Background Babies differ from older children with regard to their exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, data describing the effect of SARS-CoV-2 in this group are scarce, and guidance is variable. We aimed to describe the incidence, characteristics, transmission, and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection in neonates who received inpatient hospital care in the UK. Methods We carried out a prospective UK population-based cohort study of babies with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first 28 days of life who received inpatient care between March 1 and April 30, 2020. Infected babies were identified through active national surveillance via the British Paediatric Surveillance Unit, with linkage to national testing, paediatric intensive care audit, and obstetric surveillance data. Outcomes included incidence (per 10 000 livebirths) of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe disease, proportions of babies with suspected vertically and nosocomially acquired infection, and clinical outcomes. Findings We identified 66 babies with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (incidence 5·6 [95% CI 4·3–7·1] per 10 000 livebirths), of whom 28 (42%) had severe neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infection (incidence 2·4 [1·6–3·4] per 10 000 livebirths). 16 (24%) of these babies were born preterm. 36 (55%) babies were from white ethnic groups (SARS-CoV-2 infection incidence 4·6 [3·2–6·4] per 10 000 livebirths), 14 (21%) were from Asian ethnic groups (15·2 [8·3–25·5] per 10 000 livebirths), eight (12%) were from Black ethnic groups (18·0 [7·8–35·5] per 10 000 livebirths), and seven (11%) were from mixed or other ethnic groups (5·6 [2·2–11·5] per 10 000 livebirths). 17 (26%) babies with confirmed infection were born to mothers with known perinatal SARS-CoV-2 infection, two (3%) were considered to have possible vertically acquired infection (SARS-CoV-2-positive sample within 12 h of birth where the mother was also positive). Eight (12%) babies had suspected nosocomially acquired infection. As of July 28, 2020, 58 (88%) babies had been discharged home, seven (11%) were still admitted, and one (2%) had died of a cause unrelated to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Interpretation Neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infection is uncommon in babies admitted to hospital. Infection with neonatal admission following birth to a mother with perinatal SARS-CoV-2 infection was unlikely, and possible vertical transmission rare, supporting international guidance to avoid separation of mother and baby. The high proportion of babies from Black, Asian, or minority ethnic groups requires investigation. Funding UK National Institute for Health Research Policy Research Programme.
Background Pregnant women with metabolic risk factors are at high risk of complications. We aimed to assess whether a Mediterranean-style diet reduces adverse pregnancy outcomes in high-risk women. Methods and findings We conducted a multicentre randomised trial in 5 maternity units (4 in London and 1 in Birmingham) between 12 September 2014 and 29 February 2016. We randomised inner-city pregnant women with metabolic risk factors (obesity, chronic hypertension, or hypertriglyceridaemia) to a Mediterranean-style diet with high intake of nuts, extra virgin olive oil, fruits, vegetables, nonrefined grains, and legumes; moderate to high consumption of fish; low to moderate intake of poultry and dairy products; low intake of red and processed meat; and avoidance of sugary drinks, fast food, and food rich in animal fat versus usual care. Participants received individualised dietary advice at 18, 20, and 28 weeks’ gestation. The primary endpoints were composite maternal (gestational diabetes or preeclampsia) and composite offspring (stillbirth, small for gestational age, or admission to neonatal care unit) outcomes prioritised by a Delphi survey. We used an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis with multivariable models and identified the stratification variables and prognostic factors a priori. We screened 7,950 and randomised 1,252 women. Baseline data were available for 593 women in the intervention (93.3% follow-up, 553/593) and 612 in the control (95.6% follow-up, 585/612) groups. Over a quarter of randomised women were primigravida (330/1,205; 27%), 60% (729/1,205) were of Black or Asian ethnicity, and 69% (836/1,205) were obese. Women in the intervention arm consumed more nuts (70.1% versus 22.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 6.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.3–10.6, p ≤ 0.001) and extra virgin olive oil (93.2% versus 49.0%; aOR 32.2, 95% CI 16.0–64.6, p ≤ 0.001) than controls; increased their intake of fish ( p < 0.001), white meat ( p < 0.001), and pulses ( p = 0.05); and reduced their intake of red meat ( p < 0.001), butter, margarine, and cream ( p < 0.001). There was no significant reduction in the composite maternal (22.8% versus 28.6%; aOR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56–1.03, p = 0.08) or composite offspring (17.3% versus 20.9%; aOR 0.79, 95% CI 0.58–1.08, p = 0.14) outcomes. There was an apparent reduction in the odds of gestational diabetes by 35% (aOR 0.65, 95% CI 0.47–0.91, p = 0.01) but not in other individual components of the composite outcomes. Mothers gained less gestational weight (mean 6.8 versus 8.3 kg; adjusted difference −1.2 Kg, 95% CI −2.2 to −0.2, p = 0.03) with intervention versus control. There was no difference in any of the other maternal and offsprin...
