvaccinated counterparts. METHODS: Search was conducted using Web of Science, Scopus, ClinicalTrial.gov, MEDLINE, Embase, OVID, and Cochrane Library as electronic databases. We included observational studies evaluating pregnant women undergoing SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and compared pregnancy and perinatal outcomes with those in unvaccinated women. Categorical variables were assessed using odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI), whereas for continuous variables, the results were expressed as mean difference with their 95% CI. All analyses were performed by adopting the random effect model of DerSimonian and Laird. RESULTS: There was no difference in the probability of having a small-for-gestational-age fetus (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.85-1.09; P = 0.570), but we observed a reduced probability of a non-reassuring fetal monitoring, a reduced gestational age at delivery, and a reduced probability of premature delivery in vaccinated pregnant women versus unvaccinated ones. CONCLUSION: The probability of small for gestational age is similar between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant women, and the former also had a slightly reduced rate of premature delivery.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Premature Birth , Female , Pregnancy , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/prevention & control , Premature Birth/prevention & control , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/prevention & control , Fetal Growth Retardation , Pregnancy Outcome
12.
Healthcare (Basel) ; 10(3)2022 Mar 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1742404

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Our hospital became a referral center for COVID-19-positive obstetric patients from 1 May 2020. The aim of our study is to illustrate our management protocols for COVID-19-positive obstetric patients, to maintain safety standards for patients and healthcare workers. METHODS: Women who underwent vaginal or operative delivery and induced or spontaneous abortion with a SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal swab using real-time PCR (RT-PCR) were included in the study. Severity and onset of new symptoms were carefully monitored in the postoperative period. All the healthcare workers received a nasopharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR serially every five days. RESULTS: We included 152 parturients with COVID-19 infection. None of the included women had general anesthesia, an increase of severe symptoms or onset of new symptoms. The RT-PCR test was "negative" for the healthcare workers. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, neuraxial anesthesia for parturients' management with SARS-CoV-2 infection has been proven to be safe for patients and healthcare workers. Neuraxial anesthesia decreases aerosolization during preoxygenation, face-mask ventilation, endotracheal intubation, oral or tracheal suctioning and extubation. This anesthesia management protocol can be generalizable.

13.
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM ; 4(3): 100592, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1670131

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Different factors may influence the closure of the uterine wall, including suture material. Suture materials may indeed influence tissue healing and therefore the development of scar defects. OBJECTIVE: To test whether uterine closure using synthetic absorbable monofilament sutures at the time of cesarean delivery would reduce the rate of cesarean scar defects compared with uterine closure using synthetic absorbable multifilament sutures. STUDY DESIGN: Parallel-group, nonblinded, randomized clinical trial of women with singleton pregnancies undergoing cesarean delivery at term in a single center in Italy. The inclusion criteria were singleton pregnancy, first or second cesarean delivery, scheduled and emergent or urgent cesarean deliveries, and gestational age between 37 0/7 and 42 0/7 weeks. Eligible participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to either the monofilament group (polyglytone 6211 [Caprosyn]; Covidien, Dublin, Ireland) or the multifilament suture group (coated polyglactin 910 suture with Triclosan [Vicryl Plus]; Ethicon, Inc, Raritan, NJ). The primary outcome was the incidence of cesarean scar defect at ultrasound at the 6-month follow-up visit. The secondary outcomes were residual myometrial thickness and symptoms. RESULTS: Overall, 300 women were included in the trial. Of the randomized women, 151 were randomized to the monofilament group and 149 to the multifilament group. However, 27 women were lost to follow-up: 15 in the monofilament group and 12 in the multifilament group. Of note, 6 months after delivery, the incidence rates of cesarean scar defect were 18.4% (25 of 136 patients) in the monofilament group and 23.4% (32 of 137 patients) in the multifilament group (relative risk, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-1.25; P=.31). The mean residual myometrial thicknesses were 7.6 mm in the monofilament group and 7.2 mm in the multifilament group (mean difference, +0.40 mm; 95% confidence interval, -0.23 to 1.03). There was no between-group substantial difference found in the incidence of symptoms, including pelvic pain, painful periods, and dyspareunia. CONCLUSION: In singleton pregnancies undergoing primary or second cesarean delivery, the use of synthetic absorbable monofilament sutures at the time of uterine wall closure was not associated with a reduction in the rate of cesarean scar defect 6 months after delivery compared with the use of synthetic absorbable multifilament sutures.


