Maternal Eating Disorders and Adverse Birth Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Previous systematic reviews have reported on the relationship between eating disorders (EDs) and birth outcomes, but there are no existing meta-analyses on this topic. This systematic review and meta-analysis examines the association between lifetime maternal EDs, including anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN), and binge-eating disorder (BED) with low birth weight (LBW), preterm birth (PTB), small for gestational age (SGA), large for gestational age (LGA), and miscarriage. Four databases were systematically searched for quantitative literature on maternal EDs that preceded birth outcomes. Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The meta-analyses included 6 studies on miscarriage, 11 on PTB, 4 on LBW, 9 on SGA, and 4 on LGA. The Mantel-Haenszel random effects model was used to test the associations between EDs and birth outcomes. The results showed significant positive associations between AN and LBW (OR 1.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.49, 2.03), AN and SGA (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.17, 1.65), BN and PTB (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.04, 1.36), and BED and LGA (OR 1.43 95% CI 1.18, 1.72). EDs were not significantly correlated with miscarriage. These findings reveal the importance of screening for and treating EDs in pregnant women.

Directive clinique no 442 : Retard de croissance intra-utérin : Dépistage, diagnostic et prise en charge en contexte de grossesse monofœtale.

OBJECTIF: Le retard de croissance intra-utérin est une complication obstétricale fréquente qui touche jusqu'à 10 % des grossesses dans la population générale et qui est le plus souvent due à une pathologie placentaire sous-jacente. L'objectif de la présente directive clinique est de fournir des déclarations sommaires et des recommandations pour appuyer un protocole clinique de dépistage, diagnostic et prise en charge du retard de croissance intra-utérin pour les grossesses à risque ou atteintes. POPULATION CIBLE: Toutes les patientes enceintes menant une grossesse monofœtale. BéNéFICES, RISQUES ET COûTS: La mise en application des recommandations de la présente directive devrait améliorer la compétence des cliniciens quant à la détection du retard de croissance intra-utérin et à la réalisation des interventions indiquées. DONNéES PROBANTES: La littérature publiée a été colligée par des recherches effectuées jusqu'en septembre 2022 dans les bases de données PubMed, Medline, CINAHL et Cochrane Library en utilisant un vocabulaire contrôlé au moyen de termes MeSH pertinents (fetal growth retardation and small for gestational age) et de mots-clés (fetal growth, restriction, growth retardation, IUGR, FGR, low birth weight, small for gestational age, Doppler, placenta, pathology). Seuls les résultats de revues systématiques, d'essais cliniques randomisés ou comparatifs et d'études observationnelles ont été retenus. La littérature grise a été obtenue par des recherches menées dans des sites Web d'organismes s'intéressant à l'évaluation des technologies dans le domaine de la santé et d'organismes connexes, dans des collections de directives cliniques, des registres d'essais cliniques et des sites Web de sociétés de spécialité médicale nationales et internationales. MéTHODES DE VALIDATION: Les auteurs ont évalué la qualité des données probantes et la force des recommandations en utilisant le cadre méthodologique GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Voir l'annexe A en ligne (tableau A1 pour les définitions et tableau A2 pour l'interprétation des recommandations fortes et conditionnelles [faibles]). PROFESSIONNELS CONCERNéS: Obstétriciens, médecins de famille, infirmières, sages-femmes, spécialistes en médecine fœto-maternelle, radiologistes et autres professionnels de la santé qui prodiguent des soins aux patientes enceintes. RéSUMé POUR TWITTER: Mise à jour de la directive sur le dépistage, le diagnostic et la prise en charge du retard de croissance intra-utérin pour les grossesses à risque ou atteintes. DÉCLARATIONS SOMMAIRES: RECOMMANDATIONS: Prédiction du retard de croissance intra-utérin Prévention du retard de croissance intra-utérin Détection du retard de croissance intra-utérin Examens en cas de retard de croissance intra-utérin soupçonné Prise en charge du retard de croissance intra-utérin précoce Prise en charge du retard de croissance intra-utérin tardif Prise en charge du post-partum et consultations préconception.

