Ambulation for latency during expectant management of preterm prelabor rupture of membranes: a randomized controlled trial (AMBLE).

BACKGROUND: Individuals hospitalized with preterm prelabor rupture of membranes are often advised to limit their activity or adhere to bed rest. Some evidence suggests that greater activity is associated with longer latency and improved outcomes, but no high-quality evidence from a randomized controlled trial exists. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate whether encouragement to ambulate at least 2000 steps daily affects latency among individuals with preterm prelabor rupture of membranes compared with usual care. STUDY DESIGN: This was a multisite unblinded, 2-arm randomized trial of individuals at 23 0/7 to 35 0/7 weeks of gestation undergoing inpatient expectant management of preterm prelabor rupture of membranes with planned delivery at least 7 days away. Each participant wore a Fitbit Inspire that tracked steps. The intervention arm was encouraged (verbal and Fitbit-based reminders) to reach a goal of 2000 steps per day. The usual-care arm was allowed ad libitum activity with no step goal or reminders. The primary outcome was latency (days) from randomization to delivery. Secondary analyses included composite neonatal and maternal clinical outcomes and maternal mental health survey results. Statistical analyses were conducted with an intent-to-treat approach under a Bayesian framework using neutral priors (a priori assumed 50:50 likelihood of longer latency in either arm). A total of 100 participants were required to have 80% power to demonstrate a 4-day difference in latency with 75% certainty (Bayesian probability). RESULTS: Among 163 eligible individuals, 100 (61%) were randomized, and after loss to follow-up, 95 were analyzed. Gestational age at randomization was 29 3/7 weeks (interquartile range, 26 2/7 to 31 5/7) in the intervention arm and 27 4/7 weeks (interquartile range, 25 4/7 to 29 6/7) in the usual-care arm. Median step counts were 1690 per day in the intervention arm (interquartile range, 1031-2641) and 1338 per day in the usual-care arm (interquartile range, 784-1913). Median days of latency were 9 days in the intervention arm (interquartile range, 4-17) and 6 days in the usual-care arm (interquartile range, 2-14). The primary analysis indicated a 65% posterior probability that the intervention increased latency relative to usual care (posterior relative risk, 1.09; 95% credible interval, 0.70-1.71). The relative risk was 0.55 (95% credible interval, 0.32-0.82) for the composite neonatal adverse outcome, with 99% posterior probability of intervention benefit, and was 0.94 (95% credible interval, 0.72-1.20) for the composite maternal adverse outcome, with 70% posterior probability of intervention benefit. There was a 94% posterior probability of the intervention arm having a greater decrease in maternal stress score from baseline to before delivery compared with the usual-care arm (mean arm difference, 3.24 points [95% credible interval, -7.23 to 0.79]). Adjustment for gestational age at randomization had minimal impact on secondary outcome results. CONCLUSION: Individuals with preterm prelabor rupture of membranes randomized to encouragement to ambulate had a longer latency to delivery and improved neonatal and mental health outcomes, with similar maternal clinical outcomes compared with usual care.

The ethics of induction of labor at 39 weeks in low-risk nulliparas in research and clinical practice.

The "A Randomized Trial of Induction Versus Expectant Management" trial (ARRIVE trial) published in 2018 suggested that induction of labor can be considered a "reasonable option" for low-risk nulliparous women at ≥39 weeks of gestation. The study results led some professional societies to endorse the option for elective induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation in low-risk nulliparas, and this has begun to change obstetrical practice. The ARRIVE trial provided valuable information supporting the benefits of induction of labor; however, the trial is insufficient to serve as the primary justification for widespread elective induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation in low-risk nulliparas because of concerns about external validity. Thus, the French ARRIVE trial was designed to test the hypothesis in a different setting that elective induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation in low-risk nulliparas leads to a lower cesarean delivery rate than expectant management. This ongoing trial has been criticized as "pseudoscientific" and telling "women where, when, and how to give birth." We reject these allegations and extensively examine the ethical framework that should govern clinical and research interventions, including elective induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation in low-risk nulliparas. This study aimed to discuss the ethical issues that emerge from randomized trials of elective induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation in low-risk nulliparas and the ethics of the clinical practice itself. The analysis of existing evidence shows the importance of further research on induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation in low-risk women. Certain aspects of research ethics in this area, particularly the consent of pregnant women in a context where autonomy remains fragile, call for vigilance. In addition, we emphasize that childbirth is not only a medical object but also a social phenomenon that cannot be regarded only from the perspective of a health risk to be managed by clinical research. Further research on this issue is needed to allow pregnant women to make informed decisions, and the results should be integrated with social issues. The perspective of women is required in constructing, evaluating, and implementing medical interventions in childbirth, such as induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation.

