Lung ultrasound versus chest computed tomography for pregnant inpatients with COVID-19.

PURPOSE: To compare lung ultrasound (US) and computed tomography (CT) in the assessment of pregnant women with COVID-19. METHODS: Prospective study comprising 39 pregnant inpatients with COVID-19 who underwent pulmonary assessment with CT and US with a maximum span of 48 h between the exams. The thorax was divided into 12 regions and assessed in terms of the following: the presence of B-lines (>2), coalescent B-lines, consolidation on US; presence of interlobular thickening, ground glass, consolidation on CT. The two methods were scored by adding up the scores from each thoracic region. RESULTS: A significant correlation was found between the scores obtained by the two methods (rICC = 0.946; p < 0.001). They were moderately in agreement concerning the frequency of altered pulmonary regions (weighted kappa = 0.551). In US, a score over 15, coalescent B-lines, and consolidation were predictors of the need for oxygen, whereas the predictors in CT were a lung score over 16 and consolidation. The two methods, US (p < 0.001; AUC = 0.915) and CT (p < 0.001; AUC = 0.938), were fairly accurate in predicting the need for oxygen. CONCLUSION: In pregnant women, lung US and chest CT are of similar accuracy in assessing lungs affected by COVID-19 and can predict the need for oxygen.

COVID-19 outcomes in hospitalized puerperal, pregnant, and neither pregnant nor puerperal women.

OBJECTIVE: To compare hospitalized reproductive age women with COVID-19 who were pregnant, puerperal, or neither one nor the other in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics and disease progression using Brazilian epidemiological data. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the records of the Information System of the Epidemiological Surveillance of Influenza of the Health Ministry of Brazil was performed. It included the data of female patients aged 10 to 49 years hospitalized because of severe COVID-19 disease (RT-PCR+ for SARS-CoV-2), from February 17, 2020 to January 02, 2021. They were separated into 3 groups: pregnant, puerperal, and neither pregnant nor puerperal. General comparisons and then adjustments for confounding variables (propensity score matching [PSM]) were made, using demographic and clinical characteristics, disease progression (admission to the intensive care unit [ICU] and invasive or noninvasive ventilatory support), and outcome (cure or death). Deaths were analyzed in each group according to comorbidities, invasive or noninvasive ventilatory support, and admission to the ICU. RESULTS: As many as 40,640 reproductive age women hospitalized for COVID-19 were identified: 3,372 were pregnant, 794 were puerperal, and 36,474 were neither pregnant nor puerperal. Groups were significantly different in terms of demographic data and comorbidities (p<0.0001). Pregnant and puerperal women were less likely to be symptomatic than the women who were neither one nor the other (72.1%, 69.7% and 88.8%, respectively). Pregnant women, however, had a higher frequency of anosmia, and ageusia than the others. After PSM, puerperal women had a worse prognosis than pregnant women with respect to admission to the ICU, invasive ventilatory support, and death, with OR (95% CI) 1.97 (1.55 - 2.50), 2.71 (1.78 - 4.13), and 2.51 (1.79 - 3.52), respectively. CONCLUSION: Puerperal women were at a higher risk for serious outcomes (need for the ICU, need for invasive and noninvasive ventilatory support, and death) than pregnant women.