Search

Objective: The primary aim of this study is to utilize a neural network model to predict adverse neonatal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes (GDM)., Design: Our model, based on XGBoost, was implemented using Python 3.6 with the Keras framework built on TensorFlow by Google. We sourced data from medical records of GDM-diagnosed individuals who delivered at our tertiary medical center between 2012 and 2016. The model included simple pregnancy parameters, maternal age, body mass index (BMI), parity, gravity, results of oral glucose tests, treatment modality, and glycemic control. The composite neonatal adverse outcomes defined as one of the following: large or small for gestational age, shoulder dystocia, fetal umbilical pH less than 7.2, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), hyperbilirubinemia, or polycythemia. For the machine training phase, 70% of the cohort was randomly chosen. Each sample in this set consisted of baseline parameters and the composite outcome. The remaining samples were then employed to assess the accuracy of our model., Results: The study encompassed a total of 452 participants. The composite adverse outcome occurred in 29% of cases. Our model exhibited prediction accuracies of 82% at the time of GDM diagnosis and 91% at delivery. The factors most contributing to the prediction model were maternal age, pre-pregnancy BMI, and the results of the single 3-h 100 g oral glucose tolerance test., Conclusion: Our advanced neural network algorithm has significant potential in predicting adverse neonatal outcomes in GDM-diagnosed individuals.

Objective: To compare the outcomes of dichorionic triamniotic (DCTA) triplets with that of monochorionic diamniotic (MCDA) twin gestations undergoing fetoscopic laser surgery (FLS) for treatment of twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS)., Methods: Retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data of consecutive DCTA triplet and MCDA twin pregnancies with TTTS that underwent FLS at two fetal treatment centers between 2012 and 2020. Preoperative, operative and, postoperative variables were collected. Perinatal outcomes were investigated. Primary outcome was survival to birth and to neonatal period. Secondary outcomes were gestational age (GA) at birth and procedure-to-delivery interval. Literature review was conducted in which PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from inception to September, 2020., Results: Twenty four sets of DCTA triplets were compared to MCDA twins during the study period. There were no significant differences in survival (no survivor, single, or double survivors) to birth and to the neonatal period of the MC twin pairs of the DCTA triplets vs MCDA twins. Median GA at delivery was approximately three weeks earlier in DCTA triplets compared to MCDA twins (28.4 weeks vs 31.4 weeks, p  = .035, respectively). Rates of preterm birth (PTB) less than 32 and less than 28 weeks were significantly higher in DCTA triplets compared to twins (<32 weeks: 70.8% vs 51.1%, p  = .037, respectively, and <28 weeks: 37.5% vs 20.8%, p  = .033, respectively)., Conclusion: Perinatal survival including fetal and neonatal are comparable between DCTA triplets and MCDA twins. However, this might have resulted from the small sample size of the DCTA triplets. GA at delivery is earlier in triplets, which could be due to the nature of triplet gestation rather than to the laser procedure itself.

Background: The appropriate medical treatment for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is controversial and recommendations vary between different organizations., Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of glyburide and insulin as treatments for GDM., Methods: Retrospective analysis of all pregnant women diagnosed with GDM and treated with either glyburide or insulin. Demographic features, clinical characteristics, maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared according to type of pharmacological treatment., Results: Included in the study were 323 women, of whom 269 (83.28%) were treated with glyburide and 54 (16.72%) with insulin. There were no significant differences between the groups, apart from a higher one-hour oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) value (191.80 mg/dl in the glyburide group, 204.33 in the insulin group, p = .01). Optimal glucose control was achieved in 130 women in the glyburide group (48.32%) and 15 in the insulin group (27.77%), p = .007. This difference remained significant after adjustment for age, BMI, and fasting glucose during OGTT (aOR = 2.22). Mean gestational weight gain was lower in the glyburide group vs. insulin group (10.01 vs. 11.99 kg, p  = .048). Apart from higher maternal hypoglycemia rate (12.64% in glyburide group vs. 1.85% in insulin group, p  = .016), there were no other differences in maternal and neonatal outcomes between the groups. Glyburide failure rate was 13.38%, and associated with higher fasting OGTT value (100.70 mg/dl in glyburide failure group vs. 94.67 mg/dl in the glyburide treatment until delivery group, p  = .041)., Conclusions: Glyburide is at least as safe and effective as insulin except for higher rates of maternal hypoglycemia. Considering its advantages compared to insulin (ease of use and storage, increased patient responsiveness, and lower cost), it may be considered as first line treatment in GDM, especially when fasting OGTT value is not high.

This retrospective study was conducted to determine if infants born prematurely despite prophylactic maternal progesterone treatment during pregnancy may still benefit from its adjunct properties and have decreased neonatal complications. 248 women treated with vaginal/intramuscular progesterone during pregnancy and 2519 controls who gave birth to a preterm newborn (24 + 0-36 + 6 gestational weeks) at a tertiary medical centre in 2012-2019. The primary outcome measure was neonatal infectious composite outcome. Secondary outcome measures were other maternal and neonatal complications. Compared to controls, the study group was characterised by lower gestational age at birth (35.0 ± 2.66 vs. 36.0 ± 2.23 weeks, p  < .001), lower birth weight (2294 vs. 2485 g, p  < .001), higher rates of neonatal infectious composite outcome (27.82 vs. 21.36%, p  = 0.024), NICU admission, periventricular leukomalacia, and mechanical ventilation. The higher neonatal infectious composite outcome is likely associated with the lower gestational age at birth in this high-risk group and not the progesterone treatment per se.IMPACT STATEMENT What is already known on this subject? Several randomised controlled trials have shown that progesterone administration in pregnancy significantly reduced the rate and complications of preterm birth. A recent study reported that vaginal administration of progesterone during pregnancy was more effective than intramuscular administration in decreasing vaginal group B Streptococcus (GBS) colonisation. This finding raises the question of whether progesterone treatment may have additional benefits besides preventing preterm birth and may reduce neonatal complication rate in preterm infants. What do the results of this study add? This is the first study examining the impact of gestational progesterone exposure on outcomes of preterm infants. The primary objective was a composite measure of infectious neonatal outcomes. Newborns who had progesterone exposure on average had lower gestational age, lower birth weight and higher neonatal infectious composite outcome. The significant difference is explained by lower gestational age. What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Progesterone is widely used to prevent preterm birth, and may have important additive effects even when prematurity is not avoided. Although the findings did not support our initial hypothesis, they warrant further examination with larger cohorts.

Objective: To compare maternal and neonatal outcomes following cesarean delivery during second stage of labor, according to the fetal extraction method., Methods: A retrospective cohort study of all women who underwent term cesarean delivery during the second stage of labor at a university-affiliated tertiary medical center (2012-2016). The cohort was divided according to three extraction methods: standard vertex extraction, the push method in which the head extraction is accompanied by pushing through the vagina, and the reverse breech extraction method. Primary outcomes were intraoperative maternal complications, and secondary outcomes were neonatal adverse events., Results: Three hundred and fifty women were included, of whom 206 (59%) underwent standard vertex fetal extraction, 116 (33%) the push method extraction, and 28 (8%) reverse breech extraction. Operation time was significantly shorter in the standard vertex extraction method compared to push and reverse breech extraction methods (33.5 vs. 40.5 and 39.0 min, respectively, p  = .013). Uterine laceration and incision extension frequencies were lower in the vertex extraction method as well (24.76 vs. 45.69-46.40% in others, p  < .001). Delivery related neonatal injury was significantly more frequent in the reverse breech extraction method (39.29 vs. 12-15% in others, p  < .001). In a multivariate analysis reverse breech extraction was associated with higher rates of uterine laceration and incision extension (OR = 2.739 95% confidence interval 1.44-6.56, p  = .0237) and delivery related neonatal injury (OR = 2.837, 95% CI: 1.081-7.448, p  = .0342)., Conclusion: Standard vertex extraction method during second stage of labor cesarean delivery is safer both to the mother and neonate when compared to alternative extraction methods., Abbreviations: NRFHR: non-reassuring fetal heart rate; NICU: neonatal intensive care unit.

Background: The two most commonly used nomograms for amniotic fluid index (AFI) were developed by Moore and Cayle and Magann et al. However, there are several inconsistencies between the two methods. Objective: The aim of the study was to determine whether these differences carry clinical significance. Methods: A retrospective cohort of women with singleton pregnancies evaluated for AFI during pregnancy at a tertiary medical center in 2007-2014 were divided into five groups: group A, definite oligohydramnios-AFI below the fifth percentile according to the nomograms of both Moore and Cayle and Magann et al.; group B, intermediate oligohydramnios-AFI below the fifth percentile according to only one nomogram (Moore and Cayle); group C, euhydramnios-normal AFI according to both nomograms; group D, intermediate polyhydramnios-AFI above the 95th percentile according to one nomogram (Magann et al.); group E, definite polyhydramnios-above the 95th percentile according to both nomograms. The association of group by maternal and perinatal outcomes was analyzed. Results: A total of 6987 women were included: group A, 996 (14%); group B, 1344 (19%); group C, 2561 (37%); group D, 1051 (15%); group E, 1034 (15%). Group B (intermediate oligohydramnios) was characterized by significantly lower rates of adverse perinatal outcomes than group A (definite oligohydramnios): small for gestational age neonate (12.3 versus 15.2%, p  = .05), neonatal intensive care unit admission (11.1 versus 21.5%; p  < .001), composite respiratory outcome (4.8 versus 9.8%; p  < .001), and neonatal sepsis (6.4 versus 10.8%; p  < .001). No such differences were found between groups B and C. Group D (intermediate polyhydramnios) differed from group E (definite polyhydramnios) by lower rates of 5 minutes Apgar score <7 (1.3 versus 3.2%; p  = .003), neonatal intensive care unit admission (10.9 versus 14.4%; p  = .02), and major congenital anomalies (1.7 versus 5.6%; p  = .02). There was no difference in these parameters between groups D and C. Conclusion: This study suggests that intermediate oligohydramnios and intermediate polyhydramnios are not associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. Outcome in these pregnancies is similar to pregnancies with euhydramnios. Commonly used AFI nomograms should be updated.

Objective: We aimed to compare the efficacy of commonly available progesterone preparations for preterm birth prevention. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of all women treated with progesterone to prevent preterm birth and delivered in a single university-affiliated tertiary medical-center. Four progesterone preparations were compared: vaginal Endometrin 100 mg twice daily, vaginal Crinone 8% gel 90 mg daily, vaginal Utrogestan 200 mg daily, and intramuscular 17α-hydroxyprogesterone caproate (17-OHPC) 250 mg weekly. All women were considered at risk for preterm birth according to: prior preterm birth or cervical length below 25 mm measured during the second trimester. Significant maternal morbidity, pregnancy achieved by artificial reproductive technique and cerclage placement were excluded. Primary outcome was the rate of preterm birth prior to 37 weeks of gestation. Results: Overall, 422 women were allocated to four study groups according to progesterone preparation: Endometrin 175 (41.5%), Crinone 73 (17.3%), Utrogestan 154 (36.5%), and 17-OHPC 20 (4.7%). Rates of preterm birth prior to 37 gestational weeks were lowest on the Endometrin treatment group (12.6 versus 20.5, 17.5, and 35% in the rest, p  = .05). Multivariate analysis revealed that the progesterone preparation was associated with preterm birth prior to 37 gestational weeks (LR = 8.3, p  = .004). The need for maternal red blood cells transfusion was significantly higher in the Endometrin subgroup (4% versus 0 in all others, p  = .018). This finding remained significant after adjustment to potential confounders (LR 16.44, p  < .001). Neonatal outcomes did not differ between groups. Conclusions: Different progesterone preparations prescribed to women at risk, may possess different efficacy in preventing preterm delivery prior to 37 weeks of gestation.