Delivery outcomes in a cohort of pregnant patients with COVID-19 with and without viral pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Among pregnant people, COVID-19 can lead to adverse outcomes, but the specific pregnancy outcomes that are affected by the disease are unclear. In addition, the effect of the severity of COVID-19 on pregnancy outcomes has not been clearly identified. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the associations between COVID-19 with and without viral pneumonia and cesarean delivery, preterm delivery, preeclampsia, and stillbirth. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study (April 2020-May 2021) of deliveries between 20 and 42 weeks of gestation from US hospitals in the Premier Healthcare Database. The primary outcomes were cesarean delivery, preterm delivery, preeclampsia, and stillbirth. We used a viral pneumonia diagnosis (International Classification of Diseases -Tenth-Clinical Modification codes J12.8 and J12.9) to categorize patients by severity of COVID-19. Pregnancies were categorized into 3 groups: NOCOVID (no COVID-19), COVID (COVID-19 without viral pneumonia), and PNA (COVID-19 with viral pneumonia). Groups were balanced for risk factors by propensity-score matching. RESULTS: A total of 814,649 deliveries from 853 US hospitals were included (NOCOVID: n=799,132; COVID: n=14,744; PNA: n=773). After propensity-score matching, the risks of cesarean delivery and preeclampsia were similar in the COVID group compared with the NOCOVID group (matched risk ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.00; and matched risk ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-1.07; respectively). The risks of preterm delivery and stillbirth were greater in the COVID group than in the NOCOVID group (matched risk ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.19; and matched risk ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.66; respectively). The risks of cesarean delivery, preeclampsia, and preterm delivery were higher in the PNA group than in the COVID group (matched risk ratio, 1.76; 95% confidence interval, 1.53-2.03; matched risk ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.74; and matched risk ratio, 3.33; 95% confidence interval, 2.56-4.33; respectively). The risk of stillbirth was similar in the PNA and COVID group (matched risk ratio, 1.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-3.44). CONCLUSION: Within a large national cohort of hospitalized pregnant people, we found that the risk of some adverse delivery outcomes was elevated in people with COVID-19 with and without viral pneumonia, with much higher risks in the group with viral pneumonia.

Recent trends in term trial of labor after cesarean by number of prior cesarean deliveries.

BACKGROUND: Cesarean delivery is a major source of maternal morbidity, and repeat cesarean delivery accounts for 40% of cesarean delivery, but recent data on the trial of labor after cesarean and vaginal birth after cesarean are limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to report the national rates of trial of labor after cesarean and vaginal birth after cesarean by number of previous cesarean deliveries and examine the effect of demographic and clinical characteristics on these rates. STUDY DESIGN: This was a population-based cohort study using the US natality data files. The study sample was restricted to 4,135,247 nonanomalous singleton, cephalic deliveries between 37 and 42 weeks of gestation, with a history of previous cesarean delivery and delivered in a hospital between 2010 and 2019. Deliveries were grouped by number of previous cesarean deliveries (1, 2, or ≥3). The trial of labor after cesarean (deliveries with labor among deliveries with previous cesarean delivery) and vaginal birth after cesarean (vaginal deliveries among trial of labor after cesarean) rates were computed for each year. The rates were further subgrouped by history of previous vaginal delivery. Year of delivery, number of previous cesarean deliveries, history of previous cesarean delivery, age, race and ethnicity, maternal education, obesity, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, inadequate prenatal care, Medicaid payer, and gestational age were examined concerning the trial of labor after cesarean and vaginal birth after cesarean using multiple logistic regression. SAS software (version 9.4) was used for all analyses. RESULTS: The trial of labor after cesarean rates increased from 14.4% in 2010 to 19.6% in 2019 (P<.001). This trend was seen in all categories of number of previous cesarean deliveries. Moreover, vaginal birth after cesarean rates increased from 68.5% in 2010 to 74.3% in 2019. The trial of labor after cesarean and vaginal birth after cesarean rates were the highest for deliveries with a history of both 1 previous cesarean delivery and a vaginal delivery (28.9% and 79.7%, respectively) and the lowest for those with a history of ≥3 previous cesarean deliveries and no history of vaginal delivery (4.5% and 46.9%, respectively). Factors associated with the trial of labor after cesarean and vaginal birth after cesarean rates are similar, but several factors have different directions of effect, such as non-White race and ethnicity, which is associated with a higher likelihood of trial of labor after cesarean but a lower likelihood of successful vaginal birth after cesarean. CONCLUSION: More than 80% of patients with a history of previous cesarean delivery deliver by repeat scheduled cesarean delivery. With vaginal birth after cesarean rates increasing among those who attempt a trial of labor after cesarean, emphasis should be put on safely increasing the trial of labor after cesarean rates.

