Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 39
Filter
1.
An Acad Bras Cienc ; 94(2): e20211283, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1833800

ABSTRACT

Aim of this study is to investigate whether the risk of miscarriage increases in pregnant women who had COVID-19 in first trimester. Our study included 52 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection detected by RT-PCR and 53 patients with negative RT-PCR test in samples taken with nasopharyngeal swab in the first trimester between March 1 and December 31, 2020. Complete abortion, incomplete abortion, blighted ovum, intrauterine exitus, biochemical pregnancies were accepted as in the miscarriage group (MG). Pregnant women with COVID-19 and control group were compared in terms of demographic data, miscarriage rate and laboratory results. Patients were divided into MG and ongoing pregnancy groups (OPG) and compared in terms of the diagnosed weeks, clinical findings, laboratory results, treatments, and hospitalization. While miscarriage was observed in 15 (28.8%) of pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2 in the first trimester, this number was 7 (13.2%) in the control group. While the common symptoms in the MG were cough (60%), fever (53.3%), shortness of breath (53.3%), and fatigue (46.7%) (p<0.05); asymptomatic patients (51.4%) were higher in the OPG (p<0.001). Hospitalized patients were 33.3% in the MG and 8.1% in the OPG (p=0.02). According to the results of our study, the risk of miscarriage increases in pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2 (especially in severe infection) in the first trimester.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Abortion, Spontaneous/etiology , COVID-19/complications , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/diagnosis , Pregnancy Trimester, First , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand ; 101(7): 803-808, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1819875

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pre-Eclampsia , Biomarkers , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Placenta/metabolism , Placenta Growth Factor , Pre-Eclampsia/diagnosis , Pre-Eclampsia/epidemiology , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Trimester, First/physiology , Pregnancy-Associated Plasma Protein-A , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Uterine Artery
3.
Hum Reprod ; 37(6): 1126-1133, 2022 05 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1778911

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous , COVID-19 , Premature Birth , Abortion, Spontaneous/epidemiology , Abortion, Spontaneous/etiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Pandemics , Placenta , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Trimester, First , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Premature Birth/etiology , Prospective Studies , RNA, Viral , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiology
4.
Fetal Diagn Ther ; 49(3): 67-76, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1736174

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Second- and third-trimester SARS-CoV-2 infections may have an increased risk of obstetric complications. However, data on first-trimester infections are scarce. We sought to characterize the clinical and inflammatory presentations and pregnancy outcomes of first-trimester infections. METHODS: A population-based multicenter study including 817 singleton pregnancies with SARS-CoV-2 serologic testing at 8-14 weeks between March and May 2020. Blood count, uterine artery Doppler, and pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A) were performed in all women. Placental growth factor (PlGF), soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase 1 (sFlt-1), IL-6, and ferritin were determined in positive women. Obstetric outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: The prevalence of first-trimester infection was 15.2% (n = 124). 72.6% of positive women were asymptomatic. Symptomatic women had higher rates of lymphopenia (1.91 × 109/L vs. 2.16 × 109/L, p = 0.017) and increased levels of IL-6 (9.1% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.051), but lower rates of decreased ferritin (6.3% vs. 19.8%, p = 0.015). PAPP-A was higher in symptomatic women compared with asymptomatic and negative women (1.44 [IQR 0.90-1.82] vs. 1.08 [IQR 0.66-1.61] p = 0.014, vs. 1.08 [IQR 0.77-1.55] p = 0.019, respectively). Obstetric outcomes were not increased. CONCLUSIONS: First-trimester SARS-CoV-2 infections are mostly asymptomatic, with a mild increase of inflammatory markers in symptomatic women. Obstetric complications were not increased, but PAPP-A levels were higher in symptomatic women.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pre-Eclampsia , Biomarkers , Female , Ferritins , Humans , Interleukin-6/metabolism , Placenta Growth Factor , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Trimester, First , Pregnancy-Associated Plasma Protein-A/metabolism , SARS-CoV-2
5.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 22(1): 54, 2022 Jan 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1643118

