Continuous glucose monitor use in type 2 diabetes mellitus in pregnancy and perinatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess whether continuous glucose monitor use in type 2 diabetes mellitus in pregnancy is associated with improved perinatal outcomes. DATA SOURCES: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane library from inception through May 9, 2022. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included all studies that compared continuous glucose monitor use with fingerstick glucose monitoring in women with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: The initial search yielded 2463 unique citations that were screened in Covidence by 2 independent reviewers. Study types included randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and cross-sectional studies. Our outcomes of interest were macrosomia or large-for-gestational-age infants, hemoglobin A1c, cesarean delivery, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy including preeclampsia, gestational age at delivery, and neonatal hypoglycemia. RESULTS: Three randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. We performed random-effects meta-analyses of estimates from 2 studies without risk of significant bias and reported summary adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Meta-analysis of 56 women with continuous glucose monitor use and 53 control women without continuous glucose monitor use showed that there was no difference in the incidence of large-for-gestational-age infants between continuous glucose monitor users and standard-of-care controls (odds ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-1.78) with an I2 of 0%. In addition, there was no difference in the development of preeclampsia between continuous glucose monitor users and standard-of-care controls (odds ratio, 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-7.22) with an I2 of 0%. CONCLUSION: Continuous glucose monitor use was not associated with improved perinatal outcomes as assessed by large-for-gestational-age infants and preeclampsia. This review is limited by the small amount of data available for this population, and further research is needed.

SARS CoV-2 infection as a risk factor of preeclampsia and pre-term birth. An interplay between viral infection, pregnancy-specific immune shift and endothelial dysfunction may lead to negative pregnancy outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Since SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) was first identified as the cause of Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) it has caused over 649,147,421 infections and over 6,730,382 deaths worldwide. SARS-CoV-2 presents higher infectivity than other coronaviridae (MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV). Pregnant patients, according to previous studies are at high risk of severe COVID-19 course and negative pregnancy outcomes (pre-term birth, low birth weight, preeclampsia, operative delivery and ICU admission with need for mechanical ventilation). METHODS: In this review we focus on the pathophysiology of subcellular changes in COVID-19 and try bring to light the aspects that occur in physiological pregnancy that may cause higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 course. RESULTS: Knowledge of potential interplay between viral infection and physiological changes in pregnancy may point us in the direction of future prophylaxis and treatment in this special population.Key MessagesSARS-CoV-2 having affinity to ACE-2 and causing it's downregulation receptor may cause endothelial injury leading to compliment activation and formation of NETs, together with RAS dysregulation this may cause preeclampsia to develop in pregnant patients.PTB may occur in patients as an effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection in first or second trimester as an effect of TLR4 pathway dysregulation with lower levels of IFNß.

COVID-19 and preeclampsia: The unique and the mutually nonexclusive clinical manifestations.

Preeclampsia (PE) is a serious, unpredictable hypertensive disorder of pregnancy present in around 8-10% of all pregnancies resulting in high rate of maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality. With the pathophysiology partially known, delivery is the only cure for PE. The disease sets due to multiple pathologic processes involving endothelial cell activation, inflammation, multiorgan damage and syncytiotrophoblast stress.  Though the primary target organ is lungs in COVID-19, other systemic manifestations which include endothelial dysfunction, dysregulated angiogenesis, thrombosis, liver injury, thrombocytopenia, hypertension and kidney damage overlap with PE. COVID-19 patients show a higher incidence of PE as compared to their noninfected counterparts and vice versa. Similar pathophysiology and clinical features make differential diagnosis challenging. For effective and specific management, it is important to differentiate actual PE from COVID-19 with PE like features. There are contradictory reports about the accuracy of diagnostic tools in distinguishing PE from severe COVID-19 with PE like features. With the available data, it can only be stated that PE is a common adverse pregnancy event, which may be exacerbated by, or may exacerbate, COVID-19. Future research should focus on cohesive understanding of the pathophysiology of the clinical manifestations, and preventive strategies during pregnancy.

Increased risk of early-onset preeclampsia in pregnant women with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate incidence, risk of early and late-onset preeclampsia (PE) and understand their relationship with severity of COVID-19. METHODS: Pregnant women with COVID-19 (n = 1929) were enrolled from 1 April 2020 to 24 February 2022. Primary outcome measure was incidence and risk of early onset PE in women with COVID-19. RESULTS: The incidence of early and late-onset PE was 11.4% and 5.6%. Moderate to severe COVID-19 was associated with eight times higher risk of early onset PE [aOR = 8.13 (1.56-42.46), p = 0.0129] compared to asymptomatic group. CONCLUSIONS: Risk of early onset PE was higher in pregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19 as compared to asymptomatic women.

Pregnancy and neonatal outcomes of COVID-19: The PAN-COVID study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess perinatal outcomes for pregnancies affected by suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Prospective, web-based registry. Pregnant women were invited to participate if they had suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between 1st January 2020 and 31st March 2021 to assess the impact of infection on maternal and perinatal outcomes including miscarriage, stillbirth, fetal growth restriction, pre-term birth and transmission to the infant. RESULTS: Between April 2020 and March 2021, the study recruited 8239 participants who had suspected or confirmed SARs-CoV-2 infection episodes in pregnancy between January 2020 and March 2021. Maternal death affected 14/8197 (0.2%) participants, 176/8187 (2.2%) of participants required ventilatory support. Pre-eclampsia affected 389/8189 (4.8%) participants, eclampsia was reported in 40/ 8024 (0.5%) of all participants. Stillbirth affected 35/8187 (0.4 %) participants. In participants delivering within 2 weeks of delivery 21/2686 (0.8 %) were affected by stillbirth compared with 8/4596 (0.2 %) delivering ≥ 2 weeks after infection (95 % CI 0.3-1.0). SGA affected 744/7696 (9.3 %) of livebirths, FGR affected 360/8175 (4.4 %) of all pregnancies. Pre-term birth occurred in 922/8066 (11.5%), the majority of these were indicated pre-term births, 220/7987 (2.8%) participants experienced spontaneous pre-term births. Early neonatal deaths affected 11/8050 livebirths. Of all neonates, 80/7993 (1.0%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS: Infection was associated with indicated pre-term birth, most commonly for fetal compromise. The overall proportions of women affected by SGA and FGR were not higher than expected, however there was the proportion affected by stillbirth in participants delivering within 2 weeks of infection was significantly higher than those delivering ≥ 2 weeks after infection. We suggest that clinicians' threshold for delivery should be low if there are concerns with fetal movements or fetal heart rate monitoring in the time around infection. The proportion affected by pre-eclampsia amongst participants was not higher than would be expected, although we report a higher than expected proportion affected by eclampsia. There appears to be no effect on birthweight or congenital malformations in women affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy and neonatal infection is uncommon. This study reflects a population with a range of infection severity for SARS-COV-2 in pregnancy, generalisable to whole obstetric populations.

COVID-19 Not Hypertension or Diabetes Increases the Risk of Preeclampsia among a High-Risk Population.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) infection has been associated with greater morbidity and increased mortality in certain populations, such as those with chronic medical conditions, the elderly, and pregnant women. Our goal was to determine if COVID-19 infection during pregnancy increased the risk of preeclampsia in a population of women with increased risk factors for preeclampsia. We present a prospective observational matched case-control study of 100 deliveries with confirmed SARS-CoV2. Specifically, we investigated the maternal and neonatal outcomes in a high-risk population of pregnant women. Among women with COVID-19, the severity of symptoms was associated with the incidence of preeclampsia, but not with pre-existing diabetes or hypertension. Women with more severe symptoms were more likely to delivery pre-term with smaller babies. After adjusting for diabetes, hypertensive women with COVID-19 had an increased risk of preeclampsia aOR4.3 [1.5,12.4] compared to non-hypertensive women with COVID-19. After adjusting for hypertension, women with diabetes and COVID-19 had an increased risk of preeclampsia aOR3.9 [1.2,12.5]. This relationship was not seen among women without COVID-19. For women who had pre-existing diabetes or hypertension, the risk of developing preeclampsia was only increased if they were also diagnosed with COVID-19, suggesting that in our population of women the risk of preeclampsia is not associated with pre-existing diabetes or hypertension.

A global view of hypertensive disorders and diabetes mellitus during pregnancy.

Two important maternal cardiometabolic disorders (CMDs), hypertensive disorders in pregnancy (HDP) (including pre-eclampsia) and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), result in a large disease burden for pregnant individuals worldwide. A global consensus has not been reached about the diagnostic criteria for HDP and GDM, making it challenging to assess differences in their disease burden between countries and areas. However, both diseases show an unevenly distributed disease burden for regions with a low income or middle income, or low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), or regions with lower sociodemographic and human development indexes. In addition to many common clinical, demographic and behavioural risk factors, the development and clinical consequences of maternal CMDs are substantially influenced by the social determinants of health, such as systemic marginalization. Although progress has been occurring in the early screening and management of HDP and GDM, the accuracy and long-term effects of such screening and management programmes are still under investigation. In addition to pharmacological therapies and lifestyle modifications at the individual level, a multilevel approach in conjunction with multisector partnership should be adopted to tackle the public health issues and health inequity resulting from maternal CMDs. The current COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted health service delivery, with women with maternal CMDs being particularly vulnerable to this public health crisis.

Preeclampsia and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease that has rapidly spread worldwide, causing hundreds of thousand deaths. Normal placentation is characterized by many processes strictly regulated during pregnancy. If placentation is impaired, it can lead to gestational disorders, such as preeclampsia that is a multisystem disorder that occurs in 2-8% of pregnancies worldwide. METHODS: We performed a systematic search to understand the potential involvement of SARS-CoV-2 in preeclampsia onset using the databases, PubMed and Web of Science until 31 January 2022. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 infection not only causes damage to the respiratory system but also can infect human placenta cells impairing pivotal processes necessary for normal placenta development. The inflammatory response trigged by COVID-19 disease is very similar to that one found in preeclampsia pregnancies suggesting a possible link between SARS-CoV-2 infection and preeclampsia onset during pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Some studies showed that pregnancies affected by COVID-19 had higher incidence of preeclampsia compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative ones. However, increased blood pressure found in COVID-19 pregnancies does not allow to associate COVID-19 to preeclampsia as hypertension is a common factor to both conditions. At present, no diagnostic tools are available to discriminate real preeclampsia from preeclampsia-like syndrome in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Thus, new specific diagnostic tools are necessary to assure an appropriate diagnosis of preeclampsia in these patients, especially in case of severe COVID-19 disease.

Risk of preeclampsia in patients with symptomatic COVID-19 infection.

OBJECTIVES: Recent studies suggest an association between COVID-19 infection during pregnancy and preeclampsia. Nonetheless, these studies are subject to numerous biases. We compared the onset of preeclampsia in a group with symptomatic COVID-19 during pregnancy to that in a group whose non-exposure to the virus was certain, in a center where pregnancy management was identical in both groups. STUDY DESIGN: This was a single-center study comparing exposed and unexposed patients. The exposed group included pregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19 infection (diagnosed by RT-PCR or CT scan), who gave birth between March and December, 2020. The unexposed group included pregnant women who gave birth between March and December, 2019. Only cases of preeclampsia that occurred after COVID-19 infection were considered. A multivariate analysis was performed to study the existence of an association between COVID-19 and preeclampsia. A sensitivity analysis was performed among nulliparous patients. RESULTS: The frequency of preeclampsia was 3.2% (3/93) in the exposed group, versus 2.2% (4/186) in the unexposed group (P = 0.58). Among the nulliparous patients, the frequency of preeclampsia was 4.9% (2/41) in the exposed group versus 0.9% (1/106) in the unexposed group (P = 0.13). The association between COVID-19 and preeclampsia was not significant after multivariate analysis (OR 3.12, 95% CI 0.39-24.6). CONCLUSION: Symptomatic COVID-19 infection during pregnancy does not appear to increase the risk of preeclampsia strongly, although the size of our sample prevents us from reaching a conclusion about a low or moderate risk. It therefore does not appear necessary to reinforce preeclampsia screening in patients with symptomatic COVID-19 infection during pregnancy.

Preeclampsia among women with COVID-19 during pregnancy and its impact on maternal and perinatal outcomes: Results from a national multicenter study on COVID in Brazil, the REBRACO initiative.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence of preeclampsia among cases of COVID-19 infection during pregnancy and the association between both conditions, in a multicenter cohort of Brazilian women with respiratory symptoms. STUDY DESIGN: Ancillary analysis of the Brazilian Network of COVID-19 in Obstetrics (REBRACO) study. We performed a nested case-control analysis selecting all women with COVID-19 and compared outcomes between women with and without PE. MAIN OUTCOMES: Maternal, gestational, and clinical characteristics and perinatal outcomes. MEASURES: Prevalence ratio (PR) and its 95%CI for each of the predictors and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 203 women were included: 21 (10.3%) in PE group and 182 (89.7%) in non-PE group. Preeclampsia was not different among women with and without COVID-19 (10.3% vs 13.1%, p-value = 0.41), neither complication such as eclampsia and HELLP syndrome. Chronic hypertension (33.4%) (p < 0.01) and obesity (60.0%) (p = 0.03) were the most frequent comorbidities in PE group, and they were significantly more frequent in this group. Women with PE had more cesarean section (RR 5.54 [1.33 - 23.14]) and their neonates were more frequently admitted to neonatal intensive care unit (PR 2.46[1.06 - 5.69]), most likely due to preterm-birth-related complications. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of PE among women with COVID-19 infection during pregnancy was around 10%; women with COVID-19 and a history of chronic hypertension or obesity are more likely to have preeclampsia. Cesarean section is increased among women with PE and COVID-19, with increased rates of neonatal admission to intensive care units, mostly due to prematurity.

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.

Association between SARS-Cov-2 infection during pregnancy and adverse pregnancy outcomes: A re-analysis of the data reported by Wei et al. (2021).

OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND: Wei et al. have published a meta-analysis (MA), which aimed to evaluate the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Using classical random-effects model, they found that SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with preeclampsia, preterm birth and stillbirth. Performing MA with low event rates or with few studies may be challenging insofar as MA relies on several within and between-study distributional assumptions. The objective was to assess the robustness of the results provided by Wei et al. METHODS: We performed a sensitivity analysis using frequentist and Bayesian meta-analysis methods. We also estimated fragility indexes. RESULTS: For eclampsia, the confidence intervals of most frequentist models contain 1. All beta-binomial models (Bayesian) lead to credible intervals containing 1. The prediction interval, based on DL method, ranges from 0.75 to 2.38. The fragility index is 2 for the DL method. For preterm, the confidence (credible) intervals exclude 1. The prediction interval is broad, ranging from 0.84 to 20.61. The fragility index ranges from 27 to 10. For stillbirth, the confidence intervals of most frequentist models contain 1. Six Bayesian MA models lead to credible intervals containing 1. The prediction interval ranges from 0.52 to 8.49. The fragility index is 3. CONCLUSION: Given the available data and the results of our broad sensitivity analysis, we can suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy is associated with preterm, and that it may be associated with preeclampsia. For stillbirth, more data are needed as none of the Bayesian analyses are conclusive.

Impact of COVID-19 infection in pregnancy and neonates: A case control study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate maternal and neonatal outcomes of pregnant women who were infected by COVID-19 during pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: A Case control retrospective study was conducted in an Obstetrical Department of a west Parisian area during the first year of COVID-19 pandemic. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared between a group of women infected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus during pregnancy (March 2020- February 2021) and a control group of women delivering before pandemic. They were matched according to age and parity. Subgroups of SARS-CoV-2 infection occurring before vs after 37 weeks of gestations and symptomatic vs asymptomatic patients were analyzed. The rate of preterm birth, preeclampsia, placental abruption and stillbirth were compared between the year of pandemic and the year before for all deliveries. RESULTS: Maternal and neonatal outcomes were similar. Among the 86 pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection, five were admitted to Hospital (5.8%). One was transferred in intensive care unit for respiratory distress (1.2%). All patients had favorable outcomes. Patients with symptoms had more associated comorbidities (34.5%, n = 20/58, with symptoms, vs 9,1%, n = 2/22, without symptoms, p = 0.023). No differences in preeclampsia, placenta abruption and stillbirth, but less preterm births (4.9%, n = 160/3383 vs 6.2%, n = 209/3235, p = 0.04) were observed between the year of pandemic and the year before. CONCLUSION: There were few complications associated with COVID-19 infection among pregnant patients and their neonates. A low rate of associated comorbidities, a good access to healthcare services in this area and the small sample size of patients could explain these results.

Shared risk factors for COVID-19 and preeclampsia in the first trimester: An observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The association between preeclampsia and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is under study. Previous publications have hypothesized the existence of shared risk factors for both conditions or a deficient trophoblastic invasion as possible explanations for this association. The primary aim of this study was to examine baseline risk factors measured in the first-trimester combined screening for preeclampsia in pregnant women with COVID-19 compared with the general population. A secondary aim of this study was to compare risk factors among patients with mild and severe COVID-19. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was an observational retrospective study conducted at Vall d'Hebron Hospital Campus (Catalonia, Spain). Study patients were 231 pregnant women undergoing the first-trimester screening for preeclampsia and positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 between February 2020 and September 2021. The reference cohort were 13 033 women of the general population from six centers across Catalonia from May 2019 to June 2021. Based on the need for hospitalization, patients were classified in two groups: mild and severe COVID-19. First-trimester screening for preeclampsia included maternal history, mean arterial blood pressure, mean uterine artery pulsatility index (UtAPI), placental growth factor (PlGF), and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A). RESULTS: The proportion of cases at high risk for preeclampsia was significantly higher among the COVID-19 group compared with the general population (19.0% and 13.2%, respectively; p = 0.012). When analyzing risk factors for preeclampsia individually, women with COVID-19 had higher median body mass index (25.2 vs 24.5, p = 0.041), higher UtAPI multiple of the median (MoM) (1.08 vs 1.00, p < 0.001), higher incidence of chronic hypertension (2.8% vs 0.9%, p = 0.015), and there were fewer smokers (5.7% vs 11.6%, p = 0.007). The MoMs of PlGF and PAPP-A did not differ significantly between both groups (0.96 vs 0.97, p = 0.760 and 1.00 vs 1.01, p = 0.432; respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COVID-19, there was a higher proportion of women at high risk for preeclampsia at the first-trimester screening than in the general population, mainly because of maternal risk factors, rather than placental signs of a deficient trophoblastic invasion.

Preeclampsia and Severe Maternal Morbidity During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Population-Based Cohort Study in Ontario, Canada.

OBJECTIVE: Significant changes to the delivery of obstetrical care that occurred with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic may be associated with higher risks of adverse maternal outcomes. We evaluated preeclampsia/HELLP (hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes and low platelets) syndrome and composite severe maternal morbidity (SMM) among pregnant people who gave birth during the COVID-19 pandemic and compared these data with those of people who gave birth before the pandemic in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: This was a population-based, retrospective cohort study using linked administrative data sets from ICES. Data on pregnant people at ≥20 weeks gestation who gave birth between March 15, 2020, and September 30, 2021, were compared with those of pregnant people who gave birth within the same date range for the years 2015-2019. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the effect of the pandemic period on the odds of preeclampsia/HELLP syndrome and composite SMM, adjusting for maternal baseline characteristics and comorbidities. RESULTS: There were no differences between the study periods in the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for preeclampsia/HELLP syndrome among primiparous (aOR 1.00; 95% CI 0.91-1.11) and multiparous (aOR 0.94; 95% CI 0.81-1.09) patients and no differences for composite SMM (primiparous, aOR 1.00; 95% CI 0.95-1.05; multiparous, aOR 1.01; 95% CI 0.95-1.08). CONCLUSION: Adverse maternal outcomes were not higher among pregnant people who gave birth during the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada, when compared with those who gave birth before the pandemic.

Obstetric and perinatal outcomes of pregnancies with COVID 19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis aimed at comparing obstetric and perinatal outcomes in laboratory-tested pregnant women for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection before delivering. METHOD: We performed a comprehensive systematic review of electronic databases for studies reporting pregnant women with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection, as determined by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) before delivery, during the pandemic period published up to June 25, 2021. Results are reported as mean difference (MD) or odds ratio (OR) and their 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Seventeen observational studies with low to moderate risk of bias, reported on 2,769 pregnant women with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test and 13,807 with a negative test. Pregnant women with a positive PCR test delivered at an earlier gestational age (MD -0.19; 95% CI -0.36 to -0.02 weeks), smoked less (OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.61-0.94) and were associated with higher odds for preeclampsia (OR 1.30; 95% CI 1.09-1.54), NICU admissions (OR 2.37; 95% CI 1.18-4.76), stillbirths (OR 2.70; 95% CI, 1.38-5.29), and perinatal mortality (OR 3.23; 95% CI 1.23-8.52). There were no significant differences between positive and negative tested women in terms of nulliparity, multiple pregnancies, gestational diabetes, route of delivery, labor induction, preterm birth, infant birth weight, 5 min Apgar scores < 7, small-for-gestational-age infants and fetal malformations. Eleven studies included neonatal PCR SARS-CoV-2 testing which was performed on 129 infants, of which 20 were positive. CONCLUSION: Positive SARS-CoV-2 tested pregnant women had higher odds for preeclampsia/hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, NICU admissions, stillbirths and perinatal mortality.

Implementation of a universal postpartum blood pressure monitoring program: feasibility and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: New-onset postpartum preeclampsia has a higher risk of maternal morbidity and mortality than preeclampsia with antepartum onset, underscoring the need for earlier identification of elevated blood pressure among patients with this condition. Given the decrease in healthcare engagement, which is typical of the postpartum period, new-onset postpartum hypertension often goes unrecognized. Currently, there are no recommendations for universal postpartum blood pressure surveillance in women without hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. With the shift to telemedicine because of the COVID-19 pandemic, our institution's approach was to distribute blood pressure cuffs to women receiving any portion of their prenatal care virtually, thus also providing access to an opportunity for blood pressure measurement during the postpartum period for all women. OBJECTIVE: To explore the feasibility of a patient-driven universal postpartum home blood pressure monitoring program in women without a previous diagnosis of a hypertensive disorder. STUDY DESIGN: This was a prospective observational study of all postpartum women who were discharged from our institution from July 2020 through June 2021 and who were not previously identified to have hypertension. A clinical algorithm was developed and followed. All the women received discharge educational materials and were called at a 1-week interval by a nurse to review blood pressure and preeclampsia symptoms. The maternal demographics and delivery outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: Of the 10,092 deliveries during the study period, 5959 (59%) were successfully contacted. 352 were excluded, as they did not deliver at the primary hospital; 1052 (18%) had a previous hypertensive disorder of pregnancy diagnosis; 1522 (26%) did not have a blood pressure cuff; and 1841 (31%) planned to take their blood pressure at a later time. Precautions and blood pressure parameters were given to this last group. Of the remaining 1192, 222 (19%) had an initial elevated blood pressure. Of these, 98 had a second elevated blood pressure on recheck; 17 were referred to the emergency room for evaluation, with 8 being diagnosed with severe preeclampsia; and the remainder were recommended to follow with their obstetrical provider and enrolled in our institution's remote blood pressure management program. Of the 1192 women, 8% potentially had a new diagnosis of a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy, with 0.7% having severe hypertension. Women with elevated blood pressures were more likely to be of non-Hispanic Black race and have a higher early pregnancy body mass index than those without elevated blood pressures. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that a patient-driven postpartum blood pressure monitoring program is feasible and may be incorporated using existing resources. In addition, our findings suggest that the incidence of new-onset postpartum hypertensive disorders of pregnancy may be higher than previously assessed in retrospective cohorts. Thus, there may be a role for closer surveillance of all women with patient-driven home blood pressure monitoring, particularly those with risk factors or in the setting of limited resources.

Maternal infection with COVID-19 and increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes: a meta-analysis.

