Search

Objective This study aimed to assess the association of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) with abnormal placentation among a cohort of pregnancies conceived after frozen embryo transfer (FET). Study Design This is a retrospective cohort study of women who conceived via FET at the University of California, San Francisco from 2012 to 2016 with resultant delivery at the same institution. The primary outcome was abnormal placentation, including placenta accreta, retained placenta, abruption, placenta previa, vasa previa, marginal or velamentous cord insertion, circumvallate placenta, circummarginate placenta, placenta membranacea, bipartite placenta, and placenta succenturiata. Diagnosis was confirmed by reviewing imaging, delivery, and pathology reports. Our secondary outcome was hypertensive disease of pregnancy. Results A total of 311 pregnancies were included in analysis; 158 (50.8%) underwent PGT. Baseline demographic characteristics were similar between groups except for age at conception and infertility diagnosis. Women with PGT were more likely to undergo single embryo transfer (82.3 vs. 64.1%, p Conclusion Among pregnancies conceived after FET, PGT is not associated with a statistically significant increased risk of abnormal placentation or hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Key Points

To evaluate the association of blood pressure category 20 weeks according to the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) criteria with adverse perinatal outcomes.A retrospective cohort study of singleton deliveries between 1/2014 and 10/2017 was undertaken. Blood pressure category assigned by 2017 ACC/AHA criteria applied to blood pressures prior to 20 weeks gestation: normal (systolic 120 and diastolic 80), elevated blood pressure (systolic 120-129 and diastolic 80 mmHg), stage 1 hypertension (systolic 130-139 and/or diastolic 80-89), stage 2 hypertension (prior diagnosis of chronic hypertension or systolic ≥ 140 or diastolic ≥ 90 mmHg).The primary outcome was preeclampsia. Secondary outcomes included preterm birth and postpartum readmission. Chi-square, ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests and multivariable Poisson regression were used for analysis.Of the 6,067 eligible pregnancies, 3,855 (63.5%) had normotensive blood pressure, 1,224 (20.2%) elevated blood pressure, 624 (10.3%) stage 1 hypertension, and 364 (6.0%) stage 2 hypertension. Compared to 4.6% prevalence of preeclampsia among normotensive pregnancies, higher categories were associated with higher preeclampsia prevalence: elevated blood pressure (10.7%, adjusted relative risk (aRR) 2.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.8-2.6), stage 1 hypertension (15.1%, aRR 2.7, 95% CI 2.2-3.4) and stage 2 hypertension (38.7%, aRR 6.2, 95% CI 5.1-7.4). Non-normal categories were also associated with a higher risk of preterm birth and postpartum readmission.Patients with elevated blood pressure and stage 1 and 2 hypertension at 20 weeks are at increased risk of adverse obstetric perinatal outcomes.

Informed by almost 400 randomized trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews, we propose an evidence-based, standardized cesarean delivery technique., In this Commentary, we explain the case for a standardized cesarean delivery surgical technique. There are three strong arguments for a standardized approach to cesarean delivery, the most common major abdominal surgery performed in the world. First, standardization within institutions improves safety, efficiency, and effectiveness in health care delivery. Second, surgical training among obstetrics and gynecology residents would become more consistent across hospitals and regions, and proficiency in performing cesarean delivery measurable. Finally, standardization would strengthen future trials of cesarean delivery technique by minimizing the potential for aspects of the surgery which are not being studied to bias results. Before 2013, more than 155 randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses or systematic reviews were published comparing various aspects of cesarean delivery surgical technique. Since 2013, an additional 216 similar studies have strengthened those recommendations and offered evidence to recommend additional cesarean delivery techniques. However, this amount of cesarean delivery technique data creates a forest for the trees problem, making it difficult for a clinician to synthesize this volume of data. In response to this difficulty, we propose a comprehensive, evidence-based and standardized approach to cesarean delivery technique.

Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) is a poorly understood disease of the late second or third trimester of pregnancy, typically associated with rapid resolution following delivery. It is characterized by pruritis, elevated serum bile acids, and abnormal liver function tests and has been linked to stillbirth, meconium passage, respiratory distress syndrome and fetal asphyxial events. The incidence is highly variable, dependent both on the ethnic makeup of the population as well as the diagnostic criteria being used. Management is challenging for clinicians, as laboratory abnormalities often lag behind clinical symptoms making diagnosis difficult. The American Congress of Gastroenterology, Government of Western Australia Department of Health, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine, European Association for the Study of the Liver, and South Australia Maternal and Neonatal Community of Practice have all released guidelines to address the risks, diagnosis and management of ICP. We performed a descriptive review of these guidelines along with a literature search to address conflicting recommendations and highlight new evidence. The variations in the guidelines reflect the heterogeneity of the literature and the challenges of diagnosing and managing ICP.