Subject(s)
Cicatrix , Suture Techniques , Cesarean Section/adverse effects , Cicatrix/epidemiology , Cicatrix/etiology , Cicatrix/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Male , Polyglactin 910 , Pregnancy , Suture Techniques/adverse effects , Sutures
14.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol ; 268: 144-164, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1561999

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 vaccine has been recommended to pregnant women, but survey studies showed contrasting findings worldwide in relation to the willingness to accept vaccination during pregnancy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the evidence from the literature regarding the acceptance rate of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in pregnant and breastfeeding women. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a systematic review on the main databases (MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, ISI Web of Science) searching for all the peer-reviewed survey studies analyzing the eventual acceptance rate of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine among pregnant and breastfeeding women. To combine data meta-analyses of proportions and pooled proportions with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: 15 studies including 25,839 women were included in the analysis. The proportion of women actually willing to be vaccinated during pregnancy is 49.1% (95% CI, 42.3-56.0), and the proportion of breastfeeding women is 61.6% (95% CI, 50.0-75.0). CONCLUSION: The cumulative SARS-CoV-2 vaccine acceptance rate among pregnant women appears still low. Vaccinal campaign are urgently needed to drive more confidence into the vaccine to help reducing the spread of the infection and the possible consequences during pregnancy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , COVID-19 Vaccines , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Pregnant Women , SARS-CoV-2
16.
Arch Gynecol Obstet ; 305(4): 859-867, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1375635

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COronaVIrus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread in Italy since February 2020, inducing the government to call for lockdown of any activity, apart primary needs, during the months March-May 2020. During the lockdown, a reduction of admissions and hospitalizations for ischemic diseases was noticed. Purpose of this study was to observe if there has been the same reduction trend in Accident & Emergency (A&E) unit admissions also for obstetric-gynecological conditions. METHODS: Medical records and electronic clinical databases were searched for all patients who were admitted to the obstetric A&E department or hospitalized at the Gynecology and Obstetrics Unit of University hospital of Naples Federico II, during the quarter March-May in the years 2019 and 2020. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) of monthly admission to the obstetric A&E department and hospitalization of the year 2020 was compared with that of the year 2019, using the unpaired T test with α error set to 0.05 and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Admissions were 1483 in the year 2020 and 1786 in 2019. Of total, 1225 (37.5%) women were hospitalized: 583 in the year 2020, 642 in 2019. Mean ± SD of patients monthly admitted to our obstetric A&E department was 494 ± 33.7 in the year 2020, and 595.3 ± 30.9 in 2019, with a mean difference of - 101.3 (95% CI - 103.5 to - 99.1; p < 0.0001). Mean ± SD of patients monthly hospitalized to our department was 194 ± 19.1 in the year 2020, 213.7 ± 4.7 in 2019, with a mean difference of - 19.7 (95% CI - 23.8 to - 15.6; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: A significant decrease in the mean of monthly admissions and hospitalizations during the COVID-19 pandemic when compared to the previous year was found also for obstetric-gynecological conditions. Further studies are necessary to assess COVID-19 impact and to take the most appropriate countermeasures.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Obstetrics , Accidents , COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Female , Hospitalization , Hospitals , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pregnancy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
17.
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM ; 3(4): 100352, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1245828

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Since coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines have been distributed, a debate has raised on whether pregnant women should get the vaccine. No available data exist so far regarding the safety, efficacy, and toxicology of these vaccines when administered during pregnancy. Most of the Obstetrics and Gynecology societies suggested that pregnant could agree to be vaccinated, after a thorough counseling of risks and benefits with their gynecologists, thus leading to an autonomous decision. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the attitude to coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination in pregnant and breastfeeding women in Italy. STUDY DESIGN: A survey was made at the University of Naples Federico II and the Ospedale Cristo Re, Tor Vergata University of Rome, on pregnant and breastfeeding women asking their perspectives on the available vaccines after reading the recommendations issued by our national Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Neonatology societies. The questionnaire included 12 items finalized to evaluate general features of the women and 6 items specifically correlated to their attitudes toward the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination. Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests were used to compare group differences of categorical variables and Wilcoxon signed rank or Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables. The study was approved by the institutional review boards of the University of Naples Federico II (ref. no. 409/2020) and the Ospedale Cristo Re, Tor Vergata University of Rome (ref. #Ost4-2020). RESULTS: Most of the included women did not agree to eventually receive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccine during pregnancy (40 [28.2%] vs 102 [71.8%]). Being pregnant was considered a determinant factor to refuse the vaccine prophylaxis (99 [69.7%] vs 43 [30.3%]; chi-square test=24.187; P<.001), even if a very large percentage declared to be generally in favor of vaccines (128 [90.1%] vs 14 [9.9%]; chi-square test=6.091; P=.014) and most of them confirmed they received or would receive other recommended vaccines during pregnancy (75 [52.8%] vs 67 [47.2%]; chi-square test=10.996; P=.001). CONCLUSION: Urgent data are needed on the safety, efficacy, and toxicology of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccines during pregnancy to modify this trend and to help obstetricians during the counseling. Furthermore, pregnant women should be included in future vaccine development trials to not incur again in such uncertainty.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19 Vaccines , Female , Humans , Italy , Pregnancy , Pregnant Women
19.
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM ; 2(2): 100107, 2020 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1064726

