The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on adverse fetal outcomes: A cross-sectional study.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been one of the most damaging pandemics in all of human history. Some of the most vulnerable groups within society such as pregnant women and children have also been affected. This observational research, cross-sectional study was conducted to investigate if there was any difference in the incidence of unfavorable outcomes in pregnancy such as miscarriage, intrauterine fetal demise, and early neonatal death during the year prior to the pandemic and the year of the COVID-19 pandemic. This retrospective study was conducted at the University Hospital of Split at the Department of Pathology, Forensic and Cytology and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the same hospital. All data was collected in the time period from March 1st, 2019, to March 1st, 2021. The study included all pregnant women who had an unfavorable pregnancy outcome such as miscarriage and intrauterine fetal demise, as well as early neonatal death at the University Hospital of Split within the time frame mentioned previously. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes in the year prior to the pandemic and during the year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our study showed that the pandemic did not have a negative effect on pregnant women and their fetuses; there was no increase in miscarriage, intrauterine fetal demise, or perinatal death during the year of the pandemic.

COVID-19 Booster Vaccination in Early Pregnancy and Surveillance for Spontaneous Abortion.

Importance: Adherence to COVID-19 booster vaccine recommendations has lagged in pregnant and nonpregnant adult populations. One barrier to booster vaccination is uncertainty regarding the safety of booster doses among pregnant people. Objective: To evaluate whether there is an association between COVID-19 booster vaccination during pregnancy and spontaneous abortion. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational, case-control, surveillance study evaluated people aged 16 to 49 years with pregnancies at 6 to 19 weeks' gestation at 8 health systems in the Vaccine Safety Datalink from November 1, 2021, to June 12, 2022. Spontaneous abortion cases and ongoing pregnancy controls were evaluated during consecutive surveillance periods, defined by calendar time. Exposure: Primary exposure was receipt of a third messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine dose within 28 days before spontaneous abortion or index date (midpoint of surveillance period in ongoing pregnancy controls). Secondary exposures were third mRNA vaccine doses in a 42-day window or any COVID-19 booster in 28- and 42-day windows. Main Outcomes and Measures: Spontaneous abortion cases and ongoing pregnancy controls were identified from electronic health data using a validated algorithm. Cases were assigned to a single surveillance period based on pregnancy outcome date. Eligible ongoing pregnancy time was assigned to 1 or more surveillance periods as an ongoing pregnancy-period control. Generalized estimating equations were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (AOR) with gestational age, maternal age, antenatal visits, race and ethnicity, site, and surveillance period as covariates and robust variance estimates to account for inclusion of multiple pregnancy periods per unique pregnancy. Results: Among 112 718 unique pregnancies included in the study, the mean (SD) maternal age was 30.6 (5.5) years. Pregnant individuals were Asian, non-Hispanic (15.1%); Black, non-Hispanic (7.5%); Hispanic (35.6%); White, non-Hispanic (31.2%); and of other or unknown (10.6%); and 100% were female. Across eight 28-day surveillance periods, among 270 853 ongoing pregnancy-period controls, 11 095 (4.1%) had received a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in a 28-day window; among 14 226 cases, 553 (3.9%) had received a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine within 28 days of the spontaneous abortion. Receipt of a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was not associated with spontaneous abortion in a 28-day window (AOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.86-1.03). Results were consistent when using a 42-day window (AOR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.90-1.05) and for any COVID-19 booster in a 28-day (AOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.86-1.02) or 42-day (AOR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.89-1.04) exposure window. Conclusions and Relevance: In this case-control surveillance study, COVID-19 booster vaccination in pregnancy was not associated with spontaneous abortion. These findings support the safety of recommendations for COVID-19 booster vaccination, including in pregnant populations.

