Search

Background Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) is a complex liver disease with varying incidence worldwide. We compared ICP incidence and pregnancy outcomes with outcomes for normal pregnant controls. Methods We conducted a retrospective data analysis of perinatal registry data for the years 2011 and 2017 to compare the following outcome measures: stillbirths, labour induction, gestational diabetes, pre-eclampsia, antepartum haemorrhage, postpartum haemorrhage, preterm births, low Apgar score, acute neonatal respiratory morbidity, meconium aspiration and in-hospital neonatal death. Results The incidence of ICP was 8 per 1000 births from a total 31,493 singleton births with more cases in 2017 than in 2011. Women with ICP were almost six times more likely to have labour induced including significantly more moderate preterm births (defined as between 32 weeks and 36 weeks and 6 days of gestation)) seen more in 2011 than in 2017. Conclusion Women with ICP showed higher incidence of moderate preterm birth and induced labour but favourable maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Background: Abnormal invasive placentation leads to massive intraoperative hemorrhage and maternal morbidity. This study aimed to assess the impact of the preoperative use of internal iliac artery balloon occlusion (IIABO) catheters in patients who had a cesarean delivery (CD) for invasive placentation, commonly known as the placenta accreta spectrum. Methods: This retrospective cohort study reviewed 67 pregnancies complicated by abnormal invasive placenta and confirmed intraoperatively. Preoperative planned placement of IIABO was performed in 33 women who underwent elective CD. Senior Obstetricians with the necessary expertise performed all CDs. The primary outcome measures were: intraoperative blood loss, blood transfusion requirement, duration of surgery and the need for hemostatic measures. Univariate comparison between the groups and regression analysis of the primary outcome and controlling for confounders, were performed. Results: No statistically significant difference was observed between the groups with intraoperative hemorrhage volume of above 3000 mL (unadjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.94 [no-IIABO group as the reference]; p = 0.895) and the median duration of surgery (median 107, interquartile range [IQR] 80–135 vs. median 96, IQR 75–121; p = 0.3508). More than 40% of the IIABO group required intraoperative transfusion of packed red blood cells above six units (14 [42.4%] vs. 10 [29.4%]; p = 0.357]), and 30% required additional postoperative transfusion (10 [30.3%] vs. 8 [23.5%]; p = 0.706]), although not statistically significant. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the difference remained nonsignificant after covariate adjustment (adjusted OR 0.585, p = 0.456). Cesarean hysterectomy was performed in fewer cases (seven [21.1%]) in the IIABO group than in the no-IIABO group (10 [29.4%]), although this difference was not significant (unadjusted OR 0.65, p = 0.442). Conclusions: The placement of IIABO catheters is an invasive procedure, which consumes time and resources. Its value as a means of reducing intraoperative blood loss or preserving the uterus in patients with abnormal placental adherence appears questionable. In this cohort study, there was no statistical difference in blood loss, and the need for other steps to control hemorrhage between women with and without IIABO catheters.

BackgroundOver 4.2 million confirmed cases and more than 285,000 deaths, COVID-19 pandemic continues to harm significant number of people worldwide. Several studies have reported the impact of COVID-19 in general population; however, there is scarcity of information related to pharmacological management and maternal and perinatal outcomes during the pandemic. Altered physiological, anatomical, and immunological response during pregnancy makes it more susceptible to infections. Furthermore, during pregnancy, a woman undergoes multiple interactions with the health care system that increases her chance of getting infected; therefore, managing pregnant population presents a unique challenge.Research questionsThis systematic review seeks to answer the following questions in relation to COVID-19:What are the different clinical characteristics presented in maternal and perinatal population?What are the different maternal and perinatal outcome measures reported?What are the distinct therapeutic interventions reported to treat COVID-19?Is it safe to use “medications” used in the treatment of COVID-19 during antenatal, perinatal, postnatal, and breastfeeding?MethodThe search will follow a comprehensive, sequential three step search strategy. Several databases relevant to COVID-19 and its impact on pregnancy including Medline, CINAHL, and LitCovid will be searched from the inception of the disease until the completion of data collection. The quality of this search strategy will be assessed using Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies Evidence-Based Checklist (PRESS EBC). An eligibility form will be developed for a transparent screening and inclusion/exclusion of studies. All studies will be sent to RefWorks, and abstraction will be independently performed by two researchers. Risk of bias will be assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials, Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for non-randomized studies, and for case reports, Murad et al. tool will be used. Decision to conduct meta-analysis will be based on several factors including homogeneity and outcome measures reported; otherwise, a narrative synthesis will be deemed appropriate.DiscussionThis systematic review will summarize the existing data on effect of COVID-19 on maternal and perinatal population. Furthermore, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review addressing therapeutic management and safety of medicines to treat COVID-19 during pregnancy and breastfeeding.Systematic review registrationThis systematic review has been registered and published with Prospero (CRD42020172773).

Objectives The objectives of this study were to quantify the prescription of oral methergin tablets in a busy Women’s Hospital, assess the stated indications for such prescription and highlight the issues and safety profile of Methergin use especially in the postpartum patient. Methods Review of prescription data for oral Methergin and the corresponding annual figures on primary and secondary postpartum hemorrhage. Results Over a period of 5 years, oral Methergin prescriptions for delayed and secondary postpartum hemorrhage constituted less than 1% of the overall prescription in Obstetrics and Gynaecology, which ranged between 1214 and 2085 per year. The numbers were too few to ascertain any relationship with both types of postpartum hemorrhage. Although stated on the relevant Patient Information leaflet, no local or regional guideline on its use exist. Conclusions Specific and random trend monitoring of medications for continuing safety profile, risk benefit issues, or unapproved indication, may help in identifying, preventing and mitigating any medication safety matters. Clinical pharmacists in collaboration with physicians are well placed in conducting such pharmacovigilance activities to improve medication safety.

Objective: To assess the maternal and neonatal consequences of scheduling elective repeated cesarean section (ERCS) at 39 weeks rather than 38 weeks and to assess the impacts of delivering by emergency cesarean section (CS) before the planned date. Design: Retrospective Cohort study. Population: Patients with previous two or more CS planned for ERCS at term during the period from January to June 2011. Methods: Medical records were reviewed for demographic and clinical data, planned timing of CS, emergency cesarean and any adverse maternal or neonatal outcome. Main Outcome Measures: Adverse maternal or neonatal outcome. Results: Four hundred and twenty women were included, 71.4% of cases were posted