Effective Dose of Prophylactic Oxytocin Infusion During Cesarean Delivery in 90% Population of Nonlaboring Patients With Preeclampsia Receiving Magnesium Sulfate Therapy and Normotensives: An Up-Down Sequential Allocation Dose-Response Study.

BACKGROUND: Oxytocin administration during cesarean delivery is the first-line therapy for the prevention of uterine atony. Patients with preeclampsia may receive magnesium sulfate, a drug with known tocolytic effects, for seizure prophylaxis. However, no study has evaluated the minimum effective dose of oxytocin during cesarean delivery in women with preeclampsia. METHODS: This study compared the effective dose in 90% population (ED90) of oxytocin infusion for achieving satisfactory uterine tone during cesarean delivery in nonlaboring patients with preeclampsia who were receiving magnesium sulfate treatment with a control group of normotensives who were not receiving magnesium sulfate. This prospective dual-arm dose-finding study was based on a 9:1 biased sequential allocation design. Oxytocin infusion was initiated at 13 IU/h, on clamping of the umbilical cord, in the first patient of each group. Uterine tone was graded as satisfactory or unsatisfactory by the obstetrician at 4 minutes after initiation of oxytocin infusion. The dose of oxytocin infusion for subsequent patients was decided according to the response exhibited by the previous patient in the group; it was increased by 2 IU/h after unsatisfactory response or decreased by 2 IU/h or maintained at the same level after satisfactory response, in a ratio of 1:9. Oxytocin-associated side effects were also evaluated. Dose-response data for the groups were evaluated using a log-logistic function and ED90 estimates were derived from fitted equations using the delta method. RESULTS: The ED90 of oxytocin was significantly greater for the preeclampsia group (n = 27) than for the normotensive group (n = 40) (24.9 IU/h [95% confidence interval {CI}, 22.4-27.5] and 13.9 IU/h [95% CI, 12.4-15.5], respectively); the difference in dose requirement was 10.9 IU/h (95% CI, 7.9-14.0; P < .001). The number of patients with oxytocin-related hypotension, defined as a decrease in systolic blood pressure >20% from baseline or to <90 mm Hg, was significantly greater in the preeclampsia group (92.6% vs 62.5%; P = .030), while other side effects such as ST-T depression, nausea/vomiting, headache, and flushing, were not significantly different. There was no significant difference in the need for additional uterotonic or uterine massage, estimated blood loss, and need for re-exploration for uncontrolled bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with preeclampsia receiving preoperative magnesium therapy need a greater intraoperative dose of oxytocin to achieve satisfactory contraction of the uterus after fetal delivery, as compared to normotensives.

Low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour.