Late miscarriage and stillbirth in asymptomatic and symptomatic hospitalised pregnant women in Belgium during the first and second waves of COVID-19: a prospective nationwide population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Stillbirth has been recognized as a possible complication of a SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy, probably due to destructive placental lesions (SARS-CoV-2 placentitis). The aim of this work is to analyse stillbirth and late miscarriage cases in unvaccinated pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2 during the first two waves (wild-type period) in Belgium. METHODS: Stillbirths and late miscarriages in our prospective observational nationwide registry of SARS-CoV-2 infected pregnant women (n = 982) were classified by three authors using a modified WHO-UMC classification system for standardized case causality assessment. RESULTS: Our cohort included 982 hospitalised pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2, with 23 fetal demises (10 late miscarriages from 12 to 22 weeks of gestational age and 13 stillbirths). The stillbirth rate was 9.5‰ for singleton pregnancies and 83.3‰ for multiple pregnancies, which seems higher than for the background population (respectively 5.6‰ and 13.8‰). The agreement between assessors about the causal relationship with SARS-Cov-2 infection was fair (global weighted kappa value of 0.66). Among these demises, 17.4% (4/23) were "certainly" attributable to SARS-CoV-2 infection, 13.0% (3/23) "probably" and 30.4% (7/23) "possibly". Better agreement in the rating was noticed when pathological examination of the placenta and identification of the virus were available, underlining the importance of a thorough investigation in case of intra-uterine fetal demise. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 causality assessment of late miscarriage and stillbirth cases in our Belgian nationwide case series has shown that half of the fetal losses could be attributable to SARS-CoV-2. We must consider in future epidemic emergencies to rigorously investigate cases of intra-uterine fetal demise and to store placental tissue and other material for future analyses.

The risk of miscarriage following COVID-19 vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the risk of miscarriage among pregnant women who received any of the COVID-19 vaccines? SUMMARY ANSWER: There is no evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are associated with an increased risk of miscarriage. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the mass roll-out of vaccines helped to boost herd immunity and reduced hospital admissions, morbidity, and mortality. Still, many were concerned about the safety of vaccines for pregnancy, which may have limited their uptake among pregnant women and those planning a pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception until June 2022 using a combination of keywords and MeSH terms. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We included observational and interventional studies that enrolled pregnant women and evaluated any of the available COVID-19 vaccines compared to placebo or no vaccination. We primarily reported on miscarriage in addition to ongoing pregnancy and/or live birth. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: We included data from 21 studies (5 randomized trials and 16 observational studies) reporting on 149 685 women. The pooled rate of miscarriage among women who received a COVID-19 vaccine was 9% (n = 14 749/123 185, 95% CI 0.05-0.14). Compared to those who received a placebo or no vaccination, women who received a COVID-19 vaccine did not have a higher risk of miscarriage (risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% CI 0.89-1.28, I2 35.8%) and had comparable rates for ongoing pregnancy or live birth (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97-1.03, I2 10.72%). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Our analysis was limited to observational evidence with varied reporting, high heterogeneity and risk of bias across included studies, which may limit the generalizability and confidence in our findings. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: COVID-19 vaccines are not associated with an increase in the risk of miscarriage or reduced rates of ongoing pregnancy or live birth among women of reproductive age. The current evidence remains limited and larger population studies are needed to further evaluate the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No direct funding was provided to support this work. M.P.R. was funded by the Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health Grant No: MR/N022556/1. B.H.A.W. hold a personal development award from the National Institute of Health Research in the UK. All authors declare no conflict of interest. REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289098.

Rates of Spontaneous Abortion in Israel Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

This cross-sectional study uses electronic health record data to compare monthly incidence rates of spontaneous abortion in Israel before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 is not a causal risk for miscarriage: evidence from a Mendelian randomization study.

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a global pandemic in the last three years. The lack of reliable evidence on the risk of miscarriage due to COVID-19 has become a concern for patients and obstetricians. We sought to identify rigorous evidence using two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis. METHODS: Seven single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with COVID-19 were used as instrumental variables to explore causality by two-sample MR. The summary data of genetic variants were obtained from the Genome Wide Association Study (GWAS) among European populations in the UK Biobank and EBI database. Inverse variance weighting (IVW) method was taken as the gold standard for MR results, and other methods were taken as auxiliary. We also performed sensitivity analysis to evaluate the robustness of MR. RESULTS: The MR analysis showed there was no clear causal association between COVID-19 and miscarriage in the genetic prediction [OR 0.9981 (95% CI, 0.9872-1.0091), p = 0.7336]. Sensitivity analysis suggested that the MR results were robust [horizontal pleiotropy (MR-Egger, intercept = 0.0001592; se = 0.0023; p = 0.9480)]. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence from MR does not support COVID-19 as a causal risk factor for miscarriage in European populations. The small probability of direct placental infection, as well as the inability to stratify the data may explain the results of MR. These findings can be informative for obstetricians when managing women in labor.