ABSTRACT

Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to report pregnancy and perinatal outcomes of coronavirus spectrum infections, and particularly coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) disease because of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 infection during pregnancy. Data Sources: Medline, Embase, Cinahl, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched electronically utilizing combinations of word variants for coronavirus or severe acute respiratory syndrome or SARS or Middle East respiratory syndrome or MERS or COVID-19 and pregnancy. The search and selection criteria were restricted to English language. Study Eligibility Criteria: Inclusion criteria were hospitalized pregnant women with a confirmed coronavirus related-illness, defined as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), or COVID-19. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods: We used meta-analyses of proportions to combine data and reported pooled proportions, so that a pooled proportion may not coincide with the actual raw proportion in the results. The pregnancy outcomes observed included miscarriage, preterm birth, preeclampsia, preterm prelabor rupture of membranes, fetal growth restriction, and mode of delivery. The perinatal outcomes observed were fetal distress, Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes, neonatal asphyxia, admission to a neonatal intensive care unit, perinatal death, and evidence of vertical transmission. Results: Nineteen studies including 79 hospitalized women were eligible for this systematic review: 41 pregnancies (51.9%) affected by COVID-19, 12 (15.2%) by MERS, and 26 (32.9%) by SARS. An overt diagnosis of pneumonia was made in 91.8%, and the most common symptoms were fever (82.6%), cough (57.1%), and dyspnea (27.0%). For all coronavirus infections, the pooled proportion of miscarriage was 64.7% (8/12; 95% confidence interval, 37.9-87.3), although reported only for women affected by SARS in two studies with no control group; the pooled proportion of preterm birth <37 weeks was 24.3% (14/56; 95% confidence interval, 12.5-38.6); premature prelabor rupture of membranes occurred in 20.7% (6/34; 95% confidence interval, 9.5-34.9), preeclampsia in 16.2% (2/19; 95% confidence interval, 4.2-34.1), and fetal growth restriction in 11.7% (2/29; 95% confidence interval, 3.2-24.4), although reported only for women affected by SARS; 84% (50/58) were delivered by cesarean; the pooled proportion of perinatal death was 11.1% (5/60; 95% confidence interval, 84.8-19.6), and 57.2% of newborns (3/12; 95% confidence interval, 3.6-99.8) were admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit. When focusing on COVID-19, the most common adverse pregnancy outcome was preterm birth <37 weeks, occurring in 41.1% of cases (14/32; 95% confidence interval, 25.6-57.6), while the pooled proportion of perinatal death was 7.0% (2/41; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-16.3). None of the 41 newborns assessed showed clinical signs of vertical transmission. Conclusion: In hospitalized mothers infected with coronavirus infections, including COVID-19, >90% of whom also had pneumonia, preterm birth is the most common adverse pregnancy outcome. COVID-19 infection was associated with higher rate (and pooled proportions) of preterm birth, preeclampsia, cesarean, and perinatal death. There have been no published cases of clinical evidence of vertical transmission. Evidence is accumulating rapidly, so these data may need to be updated soon. The findings from this study can guide and enhance prenatal counseling of women with COVID-19 infection occurring during pregnancy, although they should be interpreted with caution in view of the very small number of included cases.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Fetal Growth Retardation/epidemiology , Fetal Membranes, Premature Rupture/epidemiology , Pre-Eclampsia/epidemiology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/epidemiology , Cesarean Section/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical/statistics & numerical data , Intensive Care Units, Neonatal/statistics & numerical data , Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus , Perinatal Death , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Outcome/epidemiology , Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL