The impact of trimester of COVID-19 infection on pregnancy outcomes after recovery.

OBJECTIVES: Many physiological adaptations occur during pregnancy. It is not currently known how timing of COVID-19 infection impacts pregnancy. We hypothesize that maternal and neonatal outcomes are different if COVID-19 infection occurs in different trimesters of pregnancy. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted from 3/2020 to 6/2022. Pregnant patients with a positive COVID-19 infection more than 10 days before delivery (COVID-recovered) were identified and grouped by trimester of infection. Demographics and maternal, obstetric, and neonatal outcomes were analyzed. ANOVA, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Pearson's chi-squared test, and Fisher's exact test were used to compare continuous and categorical data. RESULTS: A total of 298 COVID-recovered pregnant patients were identified. Of those, 48 (16 %) were infected in the 1st trimester, 123 (41 %) in the 2nd, and 127 (43 %) in the 3rd. There were no significant demographic differences between the study groups. Vaccination status was similar. Hospital admission rate and the need for oxygen therapy while infected were significantly higher in patients with 2nd or 3rd trimester infection (18 % & 20 % vs. 2 % and 13 % & 14 % vs. 0 %, respectively). Rates of preterm birth (PTB) and extreme PTB were higher in the 1st trimester infection group. Infants born to mothers infected in the 2nd trimester had more neonatal sepsis workups (22 % vs. 12 % & 7 %). Other outcomes were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: First trimester COVID-recovered patients were more likely to have a preterm birth despite having lower rates of hospital admission and oxygen supplementation while infected than patients who recovered from a 2nd or 3rd trimester infection.

Prepregnancy Roux-en-Y gastric bypass vs sleeve gastrectomy: a systematic review, pairwise, and network meta-analysis of obstetrical and neonatal outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically investigate a wide range of obstetrical and neonatal outcomes with respect to 2 types of prepregnancy bariatric surgery, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy, through: (1) providing a meta-analysis of the effect of bariatric surgery (Roux-en-Y gastric bypass vs no surgery and, separately, sleeve gastrectomy vs no surgery) on adverse obstetrical and neonatal outcomes, and (2) comparing the relative benefit of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass vs sleeve gastrectomy using both conventional and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Embase systematically from inception up to April 30, 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies reporting on pregnancies' obstetrical and neonatal outcomes with respect to 2 types of prepregnancy bariatric surgery-Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy-were included. The included studies either indirectly compared between the procedure and controls or directly compared between the 2 procedures. METHODS: We performed a systematic review followed by pairwise and network meta-analysis in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. In the pairwise analysis, multiple obstetrical and neonatal outcomes were tabulated and compared between 3 groups: (1) Roux-en-Y gastric bypass vs controls, (2) sleeve gastrectomy vs controls, and (3) Roux-en-Y gastric bypass vs sleeve gastrectomy. Primary outcomes included small for gestational age, large for gestational age, gestational hypertension/preeclampsia, and gestational diabetes mellitus. Secondary outcomes included preterm birth, anemia, cesarean delivery, and biochemical profile. The random-effects model was used to pool the mean differences or odds ratios and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 value. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess individual study quality. To resolve inconclusive findings and to rank current treatments, network meta-analysis was conducted for the primary outcomes. Quality of evidence was assessed with the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis approach and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) tool within the summary of findings table. RESULTS: A total of 20 studies were included, reporting on 40,108 pregnancies, of which 5194 underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, 405 underwent sleeve gastrectomy, and 34,509 were controls. Compared with controls, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass increased the risk of small for gestational age infants (odds ratio, 2.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.77-3.70; I2, 29.1%; P<.00001), decreased the risk of large for gestational age infants (odds ratio, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.35; I2, 0%; P<.00001), decreased gestational hypertension/preeclampsia (odds ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.30-0.97; I2, 26.8%; P=.04), decreased gestational diabetes mellitus (odds ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.81; I2, 32%; P=.008), increased maternal anemia (odds ratio, 2.70; 95% confidence interval, 1.53-4.79; I2, 40.5%; P<.001), increased neonatal intensive care unit admission (odds ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.77; I2, 0%; P=.02), and decreased mean gestational weight gain (mean difference, -3.37 kg; 95% confidence interval, -5.62 to -1.11; I2, 65.3%; P=.003). Only 3 studies compared sleeve gastrectomy with controls, and found no significant differences in primary outcomes or in mean gestational weight gain. The network meta-analysis showed that Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (malabsorptive procedure) resulted in greater decrease of large for gestational age, gestational hypertension/preeclampsia, and gestational diabetes mellitus, and a greater increase in small for gestational age infants when compared with sleeve gastrectomy (restrictive procedure). However, the small number of studies, small number of sleeve gastrectomy patients, limited outcomes, and data heterogeneity resulted in low-to-moderate network GRADE of evidence. CONCLUSION: This network meta-analysis showed that Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, compared with sleeve gastrectomy, resulted in greater decrease in large for gestational age, gestational hypertension/preeclampsia, and gestational diabetes mellitus, but in greater increase in small for gestational age infants. Certainty of evidence in the network meta-analysis was of a low-to-moderate GRADE. Evidence is still lacking for periconception biochemical profile, congenital malformations, and reproductive health outcomes for both interventions; thus, future well-designed prospective studies are needed to further characterize these outcomes.