SARS-CoV-2 placentitis and severe pregnancy outcome after maternal infection: A Danish case series.

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy may cause viral inflammation of the placenta, resulting in fetal demise even without fetal or newborn infection. The impact of timing of the infection and the mechanisms that cause fetal morbidity and mortality are not well understood. MATERIAL AND METHODS: To describe placental pathology from women with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy, a SARS-CoV-2 immunohistochemistry-positive placenta and late miscarriage, stillbirth, neonatal death, or medically indicated birth due to fetal distress. RESULTS: The triad of trophoblastic necrosis, inflammatory intervillous infiltrates, and increased perivillous fibrinoid deposition was present in all 17 placentas; the pregnancies resulted in eight stillbirths, two late miscarriages (19 and 21 weeks' gestation), and seven liveborn children, two of which died shortly after delivery. The severity of maternal COVID-19 was not reflected by the extent of the placental lesions. In only one case, SARS-CoV-2 was detected in lung tissue samples from the fetus. The majority events (miscarriage, stillbirth, fetal distress resulting in indicated birth, or livebirth, but neonatal death) happened shortly after maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection was diagnosed. Seven of eight sequenced cases were infected with the Delta (B.1.617.2) virus strain. CONCLUSION: We consolidate findings from previous case series describing extensive SARS-CoV-2 placentitis and placental insufficiency leading to fetal hypoxia. We found sparse evidence to support the notion that SARS-CoV-2 virus had infected the fetus or newborn.

Safety of COVID-19 vaccination in women undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment - Clinical study and systematic review.

Background: It was suggested that vaccination in general might affect reproductive health. Safety of COVID-19 vaccination in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques (ART) treatment is not well established. Methods: We performed a retrospective study including 536 women undergoing fresh embryo transfer after IVF/ICSI treatment in a huge IVF center in southern China to investigate the effect of COVID-19 vaccination on oocyte maturation, fertilization rate, blastulation rate, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate and miscarriage rate. In addition, we performed a systematic review of existing studies on the safety of COVID-19 vaccination in women undergoing ART treatment. Results: In our study, 268 women received inactivated or recombinant COVID-19 vaccination and 268 controls were enrolled based on propensity score matching. We observed a decreased fertilization rate and signs for impaired oocyte maturation in vaccinated women. Besides our study, there were 15 studies analyzing the safety of COVID-19 vaccination in women undergoing ART treatment. For the mRNA vaccines, no adverse signals were reported concerning oocyte maturation, fertilization rate, blastulation rate, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate and miscarriage rate. In women being vaccinated with an inactivated vaccine, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate and miscarriage rate were not affected, whereas oocyte maturation and fertilization rate were impaired. Conclusions: Vaccination against COVID-19 in women undergoing ART treatment seems to be safe especially for women getting mRNA vaccines. The effects on oocyte maturation and fertilization rate of inactivated and recombinant COVID-19 vaccinations might be a safety signal and need further investigation and independent confirmation.

