Search

Objective: the aim of this systematic review is to synthesize evidence regarding the use of oral gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist for the treatment of pain associated with endometriosis. Materials and methods: Web of Science, and MEDLINE databases were searched electronically in March 2022. Only randomized controlled trials involving patients with surgically confirmed endometriosis treated with different doses of oral nonpeptide GnRH antagonists therapy were included. A network meta-analysis using random effects was performed and treatments were ranked according to their P score. Results: five randomized trials were included in the analyses. Included studies were found to be at low risk of bias. Endometriosis-associated pain was reported in 3 studies with 1626 participants. All regimens of elagolix were significantly better than placebo for controlling endometriosis-associated pain at 3 months and higher doses of elagolix (200mg BID) scored higher (mean difference [MD] in pain scores: -1.22, 95% CI: -1.31 to -1.15) compared to lower doses of 150mg OD (MD:-0.53, 95% CI: -0.61 to -0.44) and 250mg OD (MD: -0.48, 95% CI: -0.62 to -0.33). Dyspareunia scores were reported by 4 studies with 1406 participants. All doses of linzagolix and elagolix were significantly better than placebo for reducing dyspareunia scores at 3 months while relugolix was not better than placebo. The highest reduction in dyspareunia scores was achieved with Linzagolix 200mg OD (MD: -0.40, 95% CI: -0.52 to -0.28), followed by Linzagolix 100mg OD, Elagolix 200mg BID, and Linzagolix 50mg OD, which all offered similar dyspareunia relief between 0.23 to 0.27 points. Dysmenorrhea pain scores were reported by 3 studies with 1621 participants. Best pain relief was achieved with Relugolix 40mg OD (MD: -1.70, 95% CI: -2.00 to -1.40) followed by Elagolix 200mg BID (MD: -1.22, 95% CI: -1.39 to -1.05) and Relugolix 20mg OD (MD: -1.20, 95% CI: -1.56 to -0.84). Finally, best relief for non-cyclic, NA

Introduction: despite a growing body of research on the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy, there is continued controversy given heterogeneity in the quality and design of published studies. Methods: we screened ongoing studies in our sequential, prospective meta-analysis. We pooled individual participant data to estimate the absolute and relative risk (RR) of adverse outcomes among pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared with confirmed negative pregnancies. We evaluated the risk of bias using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: we screened 137 studies and included 12 studies in 12 countries involving 13 136 pregnant women. Pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection-as compared with uninfected pregnant women-were at significantly increased risk of maternal mortality (10 studies; n=1490; RR 7.68, 95% CI 1.70 to 34.61); admission to intensive care unit (8 studies; n=6660; RR 3.81, 95% CI 2.03 to 7.17); receiving mechanical ventilation (7 studies; n=4887; RR 15.23, 95% CI 4.32 to 53.71); receiving any critical care (7 studies; n=4735; RR 5.48, 95% CI 2.57 to 11.72); and being diagnosed with pneumonia (6 studies; n=4573; RR 23.46, 95% CI 3.03 to 181.39) and thromboembolic disease (8 studies; n=5146; RR 5.50, 95% CI 1.12 to 27.12). Neonates born to women with SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to be admitted to a neonatal care unit after birth (7 studies; n=7637; RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.08); be born preterm (7 studies; n=6233; RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.29) or moderately preterm (7 studies; n=6071; RR 2.92, 95% CI 1.88 to 4.54); and to be born low birth weight (12 studies; n=11 930; RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.40). Infection was not linked to stillbirth. Studies were generally at low or moderate risk of bias. Conclusions: this analysis indicates that SARS-CoV-2 infection at any time during pregnancy increases the risk of maternal death, severe maternal morbidities and neonatal morbidity, but not stillbirth or intrauterine growth restriction, Funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation grant to ERS (INV- 022057).