Objective The objective of this study was to examine laterality as a predictor of outcomes among fetuses with prenatally diagnosed congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH). Methods This is a retrospective cohort study of pregnancies with CDH evaluated at our center from 2008 to 2016 compared cases with right-sided CDH (RCDH) versus left-sided CDH (LCDH). The primary outcome was survival to discharge. Secondary outcomes included ultrasound predictors of poor prognosis (liver herniation, stomach herniation, lung area-to-head circumference ratio [LHR]), concurrent anomalies, hydrops, stillbirth, preterm birth, mode of delivery, small for gestational age, use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and length of stay. Terminations and stillbirths were excluded from analyses of neonatal outcomes. Results In this study, 157 (83%) LCDH and 32 (17%) RCDH cases were identified. Survival to discharge was similar (64 vs. 66.4%, p = 0.49) with regard to laterality. RCDH had higher rates of liver herniation (90.6 vs. 72%, p = 0.03), hydrops fetalis (15.6 vs. 1.3%, p Conclusion Compared with LCDH, fetuses with RCDH had higher rates of adverse ultrasound predictors, but equivalent survival.

To determine the loss rate after amniocentesis in twins.This cohort study evaluated twin pregnancies with serum screening through the California Prenatal Screening Program. The primary outcome was loss of one or both twins at any gestational age. Exclusions were chromosomal/structural abnormalities, selective fetal reduction, terminations, neonatal deaths, ovum donation, and incomplete data. Loss rates were compared between three groups: (a) screen negative and no amniocentesis, (b) screen positive and accepted, or (c) declined amniocentesis. Multivariate logistic analysis generated adjusted odds ratios (aOR).Thirty-six thousand eight hundred twenty-one twin pregnancies had screening: 2698 (7.3%) were screen positive for aneuploidy or neural tube defects (NTD). Among screen-positive women, 861 (31.9%) were offered amniocentesis and 274 (31.8%) accepted. The post-procedure loss rate among screen-negative women was lower than among screen-positive women (3.0% vs 7.4%; P.001; aOR 2.62; 95% CI, 1.16-2.99). Among screen-positive women, the loss rate was similar for those who underwent amniocentesis and for those who declined (8.8% vs 6.8%; .32; aOR 1.32; 95% CI, 0.66-1.91).Twins that are screen positive for aneuploidy or NTD have an increased risk of pregnancy loss. Those who are screen positive and undergo amniocentesis do not have an increased loss rate.

Key Points Question Are prenatal ultrasonographic findings in maternal Zika virus infection associated with adverse neonatal outcomes? Findings In this cohort study of 92 women with confirmed Zika virus infection in pregnancy, 37 had an abnormal result on prenatal ultrasonography that was associated with adverse composite neonatal outcomes. However, 23 of 55 neonates who had normal results on prenatal ultrasonography still had adverse neonatal outcomes. Meaning Abnormal results on prenatal ultrasonography are associated with adverse neonatal outcomes; however, a comprehensive neonatal evaluation is recommended for all infants with suspected in utero Zika exposure., Importance Congenital Zika virus infection causes a spectrum of adverse birth outcomes, including severe birth defects of the central nervous system. The association of prenatal ultrasonographic findings with adverse neonatal outcomes, beyond structural anomalies such as microcephaly, has not been described to date. Objective To determine whether prenatal ultrasonographic examination results are associated with abnormal neonatal outcomes in Zika virus–affected pregnancies. Design, Setting, and Participants A prospective cohort study conducted at a single regional referral center in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, from September 1, 2015, to May 31, 2016, among 92 pregnant women diagnosed during pregnancy with Zika virus infection by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction, who underwent subsequent prenatal ultrasonographic and neonatal evaluation. Exposures Prenatal ultrasonography. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome measure was composite adverse neonatal outcome (perinatal death, abnormal finding on neonatal examination, or abnormal finding on postnatal neuroimaging). Secondary outcomes include association of specific findings with neonatal outcomes. Results Of 92 mother-neonate dyads (mean [SD] maternal age, 29.4 [6.3] years), 55 (60%) had normal results and 37 (40%) had abnormal results on prenatal ultrasonographic examinations. The median gestational age at delivery was 38.6 weeks (interquartile range, 37.9-39.3). Of the 45 neonates with composite adverse outcome, 23 (51%) had normal results on prenatal ultrasonography. Eleven pregnant women (12%) had a Zika virus–associated finding that was associated with an abnormal result on neonatal examination (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 11.6; 95% CI, 1.8-72.8), abnormal result on postnatal neuroimaging (aOR, 6.7; 95% CI, 1.1-38.9), and composite adverse neonatal outcome (aOR, 27.2; 95% CI, 2.5-296.6). Abnormal results on middle cerebral artery Doppler ultrasonography were associated with neonatal examination abnormalities (aOR, 12.8; 95% CI, 2.6-63.2), postnatal neuroimaging abnormalities (aOR, 8.8; 95% CI, 1.7-45.9), and composite adverse neonatal outcome (aOR, 20.5; 95% CI, 3.2-132.6). There were 2 perinatal deaths. Abnormal findings on prenatal ultrasonography had a sensitivity of 48.9% (95% CI, 33.7%-64.2%) and a specificity of 68.1% (95% CI, 52.9%-80.1%) for association with composite adverse neonatal outcomes. For a Zika virus–associated abnormal result on prenatal ultrasonography, the sensitivity was lower (22.2%; 95% CI, 11.2%-37.1%) but the specificity was higher (97.9%; 95% CI, 88.7%-99.9%). Conclusions and Relevance Abnormal results on prenatal ultrasonography were associated with adverse outcomes in congenital Zika infection. The absence of abnormal findings on prenatal ultrasonography was not associated with a normal neonatal outcome. Comprehensive evaluation is recommended for all neonates with prenatal Zika virus exposure., This cohort study examines whether prenatal ultrasonographic results are associated with abnormal neonatal outcomes in Zika virus–affected pregnancies in Brazil.

Objective This article evaluates gender differences in academic rank and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding among academic maternal–fetal medicine (MFM) physicians. Study Design This was a cross-sectional study of board-certified academic MFM physicians. Physicians were identified in July 2017 from the MFM fellowship Web sites. Academic rank and receipt of any NIH funding were compared by gender. Data on potential confounders were collected, including years since board certification, region of practice, additional degrees, number of publications, and h-index. Results We identified 659 MFM physicians at 72 institutions, 312 (47.3%) male and 347 (52.7%) female. There were 246 (37.3%) full, 163 (24.7%) associate, and 250 (37.9%) assistant professors. Among the 154 (23.4%) MFM physicians with NIH funding, 89 (57.8%) were male and 65 (42.2%) were female (p = 0.003). Adjusting for potential confounders, male MFM physicians were twice as likely to hold a higher academic rank than female MFM physicians (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.04 [95% confidence interval, 1.39–2.94], p Conclusion Compared with female academic MFM physicians, male academic MFM physicians were twice as likely to hold a higher academic rank but were no more likely to receive NIH funding.

Objective Given that recent consensus guidelines established to decrease cesarean delivery (CD) rates use 6 cm to define the onset of the active phase of labor, our objective was to evaluate maternal and neonatal outcomes after CD for the indication of arrest of dilation at 4 to 5 cm compared with ≥ 6 cm. Study Design We performed a secondary analysis using data from the Maternal Fetal-Medicine Units Network Cesarean Registry. We included nulliparous women with term, singleton, vertex gestations who underwent primary CD for arrest of dilation. We compared those who reached a maximum cervical dilation of 4 to 5 cm with those of ≥6 cm. Our primary outcome was composite maternal morbidity that included chorioamnionitis, endometritis, transfusion, wound complication, operative injury, intensive care unit admission, or death. Results Of the 73,257 women in the dataset, 5,681 met the inclusion criteria. After adjusting for confounders, there was no difference in composite maternal (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94–1.52) or neonatal morbidity (aOR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.79–1.10) between the groups. Conclusion In this historical cohort, maternal and neonatal outcomes after CD for arrest of dilation ≥ 6 cm were comparable to those performed at 4 to 5 cm and support recent labor management guidelines.