Social Media Use, Unhealthy Lifestyles, and the Risk of Miscarriage Among Pregnant Women During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in changes to normal life and disrupted social and economic function worldwide. However, little is known about the impact of social media use, unhealthy lifestyles, and the risk of miscarriage among pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the association between social media use, unhealthy lifestyles, and the risk of miscarriage among pregnant women in the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in China. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, 456 singleton pregnant women in mainland China were recruited during January and February 2020. Sociodemographic characteristics, history of previous health, social media use, and current lifestyles were collected at baseline, and we followed up about the occurrence of miscarriage. Log-binomial regression models were used to estimate the risk ratios (RRs) of miscarriage for women with different exposures to COVID-19-specific information. RESULTS: Among all the 456 pregnant women, there were 82 (18.0%) who did no physical activities, 82 (18.0%) with inadequate dietary diversity, 174 (38.2%) with poor sleep quality, and 54 (11.8%) spending >3 hours on reading COVID-19 news per day. Women with excessive media use (>3 hours) were more likely to be previously pregnant (P=.03), have no physical activity (P=.003), have inadequate dietary diversity (P=.03), and have poor sleep quality (P<.001). The prevalence of miscarriage was 16.0% (n=73; 95% CI 12.6%-19.4%). Compared with women who spent 0.5-2 hours (25/247, 10.1%) on reading COVID-19 news per day, miscarriage prevalence in women who spent <0.5 hours (5/23, 21.7%), 2-3 hours (26/132, 19.7%), and >3 hours (17/54, 31.5%) was higher (P<.001). Miscarriage prevalence was also higher in pregnant women with poor sleep quality (39/174, 22.4% vs 34/282, 12.1%; P=.003) and a high education level (66/368, 17.9% vs 7/88, 8.0%; P=.02). In the multivariable model, poor sleep quality (adjusted RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.24-3.44; P=.006), 2-3 hours of media use daily (adjusted RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.02-2.97; P=.04), and >3 hours of media use daily (adjusted RR 2.56, 95% CI 1.43-4.59; P=.002) were associated with miscarriage. In the sensitivity analysis, results were still stable. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women with excessive media use were more likely to have no physical activity, inadequate dietary diversity, and poor sleep quality. Excessive media use and poor sleep quality were associated with a higher risk of miscarriage. Our findings highlight the importance of healthy lifestyles during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Fetal death after the introduction of COVID-19 mitigation measures in Sweden, Denmark and Norway: a registry-based study.

It remains unclear whether the rate of fetal death has changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. We assessed the impact of COVID-19 mitigation measures on fetal death in Sweden (449,347 births), Denmark (290,857 pregnancies) and Norway (261,057 pregnancies) using robust population-based registry data. We used Cox regression to assess the impact of the implementation of pandemic mitigation measures on March 12th, 2020, on miscarriage (fetal loss before gestational week 22) and stillbirth (fetal loss after gestational week 22). A total of 11% of 551,914 pregnancies in Denmark and Norway ended in miscarriage, while the proportion of stillbirths among 937,174 births across the three countries was 0.3%. There was no difference in the risk of fetal death during the year following pandemic mitigation measures. For miscarriage, the combined hazard ratio (HR) for Norway and Denmark was 1.01 (95% CI 0.98, 1.03), and for stillbirth, the combined HR for all three countries was 0.99 (95% CI 0.89, 1.09). We observed a slightly decreased risk of miscarriage during the first 4 months, with an HR of 0.94 (95% CI 0.90, 0.99) after lockdown. In conclusion, the risk of fetal death did not change after the implementation of COVID-19 pandemic mitigation measures in the three Scandinavian countries.

Maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes among pregnant women receiving COVID-19 vaccination: The preg-co-vax study.