Objective: ventriculomegaly can be associated with long-term neurodevelopmental impairment. Prenatal diagnosis of ventriculomegaly is most commonly made at the routine second-trimester anomaly scan. The value of first-trimester ultrasound has expanded to early diagnosis and screening of fetal abnormalities. The objective of this study was to assess the predictive accuracy of first-trimester choroid-plexus-to-lateral-ventricle-or-head ratios for development of ventriculomegaly at a later gestational age. Methods: this was a case–control study of fetuses with isolated ventriculomegaly diagnosed after 16 weeks' gestation and a control group of normal fetuses (without ventriculomegaly). The exclusion criteria included aneuploidy, genetic syndrome and/or other brain abnormality. Stored two-dimensional first-trimester ultrasound images were analyzed blindly offline and fetal biometry was performed in the axial view of the fetal head. The ratios of choroid plexus area (PA) to lateral ventricular area (VA), choroid plexus length (PL) to lateral ventricular length (VL), choroid plexus diameter (PD) to lateral ventricular diameter (VD) and PA to biparietal diameter (BPD) were measured at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks' gestation. Intra- and interobserver variability of measurement of these fetal head biometric parameters at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks' gestation were assessed in 20 normal fetuses using intraclass correlation coefficients with 95% CI. The accuracy of first-trimester biometric measurements for prediction of ventriculomegaly was assessed using the area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curves (AUC). Results: the analysis included 683 singleton pregnancies, of which 102 fetuses were diagnosed with ventriculomegaly. Ventriculomegaly was mild in 86 (84.3%) cases and severe in the other 16 (15.7%). All first-trimester fetal choroid-plexus-to-lateral-ventricle/head ratios were significantly lower in cases with ventriculomegaly compared with controls (P < 0.001), with g, NA

Background: concerns have been raised regarding a potential surge of COVID-19 in pregnancy, secondary to the rising numbers of COVID-19 in the community, easing of societal restrictions, and vaccine hesitancy. Although COVID-19 vaccination is now offered to all pregnant women in the United Kingdom; limited data exist on its uptake and safety. Objective: this study aimed to investigate the uptake and safety of COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women. Study design: this was a cohort study of pregnant women who gave birth at St George's University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom, between March 1, 2020, and July 4, 2021. The primary outcome was uptake of COVID-19 vaccination and its determinants. The secondary outcomes were perinatal safety outcomes. Data were collected on COVID-19 vaccination uptake, vaccination type, gestational age at vaccination, and maternal characteristics, including age, parity, ethnicity, index of multiple deprivation score, and comorbidities. Further data were collected on perinatal outcomes, including stillbirth (fetal death at ?24 weeks’ gestation), preterm birth, fetal and congenital abnormalities, and intrapartum complications. Pregnancy and neonatal outcomes of women who received the vaccine were compared with that of a matched cohort of women with balanced propensity scores. Effect magnitudes of vaccination on perinatal outcomes were reported as mean differences or odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Factors associated with antenatal vaccination were assessed with logistic regression analysis. Results: Data were available for 1328 pregnant women of whom 140 received at least 1 dose of the COVID-19 vaccine before giving birth and 1188 women who did not; 85.7% of those vaccinated received their vaccine in the third trimester of pregnancy and 14.3% in the second trimester of pregnancy. Of those vaccinated, 127 (90.7%) received a messenger RNA vaccine and 13 (9.3%) a viral vector vaccine. Th

Objective: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in pregnancy is associated with increased risk of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. Vaccines are highly effective at preventing severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but there are limited data on COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy. This study aimed to investigate the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women when administered according to the 12-week-interval dosing schedule recommended in the UK. Methods: this was a cohort study of pregnant women receiving COVID-19 vaccination between April and September 2021. The outcomes were immunogenicity and reactogenicity after COVID-19 vaccination. Pregnant women were recruited by phone, e-mail and/or text and were vaccinated according to vaccine availability at their local vaccination center. For immunogenicity assessment, blood samples were taken at specific timepoints after each dose to evaluate nucleocapsid protein (N) and spike protein (S) antibody titers. The comparator group comprised non-pregnant female healthcare workers in the same age group who were vaccinated as part of the national immunization program in a contemporaneous longitudinal cohort study. Longitudinal changes in serum antibody titers and association with pregnancy status were assessed using a two-step regression approach. Reactogenicity assessment in pregnant women was undertaken using an online questionnaire. The comparator group comprised non-pregnant women aged 18–49 years who had received two vaccine doses in primary care. The association of pregnancy status with reactogenicity was assessed using logistic regression analysis. Results: overall, 67 pregnant women, of whom 66 had received a mRNA vaccine, and 79 non-pregnant women, of whom 50 had received a mRNA vaccine, were included in the immunogenicity study. Most (61.2%) pregnant women received their first vaccine dose in the third trimester, while 3.0% received it in the firs, NA