Abstracts Ursodeoxycholic acid improves feto-placental and offspring metabolic outcomes in intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy and in a mouse model of hypercholanaemic pregnancy Abstracts 740The correlation between epigenetic change and neonatal plasma glucose level in maternal gestational diabetes offspring
(Lancet. 2019;394:1181–1190) Preeclampsia occurs in 2% to 3% of pregnant women and is associated with substantial maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. Prompt delivery is the recommended management for preeclamptic women after 37 weeks’ gestation, as this will decrease the risk of maternal complications while minimally affecting risk to the neonate at this gestational age. However, it is unclear what the best management strategy is for women who develop preeclampsia between 34 and 37 weeks’ gestation. In these cases, complications related to expectant management (EM), such as stillbirth or worsening fetal growth restriction and increased maternal morbidity associated with continuing the pregnancy, must be weighed against the neonatal complications associated with early delivery (infant immaturity). Current guidelines in the UK recommend EM until 37 weeks’ gestation, with earlier delivery if severe preeclampsia or other complications arise. This study from the UK compared earlier initiation of delivery with EM in women diagnosed with preeclampsia between 34 and <37 weeks gestation.
This study evaluated whether planned early delivery would ameliorate cardiovascular dysfunction 6 months postpartum, compared with usual care with expectant management, in women with late preterm preeclampsia. We conducted a mechanistic observational study in women with preterm preeclampsia between 34 +0 and 36 +6 weeks’ gestation, nested within a randomized controlled trial of planned early delivery versus expectant management (usual care), in 28 maternity hospitals in England and Wales. Women were followed up 6 months postpartum with cardiovascular assessments. The primary outcome was a composite of systolic and diastolic dysfunction (by 2009 and 2016 definitions of diastolic dysfunction). Between April 27, 2016, and November 30, 2018, 623 women were found to be eligible, of whom 420 (67%) were recruited. One hundred thirty-three women were randomized to planned delivery, 137 women were randomized to expectant management within the trial, while 150 women received expectant management outside of the trial. 321 (76.4%) completed their 6 month echocardiography assessment. 10% (31/321) had a left ventricular ejection fraction <55% while 71% (229/321) remained hypertensive. There were no differences in the primary outcome between the 2 randomized groups (planned delivery versus expectant management) using either the 2009 (risk ratio, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.80–1.40]) or 2016 definitions (risk ratio, 0.78 [0.33–1.86]). In conclusion, we demonstrated that late preterm preeclampsia results in persistence of hypertension in the majority and systolic LV dysfunction in 10%, of women 6 months postpartum. Planned early delivery does not affect these outcomes. Preeclampsia is not a self-limiting disease of pregnancy alone.
BackgroundPre-eclampsia is a pregnancy disorder, characterised by hypertension and multisystem complications in the mother. The adverse outcomes of pre-eclampsia include severe hypertension, stroke, renal and hepatic injury, haemorrhage, fetal growth restriction and even death. The optimal time to instigate delivery to prevent morbidity when pre-eclampsia occurs between 34 and 37 weeks’ gestation, without increasing problems related to infant immaturity or complications, remains unclear.Methods/designThe PHOENIX trial is a non-masked, randomised controlled trial, comparing planned early delivery (with initiation of delivery within 48 h of randomisation) with usual care (expectant management) in women with pre-eclampsia between 34+ 0 and 36+ 6 weeks’ gestation. The primary objectives of the trial are to determine if planned delivery reduces adverse maternal outcomes, without increasing the short-term harm to infants (composite of perinatal deaths or neonatal unit admissions up to infant hospital discharge) or impacting long-term infant neurodevelopmental status at 2 years corrected age (Parent Report of Cognitive Abilities-Revised).DiscussionCurrent practice in the UK at the time of trial commencement for management of pre-eclampsia varies by gestation. Previous trials have shown that in women with pre-eclampsia after 37 weeks of gestion, delivery is initiated, as maternal complications are reduced without increasing fetal risks. Prior to 34 weeks of gestation, usual management aims to prolong pregnancy for fetal benefit, unless severe complications occur, necessitating preterm delivery. This trial aims to address the uncertainty for women where the balance of benefits and risks of delivery compared to expectant management are uncertain. Previous trials in this area have been undertaken, but have not provided a definitive answer, and the research question remains active. The results of this trial are expected to influence clinical practice internationally, through direct adoption and by incorporation into guidelines in countries with similar settings.Trial registrationISRCTN01879376. Registered on 25 November 2013.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-3150-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Studies on pregnant women with epilepsy should evaluate both neurological and pregnancy outcomes. We undertook a systematic review of the literature of studies on pregnant women with epilepsy to collate the outcomes reported, and the quality of outcomes report in these studies. We searched major electronic databases (from 1999 until January 2015). Two independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data on study design, the risk of bias of the studies, journal impact factor and the quality of reported outcomes. We assessed the quality outcomes report using a six items standardised tool (score range 0-6). There were 70 different outcomes reported in 232 studies (maternal neurological (13/70, 19%), fetal and neonatal (28/70, 40%), and obstetric outcomes (29/70, 41%)). Most studies reported on major congenital fetal abnormalities (103/232, 44%), followed by live birth (60/232, 26%). Quality of the reported outcomes was poor (mean 1.54, SD 1.36). It was associated with journal impact factor (p=0.007), but not with study design (p=0.60), or risk of bias (p=0.17). The outcomes reported in studies on pregnant women with epilepsy varied widely, and the quality of the outcomes report was poor. There is a need to identify a set of core outcome to harmonise reporting in future clinical studies.
IntroductionWomen with metabolic risk factors are at higher risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Mediterranean-based dietary interventions have the potential to minimise these risks. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of a simple, targeted intervention modelled on Mediterranean diet in preventing maternal and fetal complications in pregnant women with metabolic risk factors.Methods and analysisPregnant women with a singleton pregnancy <18 weeks gestation, and without pre-existing diabetes, chronic renal disease and autoimmune diseases will be recruited. Women with metabolic risk factors will be randomised to receive a dietary intervention based on a Mediterranean pattern, supplemented with extra virgin olive oil and mixed nuts until delivery. The intervention will be delivered through a series of one to one and group sessions. The primary outcome is a composite maternal outcome of pre-eclampsia or gestational diabetes and a composite fetal outcome of stillbirth, small for gestational age fetus or admission to the neonatal intensive care unit. Secondary outcomes include maternal, fetal, dietary and laboratory outcomes. We aim to randomise 1230 eligible women with metabolic risk factors. We will also compare the outcomes in women with and without these risk factors. The sample size will provide us with 80% power at 5% significance, assuming a 20% loss to follow-up to detect a 30% reduction in maternal and fetal complications.Ethics and disseminationThe ESTEEM trial is designed to provide a definitive estimate of the effects of Mediterranean dietary pattern in pregnancy on maternal and fetal outcomes. The pragmatic nature of ESTEEM ensures the applicability of its findings into clinical practice. The findings of the study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international scientific meetings and congresses. Ethical approval was granted by the NHS Research Ethics Committees (14/EE/1048).Trial registration numberNCT02218931; Pre-results.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.