Is conservative management of placenta accreta spectrum disorders practical in the United States?

This commentary discusses the issues related to conservative management (also called leaving the placenta in situ or intentional retention of the placenta) of placenta accreta spectrum disorders. Considerations related to placenta accreta spectrum disorder management in the United States are compared with France, where conservative management is a well-accepted management option. The history of placenta accreta spectrum disorder treatment is reviewed, finding that since 1937, the most common treatment in the United States been cesarean-hysterectomy without placental removal. Although definitive studies have yet to be conducted, a growing body of evidence suggests that conservative management is able to reduce maternal morbidity, compared with cesarean-hysterectomy. International and national guidelines from several countries are examined. Comparisons between the United States and France that are addressed in the commentary include population and geography, structure of the healthcare system, physician training and acceptability, and patient acceptability. Considering the differences between the countries, conservative management is feasible in the United States. Different options for placenta accreta spectrum disorder management should be rigorously researched in multicenter international collaborations. Conservative management should be considered as an option for women with placenta accreta spectrum disorders in the United States, especially for those desiring fertility preservation.

Comorbidities associated with 30-day readmission following index coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalization: A retrospective cohort study of 331,136 patients in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Hospital readmission is unsettling to patients and caregivers, costly to the healthcare system, and may leave patients at additional risk for hospital-acquired infections and other complications. We evaluated the association between comorbidities present during index coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalization and the risk of 30-day readmission. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used the Premier Healthcare database to perform a retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 hospitalized patients discharged between April 2020 and March 2021 who were followed for 30 days after discharge to capture readmission to the same hospital. RESULTS: Among the 331,136 unique patients in the index cohort, 36,827 (11.1%) had at least 1 all-cause readmission within 30 days. Of the readmitted patients, 11,382 (3.4%) were readmitted with COVID-19 as the primary diagnosis. In the multivariable model adjusted for demographics, hospital characteristics, coexisting comorbidities, and COVID-19 severity, each additional comorbidity category was associated with an 18% increase in the odds of all-cause readmission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.17-1.19) and a 10% increase in the odds of readmission with COVID-19 as the primary readmission diagnosis (aOR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.09-1.11). Lymphoma (aOR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.58-2.19), renal failure (aOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.25-1.40), and chronic lung disease (aOR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.24-1.34) were most associated with readmission for COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Readmission within 30 days was common among COVID-19 survivors. A better understanding of comorbidities associated with readmission will aid hospital care teams in improving postdischarge care. Additionally, it will assist hospital epidemiologists and quality administrators in planning resources, allocating staff, and managing bed-flow issues to improve patient care and safety.

Adverse Maternal and Delivery Outcomes in Children and Very Young (Age ≤13 Years) US Adolescents Compared With Older Adolescents and Adults.

This study uses a US claims database to compare morbidity and delivery outcomes among pregnant 10- to 13-year-olds vs 14- to 17-year-olds and 18- to 19-year-olds.

Appropriate Antibiotic Use for Group B Streptococcus Prophylaxis Among Penicillin-Allergic Patients in Academic and Nonacademic Hospitals.

This study estimated prophylactic antibiotic usage rates for the prevention of early-onset invasive neonatal group B Streptococcus infection among patients with penicillin allergy. Undertreatment (no antibiotics, underuse of cefazolin, overuse of clindamycin inconsistent with resistance patterns) and overtreatment (vancomycin use) were common. Academic hospitals were marginally more adherent to guidelines than nonacademic hospitals.