[Impact of the healthcare pathway on the rate of obstetrical interventions in small for gestational age fetuses (IATROPAG Study)]. / Impact du parcours de soins sur le taux d'interventions obstétricales dans la prise en charge des fœtus petit pour l'âge gestationnel (Étude IATROPAG).

BACKGROUND: While previous studies have demonstrated an improvement in implementation of clinical practices and an improved neonatal prognosis when growth restricted fetuses were followed within a standardized healthcare pathway, the objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of obstetric interventions in small-for-gestational-age (SGA) fetuses followed within a standardized care pathway compared to a traditional care pathway. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study between 2015 and 2017, in a type III maternity hospital in Lyon, in a population of SGA fetuses, considered as such in case of antenatal diagnosis of fetal weight<10th percentile but>3rd centile without umbilical Doppler abnormality during antenatal surveillance and without ultrasound argument suggesting intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR). We collected the gestational age at diagnosis, obstetrical events and prevention of preterm delivery (antenatal corticosteroids), gestation age at birth, the method of delivery (spontaneous or induced), indication of induction, the method of birth (spontaneous, instrumental extraction or caesarean section), and the immediate neonatal outcome including cord pH, Apgar score at 5minutes, birth weight and fetal sex. After diagnosis, the choice of the pathway was left to the practitioner depending on their habit, their ability to manage the follow-up and their organizational constraints. RESULTS: Over the study period, and after exclusion of IUGR, 96 SGA were followed up in the traditional pathway and 106 SGA were followed up in the standardized pathway P=0.75. The traditional pathway showed in multivariate analysis a higher prevalence of antenatal corticosteroid therapy for SGA (16,6%) between 2015 and 2017 with OR 7.3 95% CI [1.41-38.43] when compared to the standardized pathway (3,7%). Similarly, the traditional pathway proposes a higher prevalence of induction of labor (54,1%) than the standardized pathway (33,9%) between 2015 and 2017 with OR 3.19 95% CI [1.70-7.80]. The "a posteriori" post-hoc power of the study is 82.9%. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the absence of excessive obstetrical intervention in the SGA population when followed in a standardized healthcare pathway. The latter would reduce unnecessary obstetrical interventions while respecting the intrinsic neonatal prognosis of small for gestational age fetuses.

[Impact of the detection of small for gestational age fetuses on the neonatal prognosis]. / Impact de la détection anténatale d'un fœtus petit pour l'âge gestationnel sur le pronostic néonatal.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate whether the antenatal identification of small for gestational age (SGA) fetuses could influence the neonatal and obstetric prognosis. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study. All liveborn singleton neonates with a birthweight<3rd centile, born>32 weeks of gestation between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2012 were included. Fetuses were considered "suspected SGA" when the estimated fetal weight was<10th centile or when a diagnosis of clinical or ultrasound SGA was explicitly noted in the record. Obstetrical and neonatal follow-up and outcomes of suspected SGA (SGAS group) and non-suspected (SGANS group) were compared, with Chi2 and the Fisher exact test when appropriate. RESULTS: Hundred and forty-seven neonates were included. Among these, 54% were suspected SGA before birth. Gestational age was lower (38.5 weeks gestation [WG] vs. 39.6 WG, P<0.001) and there was a higher preterm birth rate in the SGAS group (10% vs. 0%, P=0.005). The rate of elective cesarean sections (17% vs. 3%, P=0.005) was higher in the SGAS group, whereas the rate of nonelective cesarean sections was lower (20% vs. 33%, P=0.002). Neonatal morbidity was similar in both groups, as well as birth weight. CONCLUSION: SGA fetal screening in our cohort was associated with a higher rate of medical intervention and preterm birth without neonatal benefit. Nevertheless, the study's power and methodology are not adequate to reduce the risk of fetal death in utero or severe asphyxia associated with non-identification of a SGA fetus.

[Does customized weight curves improve prenatal diagnosis of fetuses small for gestational age in a high-risk population?] / L'utilisation des courbes de poids personnalisées en anténatal améliore-t-elle le diagnostic des fœtus petits pour l'âge gestationnel à haut risque de morbidité néonatale ?