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A hospital-based retrospective study was conducted to examine the effect of initial COVID-19 outbreak during first trimester on pregnancy outcome in Wuxi, China. METHODS: Women who delivered children at our hospital during June 2020 to July 2020 (control group), and October 2020 to December 2020 (exposure group) were recruited in the present study. All of the participants were not infected with COVID-19. The last menstrual period (LMP) of the exposure group was between January 24th, 2020 and March 12th, 2020, whilst in the control group, the LMP was between May 12th and October 31st, 2019. RESULTS: There were 1,456 women in the exposure group and 1,816 women in the control group. Women in the exposure group were more susceptible to hypertension during pregnancy (HDP, P = 0.004, OR[95%CI] = 1.90[1.22-2.95]) and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM, P = 0.008, OR[95%CI] = 1.31[1.08-1.60]) compared to those in the control group. Mothers diagnosed with HDP were more likely to deliver premature infants, leading to a higher rate of low birth weight (all P < 0.05). The other common outcomes of pregnancy showed no statistical differences between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The initial COVID-19 outbreak might increase the incidence rates of HDP and GDM among pregnant women whose first trimesters were during that period, resulting in higher percentages of premature delivery and low birth weight. These results should be confirmed by studies from other hospitals or cities.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Maternal Exposure , Pregnancy Complications/epidemiology , Pregnancy Trimester, First , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , China/epidemiology , Diabetes, Gestational/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced/epidemiology , Incidence , Infant, Low Birth Weight , Pregnancy , Premature Birth , Retrospective Studies
7.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand ; 101(2): 232-240, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1570453

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: A pandemic may negatively influence psychological well-being in the individual. We aimed to assess the potential influence of the first national lockdown in Denmark (March to June 2020) due to the COVID-19 pandemic on psychological well-being and the content and degree of worries among pregnant women in early pregnancy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this hospital-based cross-sectional study based on self-reported data we compared psychological well-being and worries among women who were pregnant during the first phase of the pandemic (COVID-19 group) (n = 685), with women who were pregnant the year before (Historical group) (n = 787). Psychological well-being was measured by the five-item World Health Organization Well-being Index (WHO-5), using a score ≤50 as indicator of reduced psychological well-being. Differences in WHO-5 mean scores and in the prevalence of women with score ≤50 were assessed using general linear and log-binomial regression analyses. The Cambridge Worry Scale was used to measure the content and degree of major worries. To detect differences between groups, Pearson's Chi-square test was used. RESULTS: We found no differences in mean WHO-5 score between groups (mean difference) 0.1 (95% CI -1.5 to 1.6) or in the prevalence of women with WHO-5 score ≤50 (prevalence ratio 1.04, 95% CI 0.83-1.29) in adjusted analyses. A larger proportion of women in the COVID-19 group reported major worries about Relationship with husband/partner compared with the Historical group (3% [n = 19] vs 1% [n = 6], p = 0.04), and 9.2% in the COVID-19 group worried about the possible negative influence of the COVID-19 restrictions. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that national restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic did not influence the psychological well-being or the content and degree of major worries among pregnant women. However, a larger proportion of women in the COVID-19 group reported major worries concerning Relationship with husband/partner compared with the Historical group and 9.2% in the COVID-19 group worried about the possible negative influence of the COVID-19 restrictions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control , Interpersonal Relations , Mental Health , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Pregnant Women/psychology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Communicable Disease Control/statistics & numerical data , Cross-Sectional Studies , Denmark/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Health/statistics & numerical data , Mental Health/trends , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/prevention & control , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/psychology , Pregnancy Trimester, First/psychology , Psychology/methods , Psychology/trends , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(23)2021 12 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1554824

ABSTRACT

As is well known, the COVID-19 infection is affecting the whole world, causing a serious health, social and economic crisis. The viral infection can cause a mild or severe illness, depending on how effectively the virus is countered by the immune system. In this context, the position of pregnant women remains rather unknown. The case described here reports the immune response in a woman in good health and in her newborn son, having undergone complete vaccination during the first trimester of her pregnancy. We performed a serological assay, measuring IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, by a fully automated solid phase DELFIA (time-resolved fluorescence) immunoassay in a few drops of blood, collected by a finger-prick and spotted on filter paper. The dried blood spot (DBS) sample we used is the same type of sample routinely used in a newborn screening program test. Such a simple and minimally invasive approach allowed us to monitor both the mother and the newborn soon after birth for their anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels. The serological test on the DBS carried out on both mother and newborn revealed the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies up to 7 months after vaccination in the mother, and already at 48 h of life in the newborn.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Parturition , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Trimester, First , Vaccination
9.
J Obstet Gynaecol Res ; 48(2): 393-401, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1528399

