The effect of selenium supplementation in pregnant women on maternal, fetal, and newborn outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Low maternal selenium status has been associated with poor pregnancy outcomes, including preterm birth. This study aimed to evaluate available evidence of the effects of selenium supplementation during pregnancy on preterm birth and related maternal, fetal, and newborn outcomes. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Global Index Medicus, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched on June 23, 2022, without language or time restrictions. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized interventional studies were included if they compared the effects of selenium supplementation with placebo or no treatment among pregnant women. The review protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (identification number: CRD42022383669). METHODS: For outcomes reported by ≥1 study, a meta-analysis was conducted. Because of the small number of studies and high clinical heterogeneity between populations, random-effects models were used. The Risk of Bias 2 and Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions tools were used to assess study quality, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation analysis was used to determine the certainty of evidence for each outcome. RESULTS: Literature searches identified 5105 unique records, and 32 studies met the eligibility criteria. Of note, 11 reports were not included for analysis following research integrity assessments. Moreover, 10 trials and 3 observational studies met the inclusion criteria; however, only 8 trials (1851 women) and 1 prospective cohort study (71,728 women) reported on at least 1 review outcome. Our results could not determine the effect of selenium supplementation on preterm birth at <37 weeks of gestation (relative risk, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-1.63; very low certainty evidence) and <34 weeks of gestation (relative risk, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.59-1.44; very low certainty evidence). CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence on the effects of selenium supplementation during pregnancy. Further trials, with larger sample sizes, more representative populations, and reliable assessment of maternal selenium status at trial entry, are required.

Comparative effectiveness of exercise electrocardiography versus exercise echocardiography in women presenting with suspected coronary artery disease: a randomized study.

Aims: There is a paucity of randomized diagnostic studies in women with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). This study sought to assess the relative value of exercise stress echocardiography (ESE) compared with exercise electrocardiography (Ex-ECG) in women with CAD. Methods and results: Accordingly, 416 women with no prior CAD and intermediate probability of CAD (mean pre-test probability 41%), were randomized to undergo either Ex-ECG or ESE. The primary endpoints were the positive predictive value (PPV) for the detection of significant CAD and downstream resource utilization. The PPV of ESE and Ex-ECG were 33% and 30% (P = 0.87), respectively for the detection of CAD. There were similar clinic visits (36 vs. 29, P = 0.44) and emergency visits with chest pain (28 vs. 25, P = 0.55) in the Ex-ECG and ESE arms, respectively. At 2.9 years, cardiac events were 6 Ex-ECG vs. 3 ESE, P = 0.31. Although initial diagnosis costs were higher for ESE, more women underwent further CAD testing in the Ex-ECG arm compared to the ESE arm (37 vs. 17, P = 0.003). Overall, there was higher downstream resource utilization (hospital attendances and investigations) in the Ex-ECG arm (P = 0.002). Using National Health Service tariffs 2020/21 (British pounds) the cumulative diagnostic costs were 7.4% lower for Ex-ECG compared with ESE, but this finding is sensitive to the cost differential between ESE and Ex-ECG. Conclusion: In intermediate-risk women who are able to exercise, Ex-ECG had similar efficacy to an ESE strategy, with higher resource utilization whilst providing cost savings.

Effect of antenatal corticosteroid administration-to-birth interval on maternal and newborn outcomes: a systematic review.

