Search

Objective: To investigate whether effects of antenatal corticosteroids on neonatal outcomes in preterm infants with very low birth weight were different by plurality., Design: Nationwide prospective cohort study., Patients: Twins and singletons with very low birth weight (<1500 g) who were born between 23 +0 and 33 +6 weeks of gestation and registered in the Korean Neonatal Network from January 2014 to December 2019., Main Outcome Measures: Morbidity and mortality before discharge from neonatal intensive care unit., Results: Among a total of 9531 preterm infants with very low birth weight, there were 2364 (24.8%) twins and 7167 (75.2%) singletons. While 83.9% of singletons were exposed to at least one dose of antenatal corticosteroids, so were 87.9% of twins.Interaction analysis demonstrated that there was no significant difference in the effect of antenatal corticosteroids on morbidities or mortality between twins and singletons in either gestational age group (23-28 weeks or 29-33 weeks).Antenatal corticosteroids significantly decreased the risk of surfactant use (adjusted relative risk (aRR): 0.972 (95% CI: 0.961 to 0.984)), high-grade intraventricular haemorrhage (aRR: 0.621 (95% CI: 0.487 to 0.794)), periventricular leucomalacia (aRR: 0.728 (95% CI: 0.556 to 0.954)) and mortality (aRR: 0.758 (95% CI: 0.679 to 0.846)) in the gestational age group of 23-28 weeks. In the gestational age group of 29-33 weeks, antenatal corticosteroids significantly decreased the risk of surfactant use (aRR: 0.914 (95% CI: 0.862 to 0.970)) and mortality (aRR: 0.409 (95% CI: 0.269 to 0.624)) but increased the risk of sepsis (aRR: 1.416 (95% CI: 1.018 to 1.969))., Conclusion: This study demonstrates that effect of antenatal corticosteroids on neonatal outcomes of preterm infants with very low birth weight does not differ significantly by plurality (twin or singleton pregnancy)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background : Preterm birth is strongly associated with increasing mortality, incidence of disability, intensity of neonatal care required, and consequent costs. We examined the clinical utility of the potential preterm birth risk factors from admitted pregnant women with symptomatic preterm labor and developed prediction models to obtain information for prolonging pregnancies. Methods: This retrospective study included pregnant women registered with the KOrean Preterm collaboratE Network (KOPEN) who had symptomatic preterm labor, between 16 and 34 gestational weeks, in a tertiary care center from March to November 2016. Demographics, obstetric and medical histories, and basic laboratory test results obtained at admission were evaluated. The preterm birth probability was assessed using a nomogram and decision tree according to birth gestational age: early preterm, before 32 weeks; late preterm, between 32 and 37 weeks; and term, after 37 weeks. Results: Of 879 registered pregnant women, 727 who gave birth at a designated institute were analyzed. The rates of early preterm, late preterm, and term births were 18.16%, 44.02%, and 37.83%, respectively. With the developed nomogram, the concordance index for early and late preterm births was 0.824 (95% CI: 0.785-0.864) and 0.717 (95% CI: 0.675-0.759) respectively. Preterm birth was significantly more likely among women with multiple pregnancy and had water leakage due to premature rupture of membrane. The prediction rate for preterm birth based on decision tree analysis was 86.9% for early preterm and 73.9% for late preterm; the most important nodes are watery leakage for early preterm birth and multiple pregnancy for late preterm birth. Conclusion: This study aims to develop an individual overall probability of preterm birth based on specific risk factors at critical gestational times of preterm birth using a range of clinical variables recorded at the initial hospital admission. Therefore, these models may be useful for clinicians and patients in clinical decision-making and for hospitalization or lifestyle coaching in an outpatient setting., Competing Interests: Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interest exists., (© The author(s).)