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE(S): This prospective observational cohort study aimed to evaluate whether women with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection during the first trimester of pregnancy are at higher risk of adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes compared to negative patients. STUDY DESIGN: Seromolecular testing for SARS-CoV-2 was performed at 12, 16, 21 weeks, and at delivery; the cohort was then subdivided into a first-trimester SARS-CoV-2-positive (case) group and a SARS-CoV-2-negative (control) group. The primary outcome was a composite adverse obstetric outcome, defined as the presence of either abortion, preterm delivery, preterm prelabor rupture of membranes, preeclampsia, intrauterine growth restriction, stillbirth; and a composite measure of adverse neonatal events, including either 1- and 5-min Apgar score ≤ 7, neonatal intensive care unit admission and congenital birth defects. Maternal symptoms and antibody titer were secondarily assessed. RESULTS: A total of 17 of 164 women tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (10.3%) in the first trimester. One SARS-CoV-2-positive patient who gave birth at another hospital was excluded. Composite adverse obstetric outcome was observed in 6.2% (1/16) SARS-CoV-2-positive and 10.5% (11/105) SARS-CoV-2-negative women; composite adverse neonatal outcome in 12.5% (2/16) and 7.6% (8/105), respectively. In the newborns of women who had developed IgG antibodies, the same antibodies were detected in arterial cord blood and the nasopharyngeal swab tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. No maternal pneumonia or hospital admission due to coronavirus disease-19 were recorded. CONCLUSION: Asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic women during the first trimester of pregnancy did not experience significantly more adverse events than SARS-CoV-2-negative women.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Premature Birth , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/diagnosis , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Pregnancy Outcome , Pregnancy Trimester, First , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
10.
Med Sci (Basel) ; 9(4)2021 11 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1512494

ABSTRACT

This paper reports a case of a 21 year old primigravida at 6 weeks gestation, suffering from important abdominal pain, who was admitted into the medical center with a giant cyst of 28 × 20 cm on her left ovary. A torsion of the ovarian cyst was suspected. Her COVID-19 status was unknown. In view of the emergency of the situation and the COVID-19 pandemic, laparoscopy in spinal anesthesia was performed. The patient remained conscious during the surgical intervention and tolerated it well apart from a slight dyspnea, which was easily eliminated by changing her body position and decreasing the pneumoperitoneum pressure. The ovarian cyst was removed by enlarging the trocar incision. The patient recovered with neither incident nor pregnancy loss. COVID-19-related complications can induce adverse pregnancy outcomes. Under general anesthesia, patients with COVID-19 are at risk of severe pneumonia and of passing their infection to the medical personnel. To avoid such complications in non-specialized centers, laparoscopy should be performed in regional anesthesia. Laparoscopy in spinal anesthesia can be performed safely on pregnant patients by placing them in the proper position, using a low pneumoperitoneum, and monitoring the hemodynamics. During early pregnancy, general anesthesia induces a higher risk of teratogenic effects and of miscarriage.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia, Spinal , Laparoscopy , Ovarian Cysts , Pneumoperitoneum , COVID-19 , Female , Humans , Ovarian Cysts/surgery , Pandemics , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Trimester, First , Pregnant Women , Young Adult
13.
Reprod Biomed Online ; 44(1): 127-130, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1415750