The Optimal Cesarean Skin Incision in Patients with Super Obesity.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate if supraumbilical midline vertical incision performed in patients with a hanging pannus (umbilicus at the level of the pubic bone) is a reasonable alternative to the Pfannenstiel in patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 50 kg/m2 undergoing cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study in patients with BMI ≥ 50 kg/m2 undergoing cesarean delivery at a single center from 2016 to 2020. Study groups were Pfannenstiel's versus supraumbilical vertical skin incision. If patients had a hanging pannus (umbilicus at the level of the pubic bone), vertical incisions were performed. Otherwise, Pfannenstiel's incision was performed. Decision for the incision was made prospectively. Primary outcome was a composite of need for blood transfusion, presence of immediate surgical complications, and presence of delayed surgical complications. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary outcome, the median surgical blood loss, total operative time, time from skin incision to delivery of neonate, hysterotomy type, and neonatal outcomes. MedCalc 19.5.1 was used for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 103 patients with BMI ≥50 kg/m2 were included. Of those, 68 (66%) had Pfannenstiel's and 35 (34%) had supraumbilical vertical incisions. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of the primary outcome (12 vs. 11%, p = 0.96). There was neither significant difference in immediate or delayed postoperative complications nor in neonatal outcomes. However, patients in the vertical midline incision group were more likely to have a classical hysterotomy (52%) compared with the Pfannenstiel group (6%; p < 0.05), increased overall median surgical blood loss (1,000 vs. 835 mL, p < 0.05), and increased total surgical time by a median of 30 minutes (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In patients with super obesity and hanging pannus, performing a supraumbilical vertical midline incision offers a reasonable alternative to Pfannenstiel's incision, but patients should be counseled about the increased risk for classical hysterotomy and implications in future pregnancies. KEY POINTS: · Patients with BMI >50 kg/m2 were allocated to different incision types based on subcutaneous fat distribution pattern. If umbilicus was at level of pubic bone, supraumbilical vertical skin incision was made. · There were no significant differences between Pfannenstiel's and supraumbilical vertical incisions in terms of the composite outcome and immediate or delayed postoperative complications and neonatal outcomes.. · In patients with a hanging pannus, performing a supraumbilical vertical midline incision offers a reasonable alternative to Pfannenstiel's incision, but patients should be counseled about the increased risk for classical hysterotomy and subsequent implications in future pregnancies..

