Search

The placenta and fetal heart undergo development concurrently during early pregnancy, and, while human studies have reported associations between placental abnormalities and congenital heart disease (CHD), the nature of this relationship remains incompletely understood. Evidence from animal studies suggests a plausible cause and effect connection between placental abnormalities and fetal CHD. Biomechanical models demonstrate the influence of mechanical forces on cardiac development, whereas genetic models highlight the role of confined placental mutations that can cause some forms of CHD. Similar definitive studies in humans are lacking; however, placental pathologies such as maternal and fetal vascular malperfusion and chronic deciduitis are frequently observed in pregnancies complicated by CHD. Moreover, maternal conditions such as diabetes and pre‐eclampsia, which affect placental function, are associated with increased risk of CHD in offspring. Bridging the gap between animal models and human studies is crucial to understanding how placental abnormalities may contribute to human fetal CHD. The next steps will require new methodologies and multidisciplinary approaches combining innovative imaging modalities, comprehensive genomic testing, and histopathology. These studies may eventually lead to preventative strategies for some forms of CHD by targeting placental influences on fetal heart development. Key points: What's already known about this topic? Placenta and fetal heart develop simultaneously during early pregnancy with an ongoing interaction as gestation progresses. What does this study add? Animal studies involving both biomechanical perturbations of cardiac hemodynamics and genetic disruptions confined to the placenta, suggest a plausible cause and effect relationship between placental abnormalities and evolution of fetal congenital heart disease.Future studies must bridge the gap between animal models and human pathology in order to find preventative therapeutic targets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundIn 2013, an estimated 2.8 million newborns died and 2.7 million were stillborn. A much greater number suffer from long term impairment associated with preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, congenital anomalies, and perinatal or infectious causes. With the approaching deadline for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015, there was a need to set the new research priorities on newborns and stillbirth with a focus not only on survival but also on health, growth and development. We therefore carried out a systematic exercise to set newborn health research priorities for 2013-2025.MethodsWe used adapted Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methods for this prioritization exercise. We identified and approached the 200 most productive researchers and 400 program experts, and 132 of them submitted research questions online. These were collated into a set of 205 research questions, sent for scoring to the 600 identified experts, and were assessed and scored by 91 experts.ResultsNine out of top ten identified priorities were in the domain of research on improving delivery of known interventions, with simplified neonatal resuscitation program and clinical algorithms and improved skills of community health workers leading the list. The top 10 priorities in the domain of development were led by ideas on improved Kangaroo Mother Care at community level, how to improve the accuracy of diagnosis by community health workers, and perinatal audits. The 10 leading priorities for discovery research focused on stable surfactant with novel modes of administration for preterm babies, ability to diagnose fetal distress and novel tocolytic agents to delay or stop preterm labour.ConclusionThese findings will assist both donors and researchers in supporting and conducting research to close the knowledge gaps for reducing neonatal mortality, morbidity and long term impairment. WHO, SNL and other partners will work to generate interest among key national stakeholders, governments, NGOs, and research institutes in these priorities, while encouraging research funders to support them. We will track research funding, relevant requests for proposals and trial registers to monitor if the priorities identified by this exercise are being addressed.

BackgroundIn 2013, an estimated 2.8 million newborns died and 2.7 million were stillborn. A much greater number suffer from long term impairment associated with preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, congenital anomalies, and perinatal or infectious causes. With the approaching deadline for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015, there was a need to set the new research priorities on newborns and stillbirth with a focus not only on survival but also on health, growth and development. We therefore carried out a systematic exercise to set newborn health research priorities for 2013-2025.MethodsWe used adapted Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methods for this prioritization exercise. We identified and approached the 200 most productive researchers and 400 program experts, and 132 of them submitted research questions online. These were collated into a set of 205 research questions, sent for scoring to the 600 identified experts, and were assessed and scored by 91 experts.ResultsNine out of top ten identified priorities were in the domain of research on improving delivery of known interventions, with simplified neonatal resuscitation program and clinical algorithms and improved skills of community health workers leading the list. The top 10 priorities in the domain of development were led by ideas on improved Kangaroo Mother Care at community level, how to improve the accuracy of diagnosis by community health workers, and perinatal audits. The 10 leading priorities for discovery research focused on stable surfactant with novel modes of administration for preterm babies, ability to diagnose fetal distress and novel tocolytic agents to delay or stop preterm labour.ConclusionThese findings will assist both donors and researchers in supporting and conducting research to close the knowledge gaps for reducing neonatal mortality, morbidity and long term impairment. WHO, SNL and other partners will work to generate interest among key national stakeholders, governments, NGOs, and research institutes in these priorities, while encouraging research funders to support them. We will track research funding, relevant requests for proposals and trial registers to monitor if the priorities identified by this exercise are being addressed.