ABSTRACT

RESEARCH QUESTION: Is there an association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and first-trimester miscarriage? DESIGN: This multicentre prospective study included a cohort of women with first-trimester miscarriages registered consecutively by seven Spanish hospitals where universal PCR screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection was implemented with both miscarriages and deliveries. The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among women with first-trimester miscarriages was compared with the rate registered in women on admission to the delivery ward within the same time frame using a mixed-effects Poisson regression analysis, considering 'hospital' as random effect. The characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 positive and negative patients who miscarried were compared through two-sided univariable analyses. RESULTS: A total of 301 miscarriages were registered, 11 (3.7%) to SARS-CoV-2 infected and 290 to non-infected women. In the same time frame as the miscarriages, 1936 deliveries were registered, 44 [2.3%] of them were SARS-CoV-2 infected. No differences in terms of SARS-CoV-2 infection incidence were observed between infected miscarriages and infected deliveries (P = 0.233). Regarding the differences observed between miscarriages in SARS-CoV-2 positive and negative women, more inevitable miscarriages occurred in the group of infected women (36.4% versus 16.5% in non-infected women; P = 0.004), and there was greater surgical management of miscarriages (27.3% versus 8.2% in non-infected women; P = 0.036), probably in line with the greater number of inevitable miscarriages observed in this group. CONCLUSIONS: No association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and risk of first-trimester miscarriage was observed; however, the type of miscarriage seems to differ between SARS-CoV-2 positive and negative women, with inevitable miscarriage being more frequent among infected women.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous/virology , COVID-19/complications , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Incidence , Middle Aged , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Trimester, First , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology , Young Adult
15.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 16529, 2021 08 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1360209

ABSTRACT

At the beginning of 2020, the Italian Lombardy region was hit by an "epidemic tsunami" which was, at that point in time, one of the worst pandemics ever. At that moment the effects of SARS-COV 2 were still unknown. To evaluate whether the pandemic has influenced ART (Assisted Reproduction Techniques) outcomes in an asymptomatic infertile population treated at one of the major COVID-19 epicentres during the weeks immediately preceding lockdown. All ART procedures performed during two time periods were compared: November 1st, 2018 to February 28th, 2019 (non-COVID-19 risk) and November 1st, 2019 to February 29th, 2020 (COVID-19 risk). In total 1749 fresh cycles (883 non-COVID-19 risk and 866 COVID-19 risk) and1166 embryos and 63 oocytes warming cycles (538 and 37 during non-COVID and 628 and 26 during COVID-19 risk, respectively) were analysed. Clinical pregnancies per cycle were not different: 370 (25.38%) in non-COVID versus 415 (27.30%) (p = 0.237) during COVID-19 risk. There were no differences in biochemical pregnancy rates 52 (3.57%) versus 38 (2.50%) (p = 0.089) nor in ectopic pregnancies 4 (1.08%) versus 3 (0.72%) (p = 0.594), spontaneous miscarriages 84 (22.70%) versus 103 (24.82%) p = 0.487, nor in intrauterine ongoing pregnancies 282 (76.22%) versus 309 (74.46%) p = 0.569. A multivariate analysis investigating differences in spontaneous miscarriage rate showed no differences between the two timeframes. Our results support no differences in asymptomatic infertile couples' ART outcomes between the pre COVID and COVID-19 periods in one of the earliest and most severe pandemic areas.


Subject(s)
Abortion, Spontaneous/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , Infertility/therapy , Pregnancy Rate , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Asymptomatic Infections/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Pandemics , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Trimester, First , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/standards , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
17.
J Med Virol ; 93(1): 537-540, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1206792

ABSTRACT

Congenitally- or perinatally-acquired viral infections can be harmful to the fetus but data are limited about prevalence and outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease during the first trimester of pregnancy. We report epidemiologic data from a study investigating a cohort of women who became pregnant just before or during the COVID-19 pandemic. We recruited 138 consecutive pregnant women attending for first trimester screening (11-13 weeks of gestation) at Sant'Anna Hospital, Turin, Piedmont, Italy, during the plateau and the falling phase of the COVID-19 epidemic curve. Patients were tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunoglobulin M/immunoglobulin G antibody levels and SARS-CoV-2 detection in sera and nasopharyngeal swab samples. COVID-19 cumulative incidence during the first trimester was of 10.1% with high prevalence of asymptomatic patients (42.8%). Similar to the course of the disease in non pregnant adults, 80% to 90% of infections were not severe.The prevalence of reported symptoms was four-fold higher in SARS-CoV-2 positive patients (57%) than in those negative (13%) (P < .001), suggesting that direct self-testing should open doors to confirmatory testing for COVID-19. Our findings support the need for COVID-19 screening in early pregnancy in epidemic areas to plan materno-fetal health surveillance programs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/virology , Pregnancy Trimester, First , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Immunoglobulin M/blood , Incidence , Italy/epidemiology , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Prevalence , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
19.
J Diabetes Res ; 2021: 5537110, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1192132