Diagnosis of fetal growth restriction in a cohort of small-for-gestational-age neonates at term: neonatal and maternal outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Small-for-gestational-age neonates (birthweight of <10th percentile for gestational age) are significantly more likely to have multiple adverse outcomes than appropriate-for-gestational-age neonates (birthweight of 10th-90th percentile). Most small-for-gestational-age neonates are undetected during pregnancy (ie, not diagnosed as fetal growth restriction), but the sequela of being undetected remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to compare the composite neonatal adverse outcomes among singleton pregnancies that were at least 37 weeks and delivered small-for-gestational-age neonates, which were diagnosed as either fetal growth restriction during pregnancy (detected small for gestational age) or not (undetected small for gestational age). STUDY DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of a retrospective cohort, the Consortium for Safe Labor. Singleton births at 37.0 to 41.6 weeks of gestation without congenital anomalies born small for gestational age were included in the analysis. The primary outcome was the rate of composite neonatal adverse outcome, defined as any of the following: Apgar score of <5 at 5 minutes, cardiopulmonary resuscitation at birth, respiratory distress syndrome, continuous positive airway pressure, mechanical ventilation, neonatal seizures, hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy or diagnosis of asphyxia, intraventricular hemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis, neonatal sepsis, or fetal or neonatal death. The secondary outcome was the rate of composite maternal adverse outcome, which included any of the following: postpartum hemorrhage, peripartum infection, thromboembolism, hysterectomy, uterine rupture, eclampsia, intensive care unit admission, or maternal death. Small for gestational age with a prenatal diagnosis of fetal growth restriction (detected small for gestational age) was compared with small for gestational age without a prenatal diagnosis of fetal growth restriction (undetected small for gestational age). Multivariate logistic regression models were used to compare groups. A P value of <.05 was considered statistically significant. Gestational age-specific risks of composite neonatal adverse outcome and perinatal death were computed for each week of gestation among ongoing pregnancies. RESULTS: Of the 228,438 deliveries in the Consortium for Safe Labor, 18,607 (8.1%) met the inclusion criteria. Among these deliveries, 17,689 (95.0%) were undetected small for gestational age, and 918 (5.0%) were detected small for gestational age. The overall rate of composite neonatal adverse outcome was 3.0%. Moreover, the rate of composite neonatal adverse outcome was similar between undetected small for gestational age and detected small for gestational age (3.0% vs 3.9%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.88-2.00). Some components of the composite-respiratory distress syndrome, mechanical ventilation, and necrotizing enterocolitis-were significantly higher among undetected small for gestational age than among detected small for gestational age. The overall rate of composite maternal adverse outcome was 6.2%. The rate of composite maternal adverse outcome between undetected small for gestational age and detected small for gestational age (6.2% vs 5.1%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-1.18) was similar. In gestational age-specific comparisons of composite neonatal adverse outcome, no difference was found between the undetected small-for-gestational-age group and the detected small-for-gestational-age group except for in pregnancies >41 weeks. In pregnancies at 41.0 to 41.6 weeks, the rate of composite neonatal adverse outcome was significantly greater in detected small for gestational age than in undetected small for gestational age (10.0% vs 2.5%, respectively; P=.035). CONCLUSION: Antenatal detection of small for gestational age was not associated with improved composite neonatal adverse outcomes, although some components of morbidity improved with detection. Maternal outcomes did not differ between detected small for gestational age and undetected small for gestational age.

Leaving the Placenta In Situ in Placenta Accreta Spectrum Disorders: A Single-Center Case Series.