ObjectiveRegulatory bodies and insurers evaluate hospital quality using obstetrical outcomes, however meaningful comparisons should take preexisting patient characteristics into account. Furthermore, if risk-adjusted outcomes are consistent within a hospital, fewer measures and resources would be needed to assess obstetrical quality. Our objective was to establish risk-adjusted models for 5 obstetric outcomes and assess hospital performance across these outcomes.Study designWe studied a cohort of 115,502 women and their neonates born in 25 hospitals in the United States from March 2008 through February 2011. Hospitals were ranked according to their unadjusted and risk-adjusted frequency of venous thromboembolism, postpartum hemorrhage, peripartum infection, severe perineal laceration, and a composite neonatal adverse outcome. Correlations between hospital risk-adjusted outcome frequencies were assessed.ResultsVenous thromboembolism occurred too infrequently (0.03%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02-0.04%) for meaningful assessment. Other outcomes occurred frequently enough for assessment (postpartum hemorrhage, 2.29%; 95% CI, 2.20-2.38, peripartum infection, 5.06%; 95% CI, 4.93-5.19, severe perineal laceration at spontaneous vaginal delivery, 2.16%; 95% CI, 2.06-2.27, neonatal composite, 2.73%; 95% CI, 2.63-2.84). Although there was high concordance between unadjusted and adjusted hospital rankings, several individual hospitals had an adjusted rank that was substantially different (as much as 12 rank tiers) than their unadjusted rank. None of the correlations between hospital-adjusted outcome frequencies was significant. For example, the hospital with the lowest adjusted frequency of peripartum infection had the highest adjusted frequency of severe perineal laceration.ConclusionEvaluations based on a single risk-adjusted outcome cannot be generalized to overall hospital obstetric performance.