Objective: To estimate the effect of prior successful vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) on the rate of uterine rupture and delivery outcome in women undergoing labor after cesarean., Methods: A retrospective cohort study of all women attempting labor after cesarean delivery in a university-affiliated tertiary-hospital (2007-2014) was conducted. Study group included women attempting vaginal delivery with a history of cesarean delivery and at least one prior VBAC. Control group included women attempting first vaginal delivery following cesarean delivery. Primary outcome was defined as the rate of uterine rupture. Secondary outcomes were delivery and maternal outcomes., Results: Of 62,463 deliveries during the study period, 3256 met inclusion criteria. One thousand two hundred and eleven women had VBAC prior to the index labor and 2045 underwent their first labor after cesarean. Women in the study group had a significantly lower rate of uterine rupture 9 (0.7%) in respect to control 33 (1.6%), p = .036, and had a higher rate of successful vaginal birth (96 vs. 84.9%, p < .001). In multivariate analysis, previous VBAC was associated with decreased risk of uterine rupture (OR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.21-0.97, p = .04)., Conclusions: In women attempting labor after cesarean, prior VBAC appears to be associated with lower rate of uterine rupture and higher rate of successful vaginal birth.

Objective: To identify predictors for prolonged interval from premature rupture of membranes (PROM) to spontaneous onset of labor in women presenting with PROM and low Bishop score at term., Methods: A retrospective study of women presenting with PROM and Bishop score < 7 at term (≥37weeks) in a tertiary hospital (2013-14). Spontaneous onset of labor was defined as presence of regular uterine contractions and Bishop score ≥ 7. Women with interval from PROM to spontaneous onset of labor of <24hours (short interval group) were compared to those with interval ≥ 24 hours (prolonged interval group). Women who underwent induction of labor at < 24 hours from PROM were excluded., Results: Among 625 women who met inclusion criteria, 155 (24.8%) had a prolonged interval to onset of labor. In multivariate analysis, prolonged PROM was associated with (OR, 95%CI) cervical dilatation (0.35, 0.24-0.52, p < 0.001), effacement (0.97, 0.96-0.99, p < 0.001) and uterine contraction (0.51, 0.32-0.80, p = 0.004). A multivariable prediction model including maternal age, parity, cervical dilatation and effacement, gestational age and neonatal birthweight was associated with an AUC of receiver-operator characteristic curve of 0.739 (0.631-0.847, p < 0.001) for predicting prolonged PROM., Conclusion: Uterine contractions and cervical examination parameters can be used for prediction of prolonged interval to spontaneous onset of labor in women with term PROM.

Objective: Dianatal® is a bioadhesive gliding film which reduces the opposing force to vaginal childbirth. We aimed to investigate the safety, applicability, and impact of Dianatal® obstetric gel on second stage of labor and perineal integrity., Methods: Low-risk singleton pregnancies at term were prospectively enrolled. Eligible women were randomly assigned to either labor management without using obstetric gel, or labor management using intermittent application of obstetric gel into the birth canal during vaginal examinations, starting at active phase of labor (≥4 cm dilation). The primary measured outcome was the length of second stage of labor., Results: Overall, 200 cases were analyzed. Demographic, obstetrical, and labor characteristics were similar between the groups. Neither adverse events nor maternal or neonatal side effects were observed. The mean lengths of the active and second stages of labor were comparable between the obstetric gel-treated and the control groups (157 versus 219 min and 48 versus 56 min, respectively). None of the women had grade III/IV perineal tears. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were not negatively influenced by using obstetric gel. No difference was found after sub-group analysis for spontaneous vaginal delivery., Conclusion: Dianatal® obstetric gel is safe in terms of maternal or neonatal use. Albeit a trend toward shorter labor stages using Dianatal® obstetric gel, no significant differences were noted among the groups. In order to further investigate the influence of the obstetric gel on labor stage interval, perineal integrity and maternal and neonatal outcomes, larger randomized clinical trials are needed to be carried out.