OBJECTIVE: The most common treatment for placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) disorders is planned primary cesarean hysterectomy. However, other management strategies may improve outcomes and/or allow fertility preservation. The objective of this study was to describe the course and outcomes of patients with PAS managed by leaving the placenta in situ. STUDY DESIGN: This is a series of 11 patients with PAS managed by leaving the placenta in situ at a single academic center in the United States from 2015 to 2022. The approach described involves delivery of the fetus via cesarean, no attempt at placental removal, closure of the hysterotomy, prophylactic intravenous antibiotics for up to 1 week, and close outpatient follow-up until the uterus is empty. RESULTS: The uterus was successfully preserved in six (55%), minimally invasive hysterectomy was performed in four (36%), and abdominal hysterectomy was performed in 1 (9%). During cesarean delivery, the median estimated blood loss was 650mL (range: 200-1,000mL). The majority of patients had no vaginal discharge for several weeks after delivery, followed by brown or bloody discharge, and intermittent mild-to-moderate cramping. The median time to resolution of PAS was 18 weeks in patients with successful uterine preservation (range: 5-25 weeks). Indications for hysterectomy included hemorrhage (n=1), coagulopathy (n=1), endomyometritis (n=2), and pain (n=1), and these occurred at a median of 5 weeks postpartum (range: 1-25 weeks). Four patients had subsequent pregnancies of whom three were live births at or near term and one was a spontaneous abortion at 19 weeks. CONCLUSION: Leaving the placenta in situ may be an appropriate management strategy for some carefully selected and counseled patients with PAS. KEY POINTS: · Overall, 55% had uterine preservation (6/11).. · Minimally invasive approach in 80% of hysterectomies (4/5).. · Of patients, 67% with uterine preservation had subsequent pregnancies (4/6)..

Pregnancy and the Risk of In-Hospital Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Mortality.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether pregnancy is an independent risk factor for in-hospital mortality among patients of reproductive age hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) viral pneumonia. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study (April 2020-May 2021) of 23,574 female inpatients aged 15-45 years with an International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis code for COVID-19 discharged from 749 U.S. hospitals in the Premier Healthcare Database. We used a viral pneumonia diagnosis to select for patients with symptomatic COVID-19. The associations between pregnancy and in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and mechanical ventilation were analyzed using propensity score-matched conditional logistic regression. Models were matched for age, marital status, race and ethnicity, Elixhauser comorbidity score, payer, hospital number of beds, season of discharge, hospital region, obesity, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic pulmonary disease, deficiency anemias, depression, hypothyroidism, and liver disease. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality occurred in 1.1% of pregnant patients and 3.5% of nonpregnant patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and viral pneumonia (propensity score-matched odds ratio [OR] 0.39, 95% CI 0.25-0.63). The frequency of ICU admission for pregnant and nonpregnant patients was 22.0% and 17.7%, respectively (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.15-1.55). Mechanical ventilation was used in 8.7% of both pregnant and nonpregnant patients (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86-1.29). Among patients who were admitted to an ICU, mortality was lower for pregnant compared with nonpregnant patients (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.20-0.57), though mechanical ventilation rates were similar (35.7% vs 38.3%, OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.70-1.16). Among patients with mechanical ventilation, pregnant patients had a reduced risk of in-hospital mortality compared with nonpregnant patients (0.26, 95% CI 0.15-0.46). CONCLUSION: Despite a higher frequency of ICU admission, in-hospital mortality was lower among pregnant patients compared with nonpregnant patients with COVID-19 viral pneumonia, and these findings persisted after propensity score matching.

Remdesivir use in pregnancy during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the composite maternal and neonatal outcomes in pregnant individuals with moderate, severe, or critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treated with remdesivir. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of the COVID in Pregnancy Registry in Houston, Texas. Women were included if they met the criteria of moderate, severe or critical COVID-19 illness. Composite adverse maternal outcome was defined as any of the following outcomes: placental abruption, pregnancy-related hypertension, chorioamnionitis, stroke, delivery with estimated blood loss >1000 mL, diagnosis of pulmonary embolism or deep venous thromboembolism, or maternal death. Composite adverse neonatal outcome was defined as any of the following: Apgar score ≤3 at 5 min, arterial cord pH <7.0, positive SAR-CoV-2 test, intraventricular hemorrhage, periventricular leukomalacia, stillbirth, or neonatal death. Comparative analyses between participants receiving remdesivir versus those not exposed were performed. RESULTS: A total of 994 patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 infection. Of these, 95 (9.6%) met criteria for moderate, severe, or critical disease. Forty-one percent of these patients (n = 39) received remdesivir. Baseline demographic characteristics were not different between groups. No patients reported an allergic reaction with the administration of remdesivir; however, 16.7% of the patients had the medication discontinued due to transaminitis. Patients receiving the drug were more likely to have a longer illness duration on admission, more likely to require oxygen support on arrival and have a longer hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir appears to be safe, well tolerated within our cohort with no cases of recorded adverse reaction.

Uterine-sparing surgical procedures to control postpartum hemorrhage.