Gestational weight gain below instead of within the guidelines per class of maternal obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of obstetrical and neonatal outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically investigate a wide range of obstetrical and neonatal outcomes as they relate to gestational weight gain less than the current Institute of Medicine and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guidelines when compared with weight gain within the guideline range and to stratify outcomes by the class of obesity and by the type of study analysis. DATA SOURCES: We systematically searched studies on PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from 2009 to April 30, 2021. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies reporting on obstetrical and neonatal outcomes of singleton pregnancies related to gestational weight gain less than the current Institute of Medicine and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guidelines in comparison with weight gain within the guidelines among women with obesity overall (body mass index >30 kg/m2) and/or a specific class of obesity (I: body mass index, 30-34.9 kg/m2; II: body mass index, 35-39.9 kg/m2; and III: body mass index >40 kg/m2). METHODS: Among the studies that met the inclusion criteria, multiple obstetrical and neonatal outcomes were tabulated and compared between pregnancies with weight gain less than recommended in the guidelines and those with weight gain within the guidelines, further classified by the class of obesity if applicable. Primary outcomes included small for gestational age neonates, large for gestational age neonates, preeclampsia, and gestational diabetes mellitus. Secondary outcomes included cesarean delivery, preterm birth, postpartum weight retention, and composite neonatal morbidity. A meta-analysis of univariate and adjusted multivariate analysis studies was conducted. The random-effect model was used to pool the mean differences or odds ratios and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 value. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess individual study quality. RESULTS: A total of 54 studies reporting on 30,245,946 pregnancies were included of which 11,515,411 pregnancies were in the univariate analysis and 18,730,535 pregnancies were in the adjusted multivariate analysis. In the meta-analysis of univariate studies, compared with women who gained weight as recommended in the guidelines, those who gained less than the weight recommended in the guidelines had higher odds of having a small for gestational age neonate among those with obesity class I and II (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.45; I2=0%; P<.00001; and odds ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-1.85; I2=0%; P<.00001, respectively). However, the incidence of small for gestational age neonates was below the expected limits (<10%) and was not associated with increased neonatal morbidity. Furthermore, after adjusting for covariates, that difference was not statistically significant anymore. The difference was not statistically significant for class III obesity. Following adjusted multivariate analysis, no significant differences in small for gestational age rates were noted for any classes of obesity between groups. Significantly lower odds for large for gestational age neonates were seen in the group with gestational weight gain less than the recommended guidelines among those with obesity class I, II, and III (odds ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.73; I2=0%; P<.00001; odds ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.74; I2=0%; P<.00001; and odds ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.57-0.75; I2=34%; P<.00001, respectively), and similar findings were seen in the adjusted multivariate analysis. Women with weight gain less than the recommended guidelines had significantly lower odds for preeclampsia among those with obesity class I, II, and III (odds ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.79; I2=0%; P<.00001; odds ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.91; I2=0%; P<.00001; and odds ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.94; I2=0%; P=.006, respectively), and similar findings were seen in the adjusted multivariate analysis. No significant differences were seen in gestational diabetes mellitus between groups. Regarding preterm birth, available univariate analysis studies only reported on overall obesity and mixed iatrogenic and spontaneous preterm birth showing a significant increase in the odds of preterm birth (odds ratio, 1.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.40-1.43; I2=0%; P<.00001) among women with low weight gain, whereas the adjusted multivariate studies in overall obesity and in all 3 classes showed no significant differences in preterm birth between groups. Women with low weight gain had significantly lower odds for cesarean delivery in obesity class I, II, and III (odds ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.81; I2=0%; P<.00001; odds ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-0.87; I2=0%; P<.00001; and odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-0.91; I2=0%; P<.00001, respectively), and similar findings were seen in the adjusted multivariate analysis. There was significantly lower odds for postpartum weight retention (odds ratio, 0.20; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-0.82; I2=0%; P=.03) and lower odds for composite neonatal morbidity in the overall obesity group with low gestational weight gain (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-0.99; I2=19.6%; P=.04). CONCLUSION: Contrary to previous reports, the current systematic review and meta-analysis showed no significant increase in small for gestational age rates in pregnancies with weight gain below the current guidelines for all classes of maternal obesity. Furthermore, gaining less weight than recommended in the guidelines was associated with lower large for gestational age, preeclampsia, and cesarean delivery rates. Our study provides the evidence that the current recommended gestational weight gain range is high for all classes of obesity. These results provide pertinent information supporting the notion to revisit the current gestational weight gain recommendations for women with obesity and furthermore to classify them by the class of obesity rather than by an overall obesity category as is done in the current recommendations.

Comparison of two combined antiretroviral treatment regimens in the management of HIV in pregnancy: an observational study.

OBJECTIVE: Combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) in pregnancy traditionally included two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors plus 1 protease inhibitor (PI). Recently, integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTI) have been approved for use in pregnancy. We sought to compare the rate of undetectable VL near delivery in pregnant HIV-infected women receiving INSTI-based versus PI-based cART. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective cohort study (January 2010-March 2017) of pregnant HIV-infected pregnancies receiving care in a single obstetric infectious disease clinic. Included pregnancies (total = 171; INSTI - group = 111, PI - group = 60) had at least 2 VL (before and after intervention) during pregnancy. The primary outcome was the rate of undetectable VL near delivery. RESULTS: We found comparable rates of undetectable HIV VL near delivery in pregnancies treated with INSTI-cART (74/111, 66.7%) compared to PI-cART (34/60, 56.7%; [adjusted p = .116, RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.92-2.59]). Compared to the PI-group, pregnancies in the INSTI-group showed lower median HIV VL near delivery (20 versus 50 copies/mL; adjusted p = .0454) and greater VL reduction (adjusted p = .0185). There were 3/171 (1.75%) infants diagnosed with HIV, 1 in the INSTI-group and 2 in the PI-group (p = .5635, RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.10-2.53). CONCLUSION: Pregnant HIV-infected women receiving either INSTI- or PI-based cART achieved comparable rates of undetectable HIV VL near delivery with similar perinatal transmission.

Fetal Alcohol Exposure: The Common Toll.

Alcohol has always been present in human life, and currently it is estimated that 50% of women of childbearing age consume alcohol. It has become increasingly clear over the last years that alcohol exposure during fetal development can have detrimental effects on various organ systems, and these effects are exerted by alcohol through multiple means, including effects on free radical formation, cellular apoptosis, as well as gene expression. Fetal alcohol exposure can lead to a spectrum of short term as well as long-term problems, with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome being on the more severe end of that spectrum. This syndrome is morbid, yet preventable, and is characterized by midfacial hypoplasia, thin upper lip, widely spaced small eyes, long smooth philtrum and inner epicanthal folds. Other findings include growth restriction as well as various neurodevelopmental abnormalities. This article is the first comprehensive review combining the molecular as well as the gross physiological and anatomical effects of alcohol exposure during pregnancy on various organ systems in the body. Our knowledge of these various mechanisms is crucial for our understanding of how alcohol exposure during fetal development can lead to its detrimental effects.