BACKGROUND: Misoprostol given orally is a commonly used labour induction method. Our Cochrane Review is restricted to studies with low-dose misoprostol (initially ≤ 50 µg), as higher doses pose unacceptably high risks of uterine hyperstimulation. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of low-dose oral misoprostol for labour induction in women with a viable fetus in the third trimester of pregnancy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov,  the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (14 February 2021) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing low-dose oral misoprostol (initial dose ≤ 50 µg) versus placebo, vaginal dinoprostone, vaginal misoprostol, oxytocin, or mechanical methods; or comparing oral misoprostol protocols (one- to two-hourly versus four- to six-hourly; 20 µg to 25 µg versus 50 µg; or 20 µg hourly titrated versus 25 µg two-hourly static). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Using Covidence, two review authors independently screened reports, extracted trial data, and performed quality assessments. Our primary outcomes were vaginal birth within 24 hours, caesarean section, and hyperstimulation with foetal heart changes. MAIN RESULTS: We included 61 trials involving 20,026 women. GRADE assessments ranged from moderate- to very low-certainty evidence, with downgrading decisions based on imprecision, inconsistency, and study limitations. Oral misoprostol versus placebo/no treatment (four trials; 594 women) Oral misoprostol may make little to no difference in the rate of caesarean section (risk ratio (RR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.11; 4 trials; 594 women; moderate-certainty evidence), while its effect on uterine hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes is uncertain (RR 5.15, 95% CI 0.25 to 105.31; 3 trials; 495 women; very low-certainty evidence). Vaginal births within 24 hours was not reported. In all trials, oxytocin could be commenced after 12 to 24 hours and all women had pre-labour ruptured membranes. Oral misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone (13 trials; 9676 women) Oral misoprostol probably results in fewer caesarean sections (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.90; 13 trials, 9676 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis indicated that 10 µg to 25 µg (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.87; 9 trials; 8652 women) may differ from 50 µg (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.34; 4 trials; 1024 women) for caesarean section. Oral misoprostol may decrease vaginal births within 24 hours (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.00; 10 trials; 8983 women; low-certainty evidence) and hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.59; 11 trials; 9084 women; low-certainty evidence). Oral misoprostol versus vaginal misoprostol (33 trials; 6110 women) Oral use may result in fewer vaginal births within 24 hours (average RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.95; 16 trials, 3451 women; low-certainty evidence), and less hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.92, 25 trials, 4857 women, low-certainty evidence), with subgroup analysis suggesting that 10 µg to 25 µg orally (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.57; 6 trials, 957 women) may be superior to 50 µg orally (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.11; 19 trials; 3900 women). Oral misoprostol probably does not increase caesarean sections overall (average RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.16; 32 trials; 5914 women; low-certainty evidence) but likely results in fewer caesareans for foetal distress (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.99; 24 trials, 4775 women). Oral misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin (6 trials; 737 women, 200 with ruptured membranes) Misoprostol may make little or no difference to vaginal births within 24 hours (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.33; 3 trials; 466 women; low-certainty evidence), but probably results in fewer caesarean sections (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.90; 6 trials; 737 women; moderate-certainty evidence). The effect on hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes is uncertain (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.19 to 2.26; 3 trials, 331 women; very low-certainty evidence). Oral misoprostol versus mechanical methods (6 trials; 2993 women) Six trials compared oral misoprostol to transcervical Foley catheter. Misoprostol may increase vaginal birth within 24 hours (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.79; 4 trials; 1044 women; low-certainty evidence), and probably reduces the risk of caesarean section (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.95; 6 trials; 2993 women; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.21; 4 trials; 2828 women; low-certainty evidence). Oral misoprostol one- to two-hourly versus four- to six-hourly (1 trial; 64 women) The evidence on hourly titration was very uncertain due to the low numbers reported. Oral misoprostol 20 µg hourly titrated versus 25 µg two-hourly static (2 trials; 296 women) The difference in regimen may have little or no effect on the rate of vaginal births in 24 hours (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.16; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is of very low certainty for all other reported outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose oral misoprostol is probably associated with fewer caesarean sections (and therefore more vaginal births) than vaginal dinoprostone, and lower rates of hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes. However, time to birth may be increased, as seen by a reduced number of vaginal births within 24 hours. Compared to transcervical Foley catheter, low-dose oral misoprostol is associated with fewer caesarean sections, but equivalent rates of hyperstimulation. Low-dose misoprostol given orally rather than vaginally is probably associated with similar rates of vaginal birth, although rates may be lower within the first 24 hours. However, there is likely less hyperstimulation with foetal heart changes, and fewer caesarean sections performed due to foetal distress. The best available evidence suggests that low-dose oral misoprostol probably has many benefits over other methods for labour induction. This review supports the use of low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour, and demonstrates the lower risks of hyperstimulation than when misoprostol is given vaginally. More trials are needed to establish the optimum oral misoprostol regimen, but these findings suggest that a starting dose of 25 µg may offer a good balance of efficacy and safety.

The clinical course and short-term health outcomes of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children in the single pediatric rheumatology center.

OBJECTIVES: Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) is a rare but severe condition resulting in excessive response of the immune system after SARS-CoV-2 infection. We report a single-center cohort of children with MIS-C, describing the spectrum of presentation, therapies, clinical course, and short-term outcomes. METHODS: This is a prospective observational study from to a tertiary pediatric rheumatology center including patients (aged 1 month to 21 years) diagnosed with MIS-C between April 2020-April 2021. Demographic, clinical, laboratory results and follow-up data were collected through the electronic patient record system and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 67 patients with MIS-C were included in the study. Fever was detected in all patients; gastrointestinal system symptoms were found in 67.2% of the patients, rash in 38.8%, conjunctivitis in 31.3%, hypotension in 26.9% myocarditis, and/or pericarditis in 22.4%, respectively. Respiratory symptoms were only in five patients (7.5%). Kawasaki Disease like presentation was found 37.3% of the patients. The mean duration of hospitalization was 11.8 7.07 days. Fifty-seven patients (85%) received intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), 45 (67%) received corticosteroids, 17 (25.3%) received anakinra, and one (1.5%) received tocilizumab. Seven of the patients (10.4%) underwent therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE). In 21 (31.3%) patients, a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) was required in a median of 2 days. The first finding to improve was fever, while the first parameter to decrease was ferritin (median 6.5 days (IQR, 4-11.2 days)). Sixty-five patients were discharged home with a median duration of hospital stay of 10 days (IQR, 7-15 days). CONCLUSION: Patients with MIS-C may have severe cardiac findings and intensive care requirements in admission and hospital follow-up. The vast majority of these findings improve with effective treatment without any sequelae until discharge and in a short time in follow-up. Although the pathogenesis and treatment plan of the disease are partially elucidated, follow-up studies are needed in terms of long-term prognosis and relapse probabilities.