Introduction: Although the European Medicines Agency (EMA) encourage coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in pregnant women, the scientific evidence supporting the use of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy is still limited. Aim: We aimed to investigate adverse events following immunization (AEFI) with COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy. Methods: We retrieved Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) related to the use of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy from the EudraVigilance database for the year 2021. We analyzed AEFI related to the mother and fetus/newborn. The reporting odds ratio (ROR) was computed to compare the reporting probability of spontaneous abortion between COVID-19 vaccines. Results: During the study period, among 1,315,315 ICSRs related to COVID-19 vaccines, we retrieved 3,252 (0.25%) reports related to the use in pregnancy. More than half (58.24%) of ICSRs were submitted by non-healthcare professionals. Although the majority (87.82%) of ICSRs concerned serious AEFI, their outcomes were mostly favorable. In this study, 85.0% of total ICSRs referred to pregnant women (n = 2,764), while 7.9% referred to fetuses/newborns (n = 258). We identified 16,569 AEFI. Moreover, 55.16% were AEFI not related to pregnancy (mostly headache, pyrexia, and fatigue), while 17.92% were pregnancy-, newborn-, or fetus-related AEFI. Among pregnancy-related AEFI, the most reported was spontaneous abortion. Messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines had a lower reporting probability of spontaneous abortion than viral vector-based vaccines (ROR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69-0.93). Moderna and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines had a higher reporting probability of spontaneous abortion (ROR 1.2, 95% CI 1.05-1.38 and ROR 1.26, 95% CI 1.08-1.47, respectively), while a lower reporting probability was found for Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine compared with all other COVID-19 vaccines (ROR 0.73, 95% CI 0.64-0.84). In addition, 5.8% of ICSRs reported a fatal outcome. Conclusions: No strong insight of unknown AEFI associated with COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women was observed. Considering the high risk associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, our analysis suggests that the benefits of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy outweigh the possible risks. However, it is important to continue monitoring the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines in this subpopulation.

A population-based matched cohort study of early pregnancy outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Data on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in early pregnancy are limited. We conducted a national, population-based, matched cohort study assessing associations between COVID-19 vaccination and miscarriage prior to 20 weeks gestation and, separately, ectopic pregnancy. We identified women in Scotland vaccinated between 6 weeks preconception and 19 weeks 6 days gestation (for miscarriage; n = 18,780) or 2 weeks 6 days gestation (for ectopic; n = 10,570). Matched, unvaccinated women from the pre-pandemic and, separately, pandemic periods were used as controls. Here we show no association between vaccination and miscarriage (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR], pre-pandemic controls = 1.02, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 0.96-1.09) or ectopic pregnancy (aOR = 1.13, 95% CI = 0.92-1.38). We undertook additional analyses examining confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection as the exposure and similarly found no association with miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy. Our findings support current recommendations that vaccination remains the safest way for pregnant women to protect themselves and their babies from COVID-19.

COVID-19 during pregnancy and risk of pregnancy loss (miscarriage or stillbirth): a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to concerns about potential adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with infection, resulting in intensive research. Numerous studies have attempted to examine whether COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk of pregnancy loss. However, studies and reviews to date have drawn differing conclusions. The aim of this systematic review is to provide a summary of all quantitative research on the relationship between pregnancy loss and COVID-19 infection and, if appropriate, to synthesise the evidence into an overall effect estimate. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Three publication databases (Embase, PubMed and Cochrane) and four preprint databases (medRxiv, Lancet Preprint, Gates Open Research and Wellcome Open Research) will be searched. Boolean logic will be used to combine terms associated with pregnancy loss and COVID-19. The population of interest are pregnant women. Retrieved results will be assessed in two phases: (1) abstract screening and (2) full text evaluation. All studies which compare pregnancy loss outcomes in women who had COVID-19 versus those who did not quantitatively will be included. Narrative and non-English studies will be excluded. Two reviewers will screen independently, with results compared and discrepancies resolved by the study team. Study quality and risk of bias will be assessed using a quality appraisal tool. Results will be summarised descriptively and where possible synthesised in a meta-analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This systematic review requires no ethical approval. This review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and provide an important update in a rapidly evolving field of research. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022327437.