Objective The aim of the study is to compare perinatal outcomes for women with greater social needs, as identified by the Community Health Needs Assessment, to those of women living in other areas of the county. Study Design This was a retrospective cohort study of pregnant women delivering at a large inner-city county hospital. Perinatal outcomes were analyzed for women living within a target area with substantial health disparities and social needs, and compared with those women living outside the target area. Statistical analysis included student's t -test, Chi square, and logistic regression. Results Between January 2015 and July 2020, 66,936 women delivered at Parkland hospital. Of these, 7,585 (11%) resided within the target area. These women were younger (26.8 ± 6.5 vs. 27.9 ± 6.4 years, p < 0.001), more likely to be black (37 vs. 13%, p < 0.001), and had a higher body mass index or BMI (33.3 ± 7.0 vs. 32.6 ± 6.4 kg/m 2 , p < 0.001). All women were likely to access prenatal care, with 7,320 (96.5%) in the target area and 57,677 (97.2%) outside the area attending at least one visit. Adverse perinatal outcomes were increased for women living within the target area, which persisted after adjustment for age, race, and BMI. This included an increased risk of preeclampsia (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.1, 95% confidence interval or CI [1.03, 1.2]) and abruption (aRR 1.3, 95% CI [1.1, 1.7]), as well as preterm birth before both 34 weeks (aRR 1.3, 95% CI [1.2, 1.5]) and 28 weeks (aRR 1.3, 95% CI [1.02,1.7]). It follows that neonatal ICU admission (aRR 2.1, 95% CI [1.3, 3.4]) and neonatal death (aRR 1.2, 95% CI [1.1, 1.3]) were increased within the target area. Interestingly, rate of postpartum visit attendance was higher in the target area (57 vs. 48%), p < 0.001. Conclusion Even among vulnerable populations, women in areas with worse health disparities and social needs are at greater risk of adverse perinatal outcomes. Efforts to achieve health equity will need to address social disparities. Key Points At a county hospital, 97% of women accessed prenatal care. Greater social needs were associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. Differences persisted with adjustment for age, race, and BMI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective This study aimed to evaluate the rate and impact of episiotomy on maternal and newborn outcomes before and after restricted use of episiotomy. Study Design This population-based observational study used an obstetric database of all deliveries since 1990 that has been maintained with quality checks. Inclusion criteria were vaginal deliveries at ≥37 weeks. Exclusion criteria included fetal malformations, multifetal gestations, or fetal deaths known on arrival to Labor and Delivery. The primary outcomes of interest were episiotomy, perineal lacerations, and newborn outcomes. To evaluate the impact of restrictive episiotomy, data from 1990 to 1997 (35% overall episiotomy rate) were compared with data from 2010 to 2017 (2.5% overall episiotomy rate). Univariable analysis of maternal and infant outcomes were performed comparing the two-time epochs with the Pearson's Chi-squared test. Results Overall, 268,415 women met inclusion criteria and 49,089 (18.2%) had an episiotomy. The rate of episiotomy decreased from 37% of deliveries in 1990 to 2% in 2017. A total of 82,082 deliveries occurred in the 1990 to 1997 epoch and 57,183 in 2010 to 2017. Indicated use of episiotomy was associated with a significant decrease in third and fourth degree lacerations. Immediate newborn condition (5-minute Apgar's score ≤3 and umbilical artery pH <7.1) and neonatal outcomes (intraventricular hemorrhage [IVH] grade 3/4, positive culture sepsis, neonatal seizures, and neonatal demise) were not significantly different. Conclusion Selective, indicated use of episiotomy compared with routine was associated with lower rates of third/fourth-degree lacerations with no change in neonatal outcomes. The common obstetric practice of routinely performing episiotomy, presumably to prevent perineal trauma, proved untrue when analyzed over almost three decades. Key Points Episiotomy use decreased overtime at our institution. Decreased episiotomy use was associated with significant improvement in maternal outcomes. Neonatal outcomes were unchanged suggesting no deleterious effects with restricted episiotomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recently released a Recommendation Statement on screening for iron deficiency anemia in pregnancy and found insufficient evidence to support routine screening or preventive iron supplementation. The USPSTF emphasized the need for more studies and clinical trials in the obstetric population, as pregnant patients have historically been excluded from research. The review included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and highlighted the limitations of RCTs in studying rare outcomes and their lack of real-world applicability. The USPSTF also discussed the importance of assessing physiologically plausible outcomes and the need for an evidence-based definition of iron deficiency anemia in pregnancy. The benefits of screening for iron deficiency without anemia were also inconclusive. Despite the knowledge gaps, the USPSTF acknowledged the minimal risk of harm and improved hematologic indices associated with routine iron supplementation in pregnancy. The article concludes by emphasizing the importance of considering health-related social needs and widening the lens to understand the factors that contribute to iron deficiency anemia in pregnancy. [Extracted from the article]

To characterize the data on medications for lactating people in the LactMed database and evaluate the strength of the data for the most commonly administered medications in lactating women. A retrospective analysis of all medications in the LactMed database in 12/2020 was performed. Each medication was classified into one of three categories: absent data, minimal-moderate data, strong data pertaining to safety in lactation. No data was defined as no available research studies associated with the medication. Minimal-moderate data was defined as absent research studies in one or more of the four LactMed categories: maternal drug levels, infant drug levels, effects on infants, effects on lactation, or if data was limited to a case report or observational study. Strong data was classified as availability of research studies in all four LactMed categories with data derived from pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic, cohort, case control, or randomized control studies. Additionally, the most commonly used medications in lactating women as defined by prior literature were analyzed for strength of data. 1408 medications were evaluated: 714 (51%) had no associated data, 664 (47%) had minimal-moderate data, and 30 (2%) had strong data. Maternal drug level category had the highest proportion of rigorous supportive data while the effect on lactation category had the least supportive data. Of the most common mediations used in lactating women, sex hormones (contraception) and the nervous system medication classes had the most robust supportive data while respiratory, blood forming organs, and galactogogues had the weakest supportive data. There is significant variability and dearth in the quality of data guiding recommendations for use of medications in lactation providing numerous opportunities for research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]