Cesarean delivery (CD) is one of the most common major surgeries performed in the United States and worldwide. Surgical techniques evaluated in well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that demonstrate maternal benefit should be incorporated into practice. The objective of this review is to provide a summary of surgical techniques of the procedure and review the evidence basis for them for the nonobstetrician. The following techniques with the strongest evidence should be commonly performed, when feasible: (1) prophylactic antibiotics with a single dose of ampicillin or first-generation cephalosporin prior to skin incision; (2) postpartum hemorrhage prevention with oxytocin infusion of 10 to 40 IU in 1 L crystalloid over 4 to 8 hours; (3) low transverse skin incision; (4) blunt or sharp subcutaneous and fascial expansion; (5) blunt, cephalad–caudad uterine incision expansion; (6) spontaneous placental removal; (7) blunt-tip needle usage during closure; (8) subcutaneous suture closure (running or interrupted) if thickness is ≥2 cm; and (9) skin closure with suture. Although the number of RCTs designed to optimize maternal and neonatal outcomes of this common procedure is encouraging, further work is needed to minimize surgical morbidity. Optimal methods for postpartum hemorrhage prevention, adhesion prevention, and venous thromboembolism prophylaxis remain ongoing areas of active research, with outcomes that could markedly improve maternal morbidity and mortality. If evidence of a surgical technique appears preferred over another, clinicians should be comfortable adopting the evidence-based technique when performing and teaching CD.

Objective The objective of this study was to compare national guidelines on the prevention of RhD alloimmunization. Study Design We performed a review of four national guidelines on prevention of alloimmunization from the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, and The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. We compared the indications/contraindications, timing, dosing, formulation and route of anti-D immune globulin, and management of unique circumstances. The references were compared with regard to the number of randomized control trials, Cochrane Reviews, and systematic reviews/meta-analyses cited. Results Variation exists in recommendations on the timing and need for consent prior to routine antenatal anti-D immune globulin administration, prophylaxis for unique circumstances (e.g., threatened abortion Conclusion These variations in recommendations reflect the heterogeneity of the literature on the prevention of alloimmunization and highlight the need for synthesis of evidence to create an international guideline on prevention of alloimmunization. This may improve safety, quality, optimize outcomes, and stimulate future trials.

Objective To determine if there was a difference in glycemic control admissions or perinatal outcomes in women with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM) treated with multiple daily injections (MDIs) versus continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). Materials and Methods This was a retrospective cohort study of women with type 1 DM with a singleton gestation who delivered between 2006 and 2014 at a tertiary hospital and received care at a dedicated DM clinic. Women who used MDI were compared with those who used CSII. The primary outcome was glycemic control admission during pregnancy. Secondary outcomes included adverse perinatal outcomes. Results There were a total of 156 women; 107 treated with MDI and 49 with CSII. Women treated with MDI had higher rates of glycemic control admissions versus those treated with CSII (68.2 vs. 30.6%, p Conclusion Women with type 1 DM treated with MDI were more likely to have glycemic control admissions and postprandial hypoglycemia than those treated with CSII.

Objective To determine if there was an association between prenatal care adherence and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission or stillbirth, and adverse perinatal outcomes in women with preexisting diabetes mellitus (DM) and gestational DM (GDM). Materials and Methods This is a retrospective cohort study among women with DM and GDM at a Diabetes in Pregnancy Program at an academic institution between 2006 and 2014. Adherence with prenatal care was the percentage of prenatal appointments attended divided by those scheduled. Adherence was divided into quartiles, with the first quartile defined as lower adherence and compared with the other quartiles. Results There were 443 women with DM and 499 with GDM. Neonates of women with DM and lower adherence had higher rates of NICU admission or stillbirth (55 vs. 39%; p = 0.003). A multivariable logistic regression showed that the lower adherence group had higher likelihood of NICU admission (adjusted odds ratio: 1.61 [1.03–2.5]; p = 0.035). Those with lower adherence had worse glycemic monitoring and more hospitalizations. Among those with GDM, most outcomes were similar between groups including NICU admission or stillbirth. Conclusion Women with DM with lower adherence had higher rates of NICU admission and worse glycemic control. Most outcomes among women with GDM with lower adherence were similar.