Comparing pregnancy outcomes between symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19 positive unvaccinated women: Multicenter study in Saudi Arabia.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 infection in pregnancy ranges from asymptomatic infection to severe disease. However, the maternal and pregnancy outcomes are primarily favorable. Acute Respiratory Illness (ARI) score is a Visual Triage Checklist for Acute Respiratory symptoms created by the ministry of health of Saudi Arabia 12 to screen the patient for acute respiratory infection with MERS-CoV. It has been used during the COVID-19 pandemic to identify suspected cases and place patients in isolation precautions if the score is≥ 4. METHOD: This study is a cross-sectional study of all pregnant women who tested positive for COVID-19 in four medical centers located in four different cities in Saudi Arabia. The study period was from 1/3/2020 until 31/10/2020. Outcomes investigated were the prevalence of COVID infection in pregnant women at the time of delivery. Rate of asymptomatic disease, different maternal and pregnancy outcomes. Women were divided into symptomatic and asymptomatic groups according to the ARI score. The two groups were compared in maternal, perinatal, and neonatal outcomes. Furthermore, the cohort was divided according to maternal age into two groups: women of advanced maternal age ≥ 35 years and younger. The two groups were compared in maternal, perinatal, and neonatal outcomes RESULTS: During the study period, 9573 women gave birth at KAMCs, and 402 pregnant women were identified as COVID positive. Out of all COVID-positive women, only 394 women gave birth at KAMCs. The screening for COVID infection differed between the centers, but the testing was the same by the Nasopharyngeal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) swab. In Riyadh, screening was based on ARI scoring at the beginning of the pandemic. Then, it became universal. In Jeddah, the screening was based on ARI scoring. Any woman who scored four or more was labeled as suspected, and she was tested. Finally, in Madinah and Dammam, the screening was universal throughout the study. The prevalence of COVID-19 infection among women who gave birth at KAMCs was 4.2% (402/9573). (CI 3.8-4.6%). At the time of diagnosis, most women (62%) were asymptomatic. The most common symptoms were cough and shortness of breath. Twenty-two women (5.5%) had Pneumonia, and five women (1.3%) needed admission to Intensive care units (ICU). One woman died due to respiratory failure. When pregnancy outcomes were compared between symptomatic and asymptomatic women, pregnancy in symptomatic women was more likely to be complicated by Abortion (6 versus 2% p-value 0.00), fetal death (3 versus 1.3%), and cesarean delivery (30.8 versus 22.4%, p-value 0.001). COVID-positive pregnant women of advanced maternal age (AMA) were more likely to be symptomatic, have Abortion (5 versus 1%, p-value 0.01), and have Preterm delivery (17 versus 11% p-value 0.01) than younger women. In addition, neonatal death was more common in AMA COVID-positive women than younger (4 versus 0%), regardless of COVID-related symptoms. CONCLUSION: Most of the COVID-infected pregnant women are asymptomatic. Therefore, the ARI scoring system does not help to triage patients. Symptomatic women, especially those older than 35, tend to have a higher maternal and pregnancy complication rate.

Pregnancy and neurologic complications of COVID-19: A scoping review.

While neurologic complications are frequently reported among patients with COVID-19 in the general population, they are unknown in pregnant women. This paper summarizes the case reports of pregnant women with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection plus a specified neurologic diagnosis. Until November 2021, 18 case reports were found. Both the central and peripheral nervous systems were equally affected: delirium (n = 1), posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (n = 4), cerebrovascular disease (n = 2), acute cerebral demyelinating disease (n = 1), acute necrotizing encephalopathy (n = 1), Guillain-Barré syndrome (n = 5), including one patient who also had vestibular neuritis, Bell's palsy (n = 3), and rhabdomyolysis (n = 1). The median maternal age was 32.5 (25-35) years, the median gestational age was 34 (30-36.5) weeks, and 38.9% presented previous medical conditions. Respiratory symptoms were reported in 76.5%, and 76.5% received immunotherapies to treat the COVID-19 or the neurologic complications. Half the women required admission to ICU and, more often, were those with central nervous system involvement (77.8% vs. 22.2%; Chi-square test, p = .018). For 64.7% of women, the most common method of delivery was surgical, although just one case was due to the neurologic complication. There were reports of one spontaneous abortion, two fetal deaths, and no maternal deaths. Only one case presented a poor neurologic outcome. It is possible that our findings are underestimated, considering that there are thousands of reports regarding neurologic complications in the general population with COVID-19.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first trimester and the risk of early miscarriage: a UK population-based prospective cohort study of 3041 pregnancies conceived during the pandemic.