OBJECTIVES: To assess the accuracy of customized growth charts for the ultrasound antenatal diagnostic of fetus small for gestational age in a high-risk population of preterm. METHODS: All premature infants born in a French university maternity center for a year and classified as small for gestational age at birth by using customized growth charts developed by Ego et al. were included in this retrospective study. At the ultrasound performed closest to the term, customized growth charts and population growth curves were compared for the antenatal diagnosis of a premature infants group classified small for gestational age in post-natal by customized growth charts and more at risk of perinatal complications. RESULTS: Sixty-seven newborns were included in the study. Fifty-one (76.1%) were secondarily classified as small for gestational age although they were eutrophic on the basis of population growth curves and 16 (23.9%) were small for gestational age on both curves. The average time between the last ultrasound and birth was 2.2 weeks. On the threshold of the tenth percentile, the sensitivities of customized growth charts and curves in population were not significantly different (29.85% versus 41.79% P=0.05) for antenatal detection of fetus small for gestational age. CONCLUSION: In our study, the use of customized growth charts does not improve the antenatal detection of most at-risk children.

Final height and intrauterine growth retardation.

Approximately 10% of small for gestational age (SGA) children maintain a small body size throughout childhood and often into adult life with a decreased pubertal spurt. Growth hormone (GH) therapy increases short-term growth in a dose-dependent manner and adult height had now been well documented. Shorter children might benefit from a higher dose at start (50µg/kg/day). The response to GH treatment was similar for both preterm and term short SGA groups and the effect of GH treatment on adult height showed a wide variation in growth response. As a whole, mean adult height is higher than -2 SDS in 60% of patients and 70% reached an adult height in their target height with better results with higher doses and combined GnRH analog therapy in those who were short at onset of puberty.

[Long-term outcome in context of intra uterine growth restriction and/or small for gestational age newborns]. / Conséquences à long terme des enfants nés dans un contexte de retard de croissance intra-utérin et/ou petits pour l'âge gestationnel.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term outcome after history of intra-uterine growth restriction (IUGR) and/or birth small for gestational age (SGA). METHODS: This systematic evidence review is based on Pubmed search, Cochrane library and experts recommendations. RESULTS: Neurodevelopmental evaluation at 2 years is lower in those infants, born premature or not. SGA is associated with a high risk of minor cognitive deficiencies, hyperactivity or attention deficit disorders at 5 years or scholar difficulties at 8 years. Those infants are at high risk of metabolic syndrome in adulthood. Most of them will catch up at 6 months for weight and 12 months for height. Even if IUGR is associated with high risk of bronchodysplasia, up to this day, the review of literature did not permit to evaluate respiratory outcome. Adults born SGA have good quality of live and normal professional insertion. One cohort study and more and more animal studies suggest potential trans generational effects. CONCLUSION: Infants born SGA and/or with history of IUGR are at high risk of minor cognitive deficiencies and scholar difficulties. They are also at high risk of metabolic syndrome in adulthood. However, prematurity seems to have a higher effect than IUGR and/or SGA on long-term outcomes.

[Screening and diagnosis of small for gestational age fetuses]. / Modalités de dépistage et de diagnostic du fœtus petit pour l'âge gestationnel.

OBJECTIVE: Define the mode of screening and diagnosis of fetal small for gestational age (SGA). METHODS: Bibliographic research by consulting Pubmed database and guidelines of the international professional societies. Keywords used: Intra uterine growth retardation or restriction, small for gestational age, curve, chart, fetal biometry, screening, velocity, fundal height measurement. RESULTS: The performance of ultrasound to detect SGA is low. The mode of screening and diagnosis of SGA must be well defined to be consensual. The fundal height measurement keeps its place in the screening from 22SA (grade C). The criteria for measuring ultrasound parameters defined by the comité technique d'échographie are recommended (professional agreement). They allow the calculation of the estimated fetal weight (EFW). That must be transferred to the reference curve adopted (professional agreement). The introduction of audit on techniques for measuring ultrasound parameters should be encouraged (grade B). CONCLUSION: Fetal biometry must be interpreted according to the clinical context and ultrasound including Doppler (grade C). To improve the performance of ultrasound, there is no need to another ultrasound examination in late pregnancy (grade A) except after a clinical suspicion (grade C). The minimum interval between two biometric tests is 3 weeks (grade B). This interval may be lower if the EFW is important in the decision of any fetal extraction (professional consensus).