Background: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has become worldwide, posing particularly severe challenges. Pregnancy brings changes that might make individuals more vulnerable to this viral infection. To date, the impact of COVID-19 infection on pregnancy outcomes remains controversial.Method: We performed a meta-analysis to address the impact of COVID-19 infection on pregnancy outcomes. We searched the PubMed and China National Knowledge infrastructure (CNKI) databases for related articles. The odds ratio (OR) corresponding to the 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was used to define the impact of INFECTION and severity of COVID-19 on pregnancy outcomes. The statistical heterogeneity among studies was batched with the Q-test and I2 statistics.Results: We collected 38 studies including 127,805 pregnancy women. Our meta-analysis revealed that pregnant women with COVID-19 have been linked to an increased risk of premature birth (OR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.41-1.96), stillbirth (OR = 1.98, 95% CI = 1.22-3.21), pre-eclampsia (OR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.18-1.80), and PROM (OR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.07-1.81).Conclusions: Our meta-analysis showed that infection with COVID-19 increases the risk of preterm birth, stillbirth, pre-eclampsia, and PROM. Screening and early care for pregnant women to intervene with COVID-19 is important, given the increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Obstetrical outcomes and maternal morbidities associated with COVID-19 in pregnant women in France: A national retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: To the best of our knowledge, no study has exhaustively evaluated the association between maternal morbidities and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the first wave of the pandemic in pregnant women. We investigated, in natural conceptions and assisted reproductive technique (ART) pregnancies, whether maternal morbidities were more frequent in pregnant women with COVID-19 diagnosis compared to pregnant women without COVID-19 diagnosis during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data in a national cohort of all hospitalizations for births ≥22 weeks of gestation in France from January to June 2020 using the French national hospitalization database (PMSI). Pregnant women with COVID-19 were identified if they had been recorded in the database using the ICD-10 (International Classification of Disease) code for presence of a hospitalization for COVID-19. A total of 244,645 births were included, of which 874 (0.36%) in the COVID-19 group. Maternal morbidities and adverse obstetrical outcomes among those with or without COVID-19 were analyzed with a multivariable logistic regression model adjusted on patient characteristics. Among pregnant women, older age (31.1 (±5.9) years old versus 30.5 (±5.4) years old, respectively, p < 0.001), obesity (0.7% versus 0.3%, respectively, p < 0.001), multiple pregnancy (0.7% versus 0.4%, respectively, p < 0.001), and history of hypertension (0.9% versus 0.3%, respectively, p < 0.001) were more frequent with COVID-19 diagnosis. Active smoking (0.2% versus 0.4%, respectively, p < 0.001) and primiparity (0.3% versus 0.4%, respectively, p < 0.03) were less frequent with COVID-19 diagnosis. Frequency of ART conception was not different between those with and without COVID-19 diagnosis (p = 0.28). When compared to the non-COVID-19 group, women in the COVID-19 group had a higher frequency of admission to ICU (5.9% versus 0.1%, p < 0.001), mortality (0.2% versus 0.005%, p < 0.001), preeclampsia/eclampsia (4.8% versus 2.2%, p < 0.001), gestational hypertension (2.3% versus 1.3%, p < 0.03), postpartum hemorrhage (10.0% versus 5.7%, p < 0.001), preterm birth at <37 weeks of gestation (16.7% versus 7.1%, p < 0.001), <32 weeks of gestation (2.2% versus 0.8%, p < 0.001), <28 weeks of gestation (2.4% versus 0.8%, p < 0.001), induced preterm birth (5.4% versus 1.4%, p < 0.001), spontaneous preterm birth (11.3% versus 5.7%, p < 0.001), fetal distress (33.0% versus 26.0%, p < 0.001), and cesarean section (33.0% versus 20.2%, p < 0.001). Rates of pregnancy terminations ≥22 weeks of gestation, stillbirths, gestational diabetes, placenta praevia, and placenta abruption were not significantly different between the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 groups. The number of venous thromboembolic events was too low to perform statistical analysis. A limitation of this study relies in the possibility that asymptomatic infected women were not systematically detected. CONCLUSIONS: We observed an increased frequency of pregnant women with maternal morbidities and diagnosis of COVID-19 compared to pregnant women without COVID-19. It appears essential to be aware of this, notably in populations at known risk of developing a more severe form of infection or obstetrical morbidities and in order for obstetrical units to better inform pregnant women and provide the best care. Although causality cannot be determined from these associations, these results may be in line with recent recommendations in favor of vaccination for pregnant women.