STUDY QUESTION: Does maternal infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the first trimester affect the risk of miscarriage before 13 week's gestation? SUMMARY ANSWER: Pregnant women with self-reported diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in the first trimester had a higher risk of early miscarriage. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Viral infections during pregnancy have a broad spectrum of placental and neonatal pathology. Data on the effects of the SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy are still emerging. Two systematic reviews and meta-analyses reported an increased risk of preterm birth, caesarean delivery, maternal morbidity and stillbirth. Data on the impact of first trimester infection on early pregnancy outcomes are scarce. This is the first study, to our knowledge, to investigate the rates of early pregnancy loss during the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak among women with self-reported infection. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This was a nationwide prospective cohort study of pregnant women in the community recruited using social media between 21 May and 31 December 2020. We recruited 3545 women who conceived during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic who were <13 week's gestation at the time of recruitment. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The COVID-19 Contraception and Pregnancy Study (CAP-COVID) was an on-line survey study collecting longitudinal data from pregnant women in the UK aged 18 years or older. Women who were pregnant during the pandemic were asked to complete on-line surveys at the end of each trimester. We collected data on current and past pregnancy complications, their medical history and whether they or anyone in their household had symptoms or been diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection during each trimester of their pregnancy. RT-PCR-based SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection from respiratory samples (e.g. nasopharynx) is the standard practice for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in the UK. We compared rate of self-reported miscarriage in three groups: 'presumed infected', i.e. those who reported a diagnosis with SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first trimester; 'uncertain', i.e. those who did not report a diagnosis but had symptoms/household contacts with symptoms/diagnosis; and 'presumed uninfected', i.e. those who did not report any symptoms/diagnosis and had no household contacts with symptoms/diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 3545 women registered for the CAP-COVID study at <13 weeks gestation and were eligible for this analysis. Data for the primary outcome were available from 3041 women (86%). In the overall sample, the rate of self-reported miscarriage was 7.8% (238/3041 [95% CI, 7-9]). The median gestational age (GA) at miscarriage was 9 weeks (interquartile range 8-11). Seventy-seven women were in the 'presumed infected' group (77/3041, 2.5% [95% CI 2-3]), 295/3041 were in the uncertain group (9.7% [95% CI 9-11]) and the rest in the 'presumed uninfected' (87.8%, 2669/3041 [95% CI 87-89]). The rate of early miscarriage was 14% in the 'presumed infected' group, 5% in the 'uncertain' and 8% in the 'presumed uninfected' (11/77 [95% CI 6-22] versus 15/295 [95% CI 3-8] versus 212/2669 [95% CI 7-9], P = 0.02). After adjusting for age, BMI, ethnicity, smoking status, GA at registration and the number of previous miscarriages, the risk of early miscarriage appears to be higher in the 'presumed infected' group (relative rate 1.7, 95% CI 1.0-3.0, P = 0.06). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We relied on self-reported data on early pregnancy loss and SARS-CoV-2 infection without any means of checking validity. Some women in the 'presumed uninfected' and 'uncertain' groups may have had asymptomatic infections. The number of 'presumed infected' in our study was low and therefore the study was relatively underpowered. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This was a national study from the UK, where infection rates were one of the highest in the world. Based on the evidence presented here, women who are infected with SARS-CoV-2 in their first trimester may be at an increased risk of a miscarriage. However, the overall rate of miscarriage in our study population was 8%. This is reassuring and suggests that if there is an effect of SARS-CoV-2 on the risk of miscarriage, this may be limited to those with symptoms substantial enough to lead to a diagnostic test. Further studies are warranted to evaluate a causal association between SARS-CoV-2 infection in early pregnancy and miscarriage risk. Although we did not see an overall increase in the risk of miscarriage, the observed comparative increase in the presumed infected group reinforces the message that pregnant women should continue to exercise social distancing measures and good hygiene throughout their pregnancy to limit their risk of infection. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was supported by a grant from the Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Hospital Charity (G13-559194). The funders of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation or writing of the report. J.A.H. is supported by an NIHR Advanced Fellowship. A.L.D. is supported by the National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre. All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: support to J.A.H. and A.L.D. as above; no financial relationships with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous 3 years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Covid-19 infection in pregnant women in Dubai: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Whilst the impact of Covid-19 infection in pregnant women has been examined, there is a scarcity of data on pregnant women in the Middle East. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the impact of Covid-19 infection on pregnant women in the United Arab Emirates population. METHODS: A case-control study was carried out to compare the clinical course and outcome of pregnancy in 79 pregnant women with Covid-19 and 85 non-pregnant women with Covid-19 admitted to Latifa Hospital in Dubai between March and June 2020. RESULTS: Although Pregnant women presented with fewer symptoms such as fever, cough, sore throat, and shortness of breath compared to non-pregnant women; yet they ran a much more severe course of illness. On admission, 12/79 (15.2%) Vs 2/85 (2.4%) had a chest radiograph score [on a scale 1-6] of ≥3 (p-value = 0.0039). On discharge, 6/79 (7.6%) Vs 1/85 (1.2%) had a score ≥3 (p-value = 0.0438). They also had much higher levels of laboratory indicators of severity with values above reference ranges for C-Reactive Protein [(28 (38.3%) Vs 13 (17.6%)] with p < 0.004; and for D-dimer [32 (50.8%) Vs 3(6%)]; with p < 0.001. They required more ICU admissions: 10/79 (12.6%) Vs 1/85 (1.2%) with p=0.0036; and suffered more complications: 9/79 (11.4%) Vs 1/85 (1.2%) with p=0.0066; of Covid-19 infection, particularly in late pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women presented with fewer Covid-19 symptoms but ran a much more severe course of illness compared to non-pregnant women with the disease. They had worse chest radiograph scores and much higher levels of laboratory indicators of disease severity. They had more ICU admissions and suffered more complications of Covid-19 infection, such as risk for miscarriage and preterm deliveries. Pregnancy with Covid-19 infection, could, therefore, be categorised as high-risk pregnancy and requires management by an obstetric and medical multidisciplinary team.