Background: Antenatal corticosteroids (ACS) are highly effective at improving outcomes for preterm newborns. Evidence suggests the benefits of ACS may vary with the time interval between administration-to-birth. However, the optimal ACS administration-to-birth interval is not yet known. In this systematic review, we synthesised available evidence on the relationship between ACS administration-to-birth interval and maternal and newborn outcomes. Methods: This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021253379). We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Global Index Medicus on 11 Nov 2022 with no date or language restrictions. Randomised and non-randomised studies of pregnant women receiving ACS for preterm birth where maternal and newborn outcomes were reported for different administration-to-birth intervals were eligible. Eligibility screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed by two authors independently. Fetal and neonatal outcomes included perinatal and neonatal mortality, preterm birth-related morbidity outcomes and mean birthweight. Maternal outcomes included chorioamnionitis, maternal mortality, endometritis, and maternal intensive care unit admission. Findings: Ten trials (4592 women; 5018 neonates), 45 cohort studies (at least 22,992 women; 30,974 neonates) and two case-control studies (355 women; 360 neonates) met the eligibility criteria. Across studies, 37 different time interval combinations were identified. There was considerable heterogeneity in included administration-to-birth intervals and populations. The odds of neonatal mortality, respiratory distress syndrome and intraventricular haemorrhage were associated with the ACS administration-to-birth interval. However, the interval associated with the greatest improvements in newborn outcomes was not consistent across studies. No reliable data were available for maternal outcomes, though odds of chorioamnionitis might be associated with longer intervals. Intepretation: An optimal ACS administration-to-birth interval likely exists, however variations in study design limit identification of this interval from available evidence. Future research should consider advanced analysis techniques such as individual patient data meta-analysis to identify which ACS administration-to-birth intervals are most beneficial, and how these benefits can be optimised for women and newborns. Funding: This study was conducted with funding support from the UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research (SRH), a co-sponsored programme executed by the World Health Organization.

The diagnostic accuracy of pooled testing from multiple individuals for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Molecular testing for Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) is costly. Therefore, we appraised the evidence regarding pooling samples from multiple individuals to test for CT/NG. METHODS: In this systematic review, we searched 5 databases (2000-2021). Studies were included if they contained primary data describing pooled testing. We calculated the pooled sensitivities and specificities for CT and NG using a bivariate mixed-effects logistic regression model. RESULTS: We included 22 studies: most were conducted in high-income countries (81.8%, 18 of 22), among women (73.3%, 17 of 22), and pooled urine samples (63.6%, 14 of 22). Eighteen studies provided 25 estimates for the meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy, with data from 6,913 pooled specimens. The pooled sensitivity for CT was 98.4% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 96.8-99.2%, I2=77.5, p<0.001), and pooled specificity was 99.9% (95% CI: 99.6-100.0%, I2=62.6, p<0.001). Only 2 studies reported pooled testing for NG, and both reported similarly high sensitivity and specificity as for CT. Sixteen studies provided data on the cost of pooling, reporting cost-savings ranging from 39%-90%. CONCLUSIONS: Pooled testing from multiple individuals for CT is highly sensitive and specific compared with individual testing. This approach has the potential to reduce the cost of screening in populations for which single anatomic site screening is recommended.

Diagnostic accuracy of pooling urine, anorectal, and oropharyngeal specimens for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) at genital and extragenital sites is needed for most key populations, but molecular diagnostic tests for CT/NG are costly. We aimed to determine the accuracy of pooled samples from multiple anatomic sites from one individual to detect CT/NG using the testing of a single sample from one anatomic site as the reference. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched five databases for articles published from January 1, 2000, to February 4, 2021. Studies were included if they contained original data describing the diagnostic accuracy of pooled testing compared with single samples, resource use, benefits and harms of pooling, acceptability, and impact on health equity. We present the pooled sensitivities and specificities for CT and NG using a bivariate mixed-effects logistic regression model. The study protocol is registered in PROSPERO, an international database of prospectively registered systematic reviews (CRD42021240793). We used GRADE to evaluate the quality of evidence. RESULTS: Our search yielded 7814 studies, with 17 eligible studies included in our review. Most studies were conducted in high-income countries (82.6%, 14/17) and focused on men who have sex with men (70.6%, 12/17). Fourteen studies provided 15 estimates for the meta-analysis for CT with data from 5891 individuals. The pooled sensitivity for multisite pooling for CT was 93.1% [95% confidence intervals (CI) 90.5-95.0], I2=43.3, and pooled specificity was 99.4% [99.0-99.6], I2=52.9. Thirteen studies provided 14 estimates for the meta-analysis for NG with data from 6565 individuals. The pooled sensitivity for multisite pooling for NG was 94.1% [95% CI 90.9-96.3], I2=68.4, and pooled specificity was 99.6% [99.1-99.8], I2=83.6. Studies report significant cost savings (by two thirds to a third). CONCLUSION: Multisite pooled testing is a promising approach to improve testing coverage for CT/NG in resource-constrained settings with a small compromise in sensitivity but with a potential for significant cost savings.