Importance Preterm birth is a major contributor to perinatal morbidity and mortality. The most common intervention performed to improve perinatal outcomes for a woman experiencing cervical dilation in the second trimester without signs or symptoms of preterm labor is the cerclage. Objective We sought to review and compare available national guidelines on cerclage use. Evidence acquisition We performed a descriptive review of 3 national guidelines on cerclage: The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Practice Bulletin on "Cerclage for the Management of Cervical Insufficiency," Green-top Guideline from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists entitled "Cervical Cerclage," and the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada Clinical Practice Bulletin entitled "Cervical Insufficiency and Cervical Cerclage." Guidelines were compared, and the following aspects of cerclage use for prevention of preterm delivery were summarized: indications and contraindications, risk factors for cervical insufficiency, perioperative considerations, and timing of removal. Recommendations and strength of evidence were reviewed based on each guideline's method of reporting. The references were compared with regard to the total number of randomized control trials, Cochrane Reviews, and systematic reviews/meta-analyses cited. Results The variations highlighted in the guidelines reflect the heterogeneity of the literature contributing to guidelines and the challenges of diagnosing and managing cervical insufficiency. Conclusions A cohesive international guideline may improve safety and quality and optimize patient outcomes. Target audience Obstetricians and gynecologists, family physicians. Learning objectives After completing this activity, the learner should be better able to outline variations in indications and contraindications for cervical cerclage use by international guideline, identify variation in perioperative considerations for cervical cerclage use by international guideline, and recognize variation in timing of removal by international guideline.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine recently published consensus guidelines on periviable birth recommending that obstetric interventions (antenatal corticosteroids, tocolysis, magnesium sulfate, antibiotics for preterm premature rupture of membranes or group B streptococcus prophylaxis, and cesarean delivery for fetal indications) may be considered at 23 0/7 weeks of gestation and neonatal resuscitation at 22 0/7 weeks of gestation. Cervical cerclage significantly decreases preterm delivery and improves perinatal outcomes in women with a singleton pregnancy, prior spontaneous preterm birth, and transvaginal cervical length less than 25 mm before 24 0/7 weeks of gestation or in women who experience painless cervix dilation in the second trimester. Randomized trials assessing ultrasonogram-indicated and physical examination-indicated cerclage report a procedure-related complication rate of 0.3% and 0.9%, respectively. If previability is a requisite for receiving a cerclage, an increasing subset of women may not be afforded an intervention that has known benefit, because obstetric and neonatal interventions are likely to occur at earlier gestational ages. Given the low procedure-related complication rate demonstrated in randomized trials, appropriately selected women should continue to be offered the procedure up to 24 0/7 weeks of gestation. Based on current evidence, cerclage placed after 24 0/7 weeks of gestation cannot be recommended, and future inquiry in the form of a well-designed randomized trial after this gestational age should be considered. The goal of this commentary is to review the history of cerclage and discuss the indications, risks, benefits, and implications on future research of this procedure as it relates to gestational age during periviability.

In 1946, Dr Curtis Mendelson suggested that aspiration during general anesthesia for delivery was avoidable by restricting oral intake during labor. This suggestion proved influential, and restriction of oral intake in labor became the norm. These limitations may contribute to fear and feelings of intimidation among parturients. Modern obstetrics, especially in the setting of advances in obstetric anesthesia, does not mirror the clinical landscape of Mendelson; hence, one is left to question if his findings remain relevant or if they should inform current recommendations. The use of general anesthesia at time of cesarean delivery has seen a remarkable decline with increased use of effective neuraxial analgesia as the standard of care in modern obstetric anesthesia. While the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists now endorses clear liquids during labor, current recommendations continue to suggest that solid food intake should be avoided. Recent evidence from a systematic review involving 3130 women in active labor suggests that oral intake should not be restricted in women at low risk of complications, given there were no identified benefits or harms of a liberal diet. Aspiration and other adverse maternal outcomes may be unrelated to oral intake in labor and as such, qualitative measures such as patient satisfaction should be paramount. It is time to reassess the impact of oral intake restriction during labor given the minimal risk of aspiration during labor in the setting of modern obstetric anesthesia practices.

The decision on the part of obstetrics and gynecology residents to opt in or out of abortion training is, for many, a complex one. Although the public debate surrounding abortion can be filled with polarizing rhetoric, residents often discover that the boundaries between pro-choice and pro-life beliefs are not so neatly divided. We present narratives from four residents, training at a 32-resident program in the Northeast, who have a range of views surrounding abortion. Their stories reveal how some struggle with the real-life experience of providing abortions, while others feel angst over lacking the skills to terminate a life-threatening pregnancy. These residents have found that close relationships with coworkers from all sides of this issue, along with a residency program that encourages open conversation, have fostered understanding. Their narratives demonstrate that reasonable providers can disagree fundamentally and still work effectively with one another and that the close relationships formed in residency can allow both sides to see beyond the black and white of the public abortion debate. Our objectives in this commentary are to encourage a more nuanced discussion of abortion among obstetrician-gynecologists, to describe the aspects of our residency program that facilitate open dialogue and respect across diverse viewpoints, and to demonstrate that the clear distinction between being pro-life and pro-choice often breaks down when one is immediately responsible for the care of pregnant women.

Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy remain among the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality. The onset of headaches in patients with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy has been considered as a premonitory symptom for eclampsia and other adverse maternal outcomes. Headaches are very common symptoms during pregnancy and the postpartum period with a reported incidence of 39%; however, headache is absent in 30-50% of women before the onset of eclampsia and is a poor predictor of eclampsia and adverse maternal outcomes. If included in the definition of cerebral or visual disturbances, headache may be considered a symptom of preeclampsia, a diagnostic feature of preeclampsia with severe features, a premonitory symptom of eclampsia, and an indication for delivery. Inclusion of this nonspecific symptom in the diagnosis and management of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in the absence of an evidence basis may lead to unintended consequences including excessive testing, visits to outpatient offices or emergency departments, additional hospitalization, and iatrogenic preterm delivery without proven benefit. If a cerebral disturbance such as severe or persistent headache presents for the first time during pregnancy or postpartum, an evaluation should be performed that considers a broad differential diagnosis, including but not limited to hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and the diagnostic evaluation is similar to that in nonpregnant adults. This commentary draws attention to the implications of considering the cerebral disturbance of headache as a symptom that portends adverse pregnancy outcome in the current recommendations for diagnosing and managing hypertensive disorders of pregnancy.

Preeclampsia is a condition characterized by the new onset of hypertension after 20 weeks of gestation, with proteinuria, evidence of organ dysfunction, or both in a previously normotensive woman.1 Preeclampsia and eclampsia complicate up to 10% of pregnancies and remain a leading cause of maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality in the United States.2 The complications of preeclampsia in part shaped the development of prenatal care in the United States. The timing and frequency of visits were chosen to improve detection of preeclampsia through the measurement of blood pressure at routine prenatal visits.3 In this issue of JAMA, the USPSTF provides a recommendation statement on screening for preeclampsia.4 The current recommendation was based on an updated systematic evidence review by Henderson et al5 conducted on behalf of the task force that evaluated 5 key questions: How effectively does screening for preeclampsia reduce maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality? What is the effectiveness of risk assessment in early pregnancy for identifying women at high risk for preeclampsia? What are the harms of preeclampsia risk assessment? How effectively do screening tests (eg, blood pressure, proteinuria) identify women with preeclampsia? What are the harms of screening for preeclampsia and do they differ by risk status or screening protocol? Although these questions are all equally important, 3 issues are worthy of discussion: the effectiveness of routine blood pressure measurement for detection of preeclampsia, the evidence of various tests to detect proteinuria, and the value of models to predict preeclampsia before its onset.

Objective The purpose of this study was to compare 4 national guidelines for the prevention and management of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH). Study Design We performed a descriptive analysis of guidelines from the American College of Obstetrician and Gynecologists practice bulletin, the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, the Royal College of Obstetrician and Gynaecologists (RCOG), and the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada on PPH to determine differences, if any, with regard to definitions, risk factors, prevention, treatment, and resuscitation. Results PPH was defined differently in all 4 guidelines. Risk factors that were emphasized in the guidelines conferred a high risk of catastrophic bleeding (eg, previous cesarean delivery and placenta previa). All organizations, except the American College of Obstetrician and Gynecologists, recommended active management of the third stage of labor for primary prevention of PPH in all vaginal deliveries. Oxytocin was recommended universally as the medication of choice for PPH prevention in vaginal deliveries. The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and RCOG recommended development of a massive transfusion protocol to manage PPH resuscitation. Recommendations for nonsurgical treatment strategies such as uterine packing and balloon tamponade varied across all guidelines. All organizations recommended transfer to a tertiary care facility for suspicion of abnormal placentation. Specific indications for hysterectomy were not available in any guideline, with RCOG recommending hysterectomy "sooner rather than later" with the assistance of a second consultant. Conclusion Substantial variation exists in PPH prevention and management guidelines among 4 national organizations that highlights the need for better evidence and more consistent synthesis of the available evidence with regard to a leading cause of maternal death.