Labor induction in COVID-19 patients: experience in the San Juan de Dios Hospital / Inducción de trabajo de parto en pacientes COVID-19: experiencia en el Hospital San Juan de Dios

INTRODUCCIÖN Y OBJETIVOS: Describir la experiencia de los partos en gestantes con diagnóstico confirmado de COVID 19 mediante RT-PCR asintomáticas o con sintomatología leve y aquellas sin la enfermedad, y determinar la tasa de éxito de parto vaginal en inducción de trabajo de parto. MÉTODOS: Análisis retrospectivo de pacientes que tuvieron su parto entre 15 de Abril y 03 de Julio del 2020 en el Hospital San Juan de Dios. Se incluyeron las pacientes inducidas con Dinoprostona, Oxitocina o ambas de manera secuencial y se dividieron según estatus COVID 19 mediante RT-PCR al ingreso. Se caracterizó demográficamente el grupo de pacientes positivas y se determinaron los datos de ambos grupos en relación a la necesidad de inducción de trabajo de parto y su éxito para parto vaginal. RESULTADOS: De un total de 657 nacimientos, hubo un 9.7% (n=64) de pacientes con COVID 19, de las cuales un 23.4% (n=15) requirió inducción de trabajo de parto, con una tasa de éxito para parto vaginal de un 66.7% (n=10). De estas pacientes, un 50% recibió Oxitocina, un 40% Dinosprostona y un 10% ambos medicamentos de forma secuencial. En las pacientes negativas, hubo un total de 568 nacimientos, con un 29.8% (n=169) de usuarias que requirieron inducción. La tasa de éxito para parto vaginal en este grupo fue de 72.2% (n=122), utilizando un 50% Oxitocina; un 27% Dinoprostona; un 14.8% ambas; y un 8.2% Balón de Cook. CONCLUSIONES: Sabemos que los resultados de este estudio están limitados por el bajo número de pacientes incluidas, sin embargo, podemos observar que, en nuestra experiencia con las pacientes que arrojaron PCR SARS-CoV-2 positivas, asintomáticas o con enfermedad leve, se logró realizar la inducción de trabajo de parto según protocolos habituales, obteniendo porcentajes de éxito para partos vaginales, similares a las pacientes sin la enfermedad.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Describe the experience of deliveries in pregnant women with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID 19 by asymptomatic RT-PCR or with mild symptoms and those without the disease, and determine the success rate of vaginal delivery in the induction of labor. METHODS: Retrospective study of patients who had their delivery between 15th April and 03rd of July, 2020 in the San Juan de Dios Hospital. Patients induced with Dinoprostone, Oxytocin or both sequentially were included, and were divided according to COVID 19 status by RT-PCR on their admission process. The group of positive patients was demographically characterized and the data of both groups was determined in relation to the need for labor induction and its success for vaginal delivery. RESULTS: Of a total of 657 births, there were 9.7% (n = 64) of patients with COVID 19, of which 23.4% (n = 15) required labor induction, with a success rate for vaginal delivery of 66.7% (n = 10). Of these patients, 50% received Oxytocin, 40% Dinosprostone and 10% both drugs sequentially. In the negative patients, there were a total of 568 births, with 29.8% (n = 169) of users requiring labor induction. The success rate for vaginal delivery in this group was 72.2% (n = 122); 50% using Oxytocin; 27% Dinoprostone; 14.8% using both; and 8.2% using Cook's Catheter. CONCLUSIONS: We know that the results of this study are limited by the low number of patients included, however, in our experience, we can observe that, in patients with SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive, asymptomatic or with mild disease, it was possible to perform induction of labor according to standard protocols, achieving success rates for vaginal deliveries, similar to patients without the disease.