Early pregnancy anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic: preliminary findings from the UCSF ASPIRE study.

BACKGROUND: Antenatal anxiety has been linked to adverse obstetric outcomes, including miscarriage and preterm birth. However, most studies investigating anxiety during pregnancy, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, have focused on symptoms during the second and third trimester. This study aims to describe the prevalence of anxiety symptoms early in pregnancy and identify predictors of early pregnancy anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We assessed baseline moderate-to-severe anxiety symptoms after enrollment in the UCSF ASPIRE (Assessing the Safety of Pregnancy in the Coronavirus Pandemic) Prospective Cohort from May 2020 through February 2021. Pregnant persons < 10 weeks' gestation completed questions regarding sociodemographic characteristics, obstetric/medical history, and pandemic-related experiences. Univariate and multivariate hierarchical logistic regression analyses determined predictors of moderate or severe anxiety symptoms (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 questionnaire score ≥ 10). All analyses performed with Statistical Analysis Software (SAS®) version 9.4. RESULTS: A total of 4,303 persons completed the questionnaire. The mean age of this nationwide sample was 33 years of age and 25.7% of participants received care through a fertility clinic. Over twelve percent of pregnant persons reported moderate-to-severe anxiety symptoms. In univariate analysis, less than a college education (p < 0.0001), a pre-existing history of anxiety (p < 0.0001), and a history of prior miscarriage (p = 0.0143) were strong predictors of moderate-to-severe anxiety symptoms. Conversely, having received care at a fertility center was protective (26.6% vs. 25.7%, p = 0.0009). COVID-19 related stressors including job loss, reduced work hours during the pandemic, inability to pay rent, very or extreme worry about COVID-19, and perceived stress were strongly predictive of anxiety in pregnancy (p < 0.0001). In the hierarchical logistic regression model, pre-existing history of anxiety remained associated with anxiety during pregnancy, while the significance of the effect of education was attenuated. CONCLUSION(S): Pre-existing history of anxiety and socioeconomic factors likely exacerbated the impact of pandemic-related stressors on early pregnancy anxiety symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite on-going limitations for in-person prenatal care administration, continued emotional health support should remain an important focus for providers, particularly when caring for less privileged pregnant persons or those with a pre-existing history of anxiety.