ABSTRACT

This study was aimed at exploring the predictive value of first-trimester glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels in the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). A total of 744 pregnant women registered at the Peking University International Hospital between March 2017 and March 2019 were included in this study. Data on personal characteristics and biochemical indicators of the pregnant women were collected during the first trimester. The International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups has adopted specific diagnostic criteria as the gold standard for the diagnosis of GDM. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve statistics were used to assess the predictive value of first-trimester HbA1c levels in the diagnosis of GDM. HbA1c levels in the first trimester were significantly higher in the GDM group than in the non-GDM group (5.23% ± 0.29% vs. 5.06 ± 0.28%, P < 0.05). The first-trimester HbA1c level was an independent risk factor for gestational diabetes. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of HbA1c for GDM was 0.655 (95% confidence interval 0.620-0.689, P < 0.001). The positive likelihood ratio was the highest at HbA1c = 5.9%, sensitivity was 2.78, and specificity was 99.83%. There was no statistical difference in AUC between fasting blood glucose and HbA1c (P = 0.407). First-trimester HbA1c levels can be used to predict GDM. The risk of GDM was significantly increased in pregnant women with first-trimester HbA1c levels > 5.9%. There was no statistical difference between first-trimester HbA1c and fasting blood glucose levels in predicting GDM.


Subject(s)
Diabetes, Gestational/diagnosis , Glycated Hemoglobin A/metabolism , Pregnancy Trimester, First/blood , Adult , Beijing , Biomarkers/blood , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Diabetes, Gestational/blood , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Predictive Value of Tests , Pregnancy , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , Up-Regulation
20.
Psychoneuroendocrinology ; 128: 105210, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1164354

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The outbreak of COVID-19 epidemic has induced entire cities in China placed under 'mass quarantine'. The majority of pregnant women have to be confined at home may be more vulnerable to stressors. In our study, we aimed to explore the effects of the epidemic on maternal thyroid function, so as to provide evidence for prevention and intervention of sustained maternal and offspring's health impairment produced by thyroid dysfunction. METHODS: The subjects were selected from an ongoing prospective cohort study. we included the pregnant women who receive a thyroid function test during the COVID-19 epidemic and those receiving the test during the corresponding lunar period of 2019. A total of 7148 pregnant women with complete information were included in the final analysis. Multivariate linear and logistic regression models were used for analyzing the association of COVID-19 pandemic with FT4 levels and isolated hypothyroxinemia. RESULTS: We found a decreased maternal FT4 level during the period of the COVID-19 pandemic in first and second trimesters (ß = -0. 131, 95%CI = -0.257,-0.006,p = 0.040) and in first trimester (ß = -0. 0.176, 95%CI = -0.326,-0.026,p = 0.022) when adjusting for 25 (OH) vitamin D, vitamin B12, folate and ferritin and gestational days, maternal socio-demographic characteristics and health conditions. The status of pandemic increased the risks of isolated hypothyroxinemia in first and second trimesters (OR = 1.547, 95%CI = 1.251,1.913, p < 0.001) and first trimester (OR = 1.651, 95%CI = 1.289,2.114, p < 0.001) when adjusting for the covariates. However, these associations disappeared in the women with positive TPOAb (p > 0.05). Additionally, we found associations between daily reported new case of COVID-19 and maternal FT4 for single-day lag1, lag3 and multi-day lag01 and lag04 when adjusting for the covariates (each p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Mass confinement as a primary community control strategy may have a significant cost to public health resources. Access to health service systems and adequate medical resources should be improved for pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Pregnancy Complications/blood , Quarantine , Thyroid Diseases/blood , Thyroxine/blood , Adult , China/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications/epidemiology , Pregnancy Trimester, First/blood , Pregnancy Trimester, Second/blood , Prospective Studies , Quarantine/statistics & numerical data , Thyroid Diseases/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL