Background Pregnant women are at increased risk of mortality and morbidity due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Many studies reported on the association of COVID-19 with pregnancy specific adverse outcomes but prediction models utilizing large cohort of pregnant women are still lacking for estimating the risk of maternal morbidity and other adverse events. Objective The main aim of this study was to develop a prediction model to quantify the risk of progression to critical COVID-19 and intensive care unit admission in pregnant women with symptomatic infection. Study design This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study including eight hospitals from four countries (UK, Austria, Greece and Turkey). Data extraction was from February 2020 until May 2021. Included were consecutive pregnant and early postpartum women (within 10 days of birth), reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome was progression to critical illness requiring intensive care. Secondary outcomes included maternal death, preeclampsia and stillbirth. The association between the primary outcome and 12 candidate predictors with known association with severe COVID-19 in pregnancy, was analyzed with log-binomial mixed-effects regression and reported as adjusted risk ratios (aRR). All potential predictors were evaluated in one model and only baseline factors in another. Predictive accuracy were assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC). Results Of 793 pregnant women positive for SARS-CoV-2 and symptomatic, 44 (5.5%) were admitted to intensive care, of whom 10 died (1.3%). The ‘mini-COvid Maternal Intensive Therapy’ model included demographic and clinical variables available at disease onset: maternal age (aRR: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.07–1.95, P=0.015); body-mass index (aRR: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.06–1.66, P=0.010); and diagnosis in the third trimester of pregnancy (aRR: 3.64, 95% CI: 1.78–8.46, P=0.001). The optimism-adjusted AUROC was 0.73. The ‘full-COvid Maternal Intensive Therapy’ model included body-mass index (aRR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.07–1.95, P=0.015), lower respiratory symptoms (aRR: 5.11, 95% CI: 1.81–21.4, P=0.007), neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (aRR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.36–1.89, P<0.001); and serum C-reactive protein (aRR: 1.30, 95% CI: 1.15–1.44, P<0.001), with an optimism-adjusted AUROC 0.85. Neither model showed signs of poor fit (P>0.05). Categorization as high risk by either model was associated with a shorter diagnosis to ICU admission interval (log-rank test P<0.001, both), higher maternal death (5.2% vs. 0.2%; P<0.0001) and preeclampsia (5.7% vs. 1.0%; P=0.0003). A spreadsheet calculator is available for risk estimation. Conclusion At presentation with symptomatic COVID-19, pregnant and recently postpartum women can be stratified into high and low-risk for progression to critical disease, even where resources are limited. This ...
Twin pregnancies are commonly assessed using singleton growth and birth weight reference charts. This practice has led to a significant number of twins labelled as small for gestational age (SGA), causing unnecessary interventions and increased risk of iatrogenic preterm birth. However, the use of twin-specific charts remains controversial. This study aims to assess whether twin-specific estimated fetal weight (EFW) and birth weight (BW) charts are more predictive of adverse outcomes compared to singleton charts. Centiles of EFW and BW were calculated using previously published singleton and twin charts. Categorical data were compared using Chi-square or McNemar tests. The study included 1740 twin pregnancies, with the following perinatal adverse outcomes recorded: perinatal death, preterm birth <34 weeks, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) and admissions to the neonatal unit (NNU). Twin-specific charts identified prenatally and postnatally a smaller proportion of infants as SGA compared to singleton charts. However, twin charts showed a higher percentage of adverse neonatal outcomes in SGA infants than singleton charts. For example, perinatal death (SGA 7.2% vs. appropriate for gestational age (AGA) 2%, p < 0.0001), preterm birth <34 weeks (SGA 42.1% vs. AGA 16.4%, p < 0.0001), HDP (SGA 21.2% vs. AGA 13.5%, p = 0.015) and NNU admissions (SGA 69% vs. AGA 24%, p < 0.0001), when compared to singleton charts (perinatal death: SGA 2% vs. AGA 1%, p = 0.029), preterm birth <34 weeks: (SGA 20.6% vs. AGA 17.4%, p = 0.020), NNU admission: (SGA 34.5% vs. AGA 23.9%, p < 0.000). There was no significant association between HDP and SGA using the singleton charts (p = 0.696). In SGA infants, according to the twin charts, the incidence of abnormal umbilical artery Doppler was significantly more common than in SGA using the singleton chart (27.0% vs. 8.1%, p < 0.001). In conclusion, singleton charts misclassify a large number of twins as at risk of fetal growth restriction. The evidence suggests that the following twin-specific charts could reduce unnecessary medical interventions prenatally and postnatally.
This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as
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.