Search

Objective: To assess neonatal and 2-year outcomes for preterm twins born after planned vaginal delivery compared with planned cesarean delivery.Methods: Women with preterm cephalic first twins delivered after preterm labor or preterm prelabor rupture of membranes from 24 0/7 to 34 6/7 weeks of gestation, with both fetuses alive at the beginning of labor, were identified from the national prospective population-based Etude Epidémiologique sur les Petits Ages Gestationnels 2 cohort study. Planned vaginal delivery was defined as vaginal delivery or cesarean delivery performed during labor. Planned cesarean delivery was considered if performed during labor for the indication of preterm twins or before labor whatever the indication. A propensity score analysis was used to compare planned vaginal delivery and planned cesarean delivery. Outcomes analyzed separately for the first and second twins were survival at discharge, survival at discharge without severe morbidity, and survival at 2 years of corrected age without neurosensory impairment.Results: Among the 932 women with a twin pregnancy, 549 were excluded mainly as a result of the first twin in noncephalic presentation, cause of delivery other than preterm labor or preterm prelabor rupture of membranes, at least one twin died before labor, and gestational age at delivery less than 24 weeks of gestation. The planned vaginal delivery group included 276 women and the planned cesarean delivery group 107. For first and second twins, survival at discharge (97.7% vs 98.3% and 95.6% vs 97.1%, respectively), survival at discharge without severe morbidity (91.6% vs 88.8% and 90.3% vs 84.5%, respectively), and survival at 2 years of corrected age without neurosensory impairment (96.0% vs 95.4% and 92.9% vs 90.8%, respectively) did not differ significantly between the planned vaginal delivery and planned cesarean delivery groups. Propensity score analysis showed that planned cesarean delivery was not associated with improved outcomes with the caveat that the infrequency of death and disability limited the statistical power of the study to detect potentially clinically meaningful differences between planned modes of delivery.Conclusion: Planned cesarean delivery for women in preterm labor or with preterm prelabor rupture of membranes was not associated with improved neonatal outcomes or 2-year outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cerebral palsy (CP) remains the most significant neurological disorder associated with preterm birth. It disrupts quality of life and places huge cost burdens on society. Antenatal magnesium sulphate administration to females before 32 weeks' gestation has proven to be an effective intervention to reduce the rate of CP. In models of hypoxia, hypoxia-ischemia, inflammation, and excitotoxicity in various animal species, magnesium sulphate preconditioning decreased the resulting lesion sizes and inflammatory cytokine levels, prevented cell death, and improved long-term cognitive and motor behaviours. In humans, meta-analyses of five randomized controlled trials using magnesium sulphate as a neuroprotectant showed prevention of CP at 2 years. The benefit remained consistent regardless of gestational age, cause of preterm birth, and total dose received. Antenatal magnesium sulphate treatment is now recommended by the World Health Organization and by many obstetric societies. Its cost-effectiveness further justifies its widespread implementation. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: Neuroprotective effect of magnesium sulphate to reduce cerebral palsy in infants born preterm when administered to females at risk of imminent preterm birth. Neuroprotection regardless of gestational age, cause of preterm birth, and total dose. Antenatal magnesium sulphate treatment has good cost-effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) tests are increasingly being offered to women in the first trimester of pregnancies at a high risk of trisomy 21 to decrease the number of required invasive fetal karyotyping procedures and their associated miscarriages. The effect of this strategy has not been evaluated.Objective: To compare the rates of miscarriage following invasive procedures only in the case of positive cfDNA test results vs immediate invasive testing procedures (amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling) in women with pregnancies at high risk of trisomy 21 as identified by first-trimester combined screening.Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial conducted from April 8, 2014, to April 7, 2016, in 57 centers in France among 2111 women with pregnancies with a risk of trisomy 21 between 1 in 5 and 1 in 250 following combined first-trimester screening.Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive either cfDNA testing followed by invasive testing procedures only when cfDNA tests results were positive (n = 1034) or to receive immediate invasive testing procedures (n = 1017). The cfDNA testing was performed using an in-house validated method based on next-generation sequencing.Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was number of miscarriages before 24 weeks' gestation. Secondary outcomes included cfDNA testing detection rate for trisomy 21. The primary outcome underwent 1-sided testing; secondary outcomes underwent 2-sided testing.Results: Among 2051 women who were randomized and analyzed (mean age, 36.3 [SD, 5.0] years), 1997 (97.4%) completed the trial. The miscarriage rate was not significantly different between groups at 8 (0.8%) vs 8 (0.8%), for a risk difference of -0.03% (1-sided 95% CI, -0.68% to ∞; P = .47). The cfDNA detection rate for trisomy 21 was 100% (95% CI, 87.2%-100%).Conclusions and Relevance: Among women with pregnancies at high risk of trisomy 21, offering cfDNA screening, followed by invasive testing if cfDNA test results were positive, compared with invasive testing procedures alone, did not result in a significant reduction in miscarriage before 24 weeks. The study may have been underpowered to detect clinically important differences in miscarriage rates.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02127515. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]