Postpartum hemorrhage remains one of the principal causes of maternal mortality in the United States and throughout the world. Its management, which must be multidisciplinary (obstetrics, midwifery, anesthesiology, interventional radiology, and nursing), depends on the speed of both diagnosis and implementation of medical and surgical treatment to control the hemorrhage. The aim of this work is to describe the various techniques of vessel ligation and of uterine compression for controlling and treating severe hemorrhage, and to present the advantages and disadvantages of each. It is not difficult to perform vessel ligation of the uterine arteries: O'Leary's bilateral ligation of the uterine artery, Tsirulnikov's triple ligation, and AbdRabbo's stepwise uterine devascularization (that is, stepwise triple ligation). These procedures are associated with a high success rate (approximately 90%) and a low complication rate. Bilateral ligation of the internal iliac (hypogastric) arteries is more difficult to perform and potentially less effective (approximately 70% effectiveness) than the previously mentioned procedures. Its complication rate is low, but the complications are most often serious. There is no evidence that future fertility or subsequent obstetrical outcomes are impaired by ligation of either the uterine or internal iliac arteries. There are many techniques used for uterine compression sutures, and none has shown clear superiority to another. Uterine compression suture has an effectiveness rate of approximately 75% after failure of medical treatment and approximately 80% as a second-line procedure after unsuccessful vessel ligation. The risk of synechiae after uterine compression suture has not yet been adequately evaluated, but is probably around 5%. The risk of synechiae after uterine compression suture has not yet been adequately evaluated, but probably ranges between 5% and 10%. The methodologic quality of the studies assessing uterine-sparing surgical procedures remains limited, with no comparative studies. Accordingly, no evidence suggests that any one of these methods is better than any other. Accordingly, the choice of surgical technique to control hemorrhage must be guided firstly by the operator's experience. If the hemorrhage continues after a first-line uterine-sparing surgical procedure and the patient remains hemodynamically stable, a second-line procedure can be chosen. Nonetheless, the application of these procedures must not delay the performance of a peripartum hysterectomy in cases of hemodynamic instability.

Antibiotic Use and Bacterial Infection among Inpatients in the First Wave of COVID-19: a Retrospective Cohort Study of 64,691 Patients.

Hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) often receive antibiotics for suspected bacterial coinfection. We estimated the incidence of bacterial coinfection and secondary infection in COVID-19 using clinical diagnoses to determine how frequently antibiotics are administered when bacterial infection is absent. We performed a retrospective cohort study of inpatients with COVID-19 present on admission to hospitals in the Premier Healthcare Database between April and June 2020. Bacterial infections were defined using ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes and associated "present on admission" coding. Coinfections were defined by bacterial infection present on admission, while secondary infections were defined by bacterial infection that developed after admission. Coinfection and secondary infection were not mutually exclusive. A total of 18.5% of 64,961 COVID-19 patients (n = 12,040) presented with bacterial infection at admission, 3.8% (n = 2,506) developed secondary infection after admission, and 0.9% (n = 574) had both; 76.3% (n = 49,551) received an antibiotic while hospitalized, including 71% of patients who had no diagnosis of bacterial infection. Secondary bacterial infection occurred in 5.7% of patients receiving steroids in the first 2 days of hospitalization, 9.9% receiving tocilizumab in the first 2 days of hospitalization, and 10.3% of patients receiving both. After adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics, bacterial coinfection (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11 to 1.20) and secondary infection (aRR 1.93; 95% CI, 1.82 to 2.04) were both independently associated with increased mortality. Although 1 in 5 inpatients with COVID-19 presents with bacterial infection, secondary infections in the hospital are uncommon. Most inpatients with COVID-19 receive antibiotic therapy, including 71% of those not diagnosed with bacterial infection.

Successful Vaginal Delivery during Acute Small Bowel Obstruction: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.

Small bowel obstruction during pregnancy is rare and can be detrimental to both mother and fetus. In most cases, management eventually involves surgical intervention. Little is known regarding optimal mode of delivery in those with bowel obstruction during pregnancy. We present a case of vaginal delivery during acute small bowel obstruction as well as a review of recent literature regarding mode of delivery in the setting of bowel obstruction. Our case and literature review demonstrates that in pregnancies complicated by small bowel obstruction, successful vaginal delivery can be achieved in those with stable maternal-fetal status.