Search

In October 2015, Colombia confirmed its first case of autochthonous Zika virus infection (1). As of November 2016, [approximately equal to] 105,000 cases of symptomatic Zika virus disease have been [...]

Background: Multiple studies have described increased risk of severe coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) among pregnant women compared to nonpregnant women. The risk in middle‐income countries where the distributions of age groups and preexisting conditions may differ is less known. Objectives: To determine whether pregnant women with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection are at increased risk for severe COVID‐19 compared to nonpregnant women in Colombia. Methods: We analysed national surveillance data from Colombia, of women aged 15–44 years with laboratory‐confirmed infection with SARS‐CoV‐2 by molecular or antigen testing, from 6 March 2020 to 12 December 2020. An enhanced follow‐up of pregnant women with COVID‐19 was established to monitor pregnancy and birth outcomes. Results: Of 371,363 women aged 15–44 years with laboratory‐confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, 1.5% (n = 5614) were reported as pregnant; among those, 2610 (46.5%) were considered a complete pregnancy for reporting purposes at the time of analysis. Hospitalisation (23.9%) and death (1.3%) occurred more frequently among pregnant symptomatic women compared to nonpregnant symptomatic women (2.9% and 0.3%, respectively). Compared to nonpregnant symptomatic women, pregnant symptomatic women were at increased risk of hospitalisation (adjusted risk ratio [RR] 2.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.07, 2.32) and death (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.60, 2.07), after adjusting for age, type of health insurance and presence of certain underlying medical conditions. Among complete pregnancies, 55 (2.1%) were pregnancy losses, 72 (2.8%) resulted in term low birthweight infants and 375 (14.4%) were preterm deliveries. Conclusions: Although pregnant women were infrequently reported with laboratory‐confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, pregnant symptomatic women with COVID‐19 were at increased risk for hospitalisation and death compared to nonpregnant symptomatic women. Almost all infections we reported on were third‐trimester infections; ongoing follow‐up is needed to determine pregnancy outcomes among women infected earlier in pregnancy. Healthcare providers should counsel pregnant women about preventive measures to protect from SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and when to seek care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Zika virus infection during pregnancy can cause serious birth defects, which include brain and eye abnormalities. The clinical importance of detection of Zika virus RNA in amniotic fluid is unknown.Objective: The purpose of this study was to describe patterns of Zika virus RNA testing of amniotic fluid relative to other clinical specimens and to examine the association between Zika virus detection in amniotic fluid and Zika-associated birth defects. Our null hypothesis was that Zika virus detection in amniotic fluid was not associated with Zika-associated birth defects.Study Design: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of women with amniotic fluid specimens submitted to Colombia's National Institute of Health as part of national Zika virus surveillance from January 2016 to January 2017. Specimens (maternal serum, amniotic fluid, cord blood, umbilical cord tissue, and placental tissue) were tested for the presence of Zika virus RNA with the use of a singleplex or multiplex real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction assay. Birth defect information was abstracted from maternal prenatal and infant birth records and reviewed by expert clinicians. Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare the frequency of Zika-associated birth defects (defined as brain abnormalities [with or without microcephaly, but excluding neural tube defects and their associated findings] or eye abnormalities) by frequency of detection of Zika virus RNA in amniotic fluid.Results: Our analysis included 128 women with amniotic fluid specimens. Seventy-five women (58%) had prenatally collected amniotic fluid; 42 women (33%) had amniotic fluid collected at delivery, and 11 women (9%) had missing collection dates. Ninety-one women had both amniotic fluid and other clinical specimens submitted for testing, which allowed for comparison across specimen types. Of those 91 women, 68 had evidence of Zika virus infection based on detection of Zika virus RNA in ≥1 specimen. Testing of amniotic fluid that was collected prenatally or at delivery identified 39 of these Zika virus infections (57%; 15 [22%] infections were identified only in amniotic fluid), and 29 infections (43%) were identified in other specimen types and not amniotic fluid. Among women who were included in the analysis, 89 had pregnancy outcome information available, which allowed for the assessment of the presence of Zika-associated birth defects. Zika-associated birth defects were significantly (P<.05) more common among pregnancies with Zika virus RNA detected in amniotic fluid specimens collected prenatally (19/32 specimens; 59%) than for those with no laboratory evidence of Zika virus infection in any specimen (6/23 specimens; 26%), but the proportion was similar in pregnancies with only Zika virus RNA detected in specimens other than amniotic fluid (10/23 specimens; 43%). Although Zika-associated birth defects were more common among women with any Zika virus RNA detected in amniotic fluid specimens (ie, collected prenatally or at delivery; 21/43 specimens; 49%) than those with no laboratory evidence of Zika virus infection (6/23 specimens; 26%), this comparison did not reach statistical significance (P=.07).Conclusion: Testing of amniotic fluid provided additional evidence for maternal diagnosis of Zika virus infection. Zika-associated birth defects were more common among women with Zika virus RNA that was detected in prenatal amniotic fluid specimens than women with no laboratory evidence of Zika virus infection, but similar to women with Zika virus RNA detected in other, nonamniotic fluid specimen types. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Zika en Embarazadas y Niños (ZEN) is a prospective cohort study designed to identify risk factors and modifiers for Zika virus (ZIKV) infection in pregnant women, partners, and infants, as well as to assess the risk for adverse maternal, fetal, infant, and childhood outcomes of ZIKV and other congenital infections. ZIKV infection during pregnancy may be associated with longterm sequelae. In the ZEN cohort, 1,519 pregnant women and 287 partners were enrolled from 3 departments within Colombia between February 2017 and January 2018, as well as 1,108 infants born to the pregnant women who were followed to 6 months. The data include baseline questionnaires at enrollment; repeated symptoms and study follow-up questionnaires; the results of lab tests to detect ZIKV and other congenital infections; medical record abstractions; infant physical, eye, and hearing exams; and developmental screening tests. Follow-up of 850 mother-child dyads occurred at 9 months, 12 months, and 18 months with developmental screenings, physical exams, and parent questionnaires. The data will be pooled with those from other prospective cohort studies for an individual participant data meta-analysis of ZIKV infection during pregnancy to characterize pregnancy outcomes and sequelae in children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]