A suggested explanation for the pituitary-suppressive effects of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation cycles (PPOS) is pituitary luteinizing hormone (LH) depletion with progestin exposure during the follicular phase. The GnRH agonist (GnRHa) trigger releases endogenous LH from the pituitary, and if the LH depletion theory is correct, the response to the agonist trigger would be dampened in PPOS cycles. In this study, we compared the performance of the GnRHa trigger after PPOS and GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation cycles. All women who underwent ovarian stimulation with the GnRH antagonist or flexible PPOS (fPPOS) and received a GnRH agonist trigger were eligible for inclusion. Outcomes included number of metaphase-II (MII) oocytes retrieved per cycle, rates of empty follicle syndrome, maturation, fertilization, blastulation, and cumulative clinical pregnancy per stimulation cycle. During the screening period, there were 166 antagonists and 58 fPPOS cycles triggered with a GnRH agonist. Groups were matched for potential confounders using propensity score matching. Progestin-downregulated cycles had 19% high mature oocyte yield (median: 14 vs. 19 MII oocytes, P = 0.03). Cumulative ongoing pregnancy or live birth rates were estimated after matching for transferred embryo count, and rates were similar between GnRH antagonist and fPPOS group (57.0% vs. 62.1%, P = 0.68). However, the number of remaining blastocysts was higher in the fPPOS group (median: 5.0 vs. 6.0, P < 0.001). LH levels were higher in fPPOS cycles compared to GnRH antagonist cycles up to the trigger day (P < 0.001). After the GnRHa trigger, fPPOS cycles were associated with a steeper LH surge compared with antagonist cycles (P = 0.02). Higher endogenous gonadotropin levels through the stimulation period and an LH surge of higher magnitude following a GnRHa trigger suggest a milder pituitary suppression by fPPOS, which needs to be confirmed in larger samples. It appears that progestins do not deplete pi, NA

Objective: there is little evidence related to the effects of the Omicron severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant on pregnancy outcomes, particularly in unvaccinated women. This study aimed to compare pregnancy outcomes of unvaccinated women infected with SARS-CoV-2 during the pre-Delta, Delta and Omicron waves. Methods: this was a retrospective cohort study conducted at two tertiary care facilities: Sancaktepe Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey, and St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. Included were women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) during pregnancy, between 1 April 2020 and 14 February 2022. The cohort was divided into three periods according to the date of their positive RT-PCR test: (i) pre-Delta (1 April 2020 to 8 June 2021 in Turkey, and 1 April 2020 to 31 July 2021 in the UK), (ii) Delta (9 June 2021 to 27 December 2021 in Turkey, and 1 August 2021 to 27 December 2021 in the UK) and (iii) Omicron (after 27 December 2021 in both Turkey and the UK). Baseline data collected included maternal age, parity, body mass index, gestational age at diagnosis and comorbidities. The primary outcome was the need for oxygen supplementation, classified as oxygen support via nasal cannula or breather mask, non-invasive mechanical ventilation with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or high-flow oxygen, mechanical ventilation with intubation, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Inferences were made after balancing of confounders, using an evolutionary search algorithm. Selected confounders were maternal age, body mass index and gestational age at diagnosis of infection. Results: during the study period, 1286 unvaccinated pregnant women with RT-PCR-proven SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified, comprising 870 cases during the pre-Delta period, 339 during the Delta wave and 77 during the Omicron wave. In the confound, NA

Objective: this sequential, prospective meta-analysis (sPMA) sought to identify risk factors among pregnant and postpartum women with COVID-19 for adverse outcomes related to disease severity, maternal morbidities, neonatal mortality and morbidity, adverse birth outcomes. Data sources: we prospectively invited study investigators to join the sPMA via professional research networks beginning in March 2020. Study eligibility criteria: eligible studies included those recruiting at least 25 consecutive cases of COVID-19 in pregnancy within a defined catchment area. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: we included individual patient data from 21 participating studies. Data quality was assessed, and harmonized variables for risk factors and outcomes were constructed. Duplicate cases were removed. Pooled estimates for the absolute and relative risk of adverse outcomes comparing those with and without each risk factor were generated using a two-stage meta-analysis. Results: we collected data from 33 countries and territories, including 21,977 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy or postpartum. We found that women with comorbidities (pre-existing diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease) versus those without were at higher risk for COVID-19 severity and pregnancy health outcomes (fetal death, preterm birth, low birthweight). Participants with COVID-19 and HIV were 1.74 times (95% CI: 1.12, 2.71) more likely to be admitted to the ICU. Pregnant women who were underweight before pregnancy were at higher risk of ICU admission (RR 5.53, 95% CI: 2.27, 13.44), ventilation (RR 9.36, 95% CI: 3.87, 22.63), and pregnancy-related death (RR 14.10, 95% CI: 2.83, 70.36). Pre-pregnancy obesity was also a risk factor for severe COVID-19 outcomes including ICU admission (RR 1.81, 95% CI: 1.26,2.60), ventilation (RR 2.05, 95% CI: 1.20,3.51), any critical care (RR 1.89, 95% CI: 1.28,2.77), and pneumonia (RR 1.66, 95% CI: 1.18,2.33). Anemic pregnant women with COVID-19 also had inc, C.W. declares a relationship with the following entities: Ferring Pharmaceuticals (COVID19 Investigational Grant) and National Health and Medical Research Council Fellowship (salary support). A.P. declares the following research grants: ”1) H2020-Grant - Consortium member of Innovative medicine initiative call 13 topic 9, ConcePTION; and 2) Efficacy and safety studies on Medicines EMA/2017/09/PE/11, Lot 4, WP 2 lead, Safety monitoring of COVID-19 vaccines in the EU - Reopening of competition no. 20 under a framework contract following procurement procedure EMA/2017/09/PE (Lot 3) (Euro 110’000.-), Federal Office of Public Health (207’000 CHF).” E.M. and C.L. declare a relationship with the National Institute for Health and Care Research (project grant for PAN-COVID study). D.M. declares a relationship with the following entities: Canadian Institutes of Health Research (payments to institution only), Public Health Agency of Canada (payments to institution only), and BC Women’s Health Foundation (payments to institution only). She is also a member of the COVID-19 Immunity Task Force sponsored by the Canadian government. T.D.M. declares a relationship with the following entities: Pfizer (site Principal Investigator for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnancy study—payment received by the institution; member of Medical Advisory Board for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnancy studyepayment received by the author), Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) (subcommittee Chair for the NICHD Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network Gestational Research Assessments of COVID- 19 [GRAVID] study), and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (board member). E.M.L. declares a relationship with the National Institutes of Health (paid institution) and is an employee of AbbVie, Inc, but was employed at the University of Washington at the time of the study. K.L.K. and S.H. declare a relationship with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) (S.H.: pa

NA

Despite a recent endorsement from official and professional bodies unequivocally recommending COVID-19 vaccination, vaccine hesitancy among pregnant people remains high. The accumulated evidence demonstrates that pregnant people are a special risk group for COVID-19, with an increased risk of intensive care unit admission, extracor-poreal membranous oxygenation requirement, preterm birth, and perinatal death. These risks are further increased with some variants of concern, and vaccination of pregnant people reduces the COVID-19-related increase in maternal or fetal morbidity. Data from more than 180,000 vaccinated persons show that immunization against COVID-19 with an mRNA vaccine is safe for pregnant people. Many observational studies comparing perinatal outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant people have had reassuring findings and did not demonstrate harmful effects on pregnancy or the newborn. Immunization with mRNA vaccines does not increase the risk of miscarriage, preterm delivery, low birthweight, maternal or neonatal intensive care unit admission, fetal death, fetal abnormality, or pulmonary embolism. Moreover, observational data corroborate the findings of randomized trials that mRNA vaccination is highly effective at preventing severe SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant people, emphasizing that the potential maternal and fetal benefits of vaccination greatly outweigh the potential risks of vaccination. Ensuring pregnant people have unrestricted access to COVID-19 vaccination should be a priority in every country worldwide., NA

While gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists have been the standard of pituitary suppression during ovarian stimulation for ART, progestin primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) has emerged as an alternative. Progestins can be started simultaneously with gonadotrophins (fixed PPOS) or later in the cycle depending on follicle growth (flexible PPOS). However, the flexible and fixed PPOS regimens have not been directly compared as of yet. This was a retrospective cohort study including women with diminished ovarian reserve who underwent oocyte cryopreservation. All women underwent ovarian stimulation with a fixed 300 IU daily dose of FSH. The primary outcome was the number of MII oocyte retrieved per cycle. Secondary outcome measures included the incidence of premature LH surge (>10ng/mL) and number of follicles larger than 14mm on the day of maturation trigger. During the screening period 2 out of 97 cycles were cancelled before oocyte retrieval, one in each group yielding an overall cancelation rate of 2%. Among women who had oocyte retrieval, 65 underwent flexible and 30 fixed PPOS. At baseline women on fixed and flexible PPOS had similar age (mean difference: -2.17 years, 95% CI: -4.46 to 0.11) and serum AMH levels (mean difference: 0.10 ng/mL, 95% CI: -0.24 to 0.47). Slight imbalances between the groups were rectified with propensity score matching using age and AMH levels. The incidence of premature LH surge (RR: 1.47, 95% CI: 0.51 - 5.27, p = 0.50), follicle count larger than 14mm on hCG day (RR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.93 - 1.42, p = 0.22), number of MII oocytes retrieved (RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.79 - 1.15, p = 0.61) were similar between flexible and fixed PPOS. The rate of no oocyte retrieval was same between the groups (0.0% both) but no formal estimation was possible. Flexible and fixed PPOS regimens had no appreciable differences regarding MII oocyte yield and the incidence of premature LH surges. Cycles without oocyte retrieval were rare in both groups and ultr, NA

Safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy is a particular concern affecting vaccination uptake by this vulnerable group. Here we evaluated evidence from 23 studies including 117,552 COVID-19 vaccinated pregnant people, almost exclusively with mRNA vaccines. We show that the effectiveness of mRNA vaccination against RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection 7 days after second dose was 89 center dot 5% (95% CI 69 center dot 0-96 center dot 4%, 18,828 vaccinated pregnant people, I-2 = 73 center dot 9%). The risk of stillbirth was significantly lower in the vaccinated cohort by 15% (pooled OR 0 center dot 85; 95% CI 0 center dot 73-0 center dot 99, 66,067 vaccinated vs. 424,624 unvaccinated, I-2 = 93 center dot 9%). There was no evidence of a higher risk of adverse outcomes including miscarriage, earlier gestation at birth, placental abruption, pulmonary embolism, postpartum haemorrhage, maternal death, intensive care unit admission, lower birthweight Z-score, or neonatal intensive care unit admission (p > 0.05 for all). COVID-19 mRNA vaccination in pregnancy appears to be safe and is associated with a reduction in stillbirth. Pregnant women have been disproportionately under-vaccinated against COVID-19, partly because they were excluded from initial trials. This systematic review and meta-analysis supports efficacy of vaccination in pregnancy, and finds no evidence of adverse maternal or perinatal outcomes., NA

Background: the COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on healthcare systems globally, with a worrying increase in adverse maternal and foetal outcomes. We aimed to assess the changes in maternity healthcare provision and healthcare-seeking by pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies of the effects of the pandemic on provision of, access to and attendance at maternity services (CRD42020211753). We searched MEDLINE and Embase in accordance with PRISMA guidelines from January 1st, 2020 to April 17th 2021 for controlled observational studies and research letters reporting primary data comparing maternity healthcare-seeking and healthcare delivery during compared to before the COVID-19 pandemic. Case reports and series, systematic literature reviews, and pre-print studies were excluded. Meta-analysis was performed on comparable outcomes that were reported in two or more studies. Data were combined using random-effects meta-analysis, using risk ratios (RR) or incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Findings: of 4743 citations identified, 56 were included in the systematic review, and 21 in the meta-analysis. We identified a significant decrease in the number of antenatal clinic visits (IRR 0614, 95% CI 0486–0776, P<00001, I2=54.6%) and unscheduled care visits (IRR 0741, 95% CI 0602–0911, P = 00046, I2=00%) per week, and an increase in virtual or remote antenatal care (IRR 4656 95% CI 7762–2794, P<00001, I2=90.6%) and hospitalisation of unscheduled attendees (RR 1214, 95% CI 1118–1319, P<00001, I2=00%). There was a decrease in the use of GA for category 1 Caesarean sections (CS) (RR 0529, 95% CI 0407–0690, P<00001, I2=00%). There was no significant change in intrapartum epidural use (P = 00896) or the use of GA for elective CS (P = 079) Interpretation: reduced maternity healthcare-seeking and healthcare provision during the COVID-19 pandemic has been global, and must be

Objective: to present a definition of recurrent implantation failure that accounts for the effects of female age and anticipated blastocyst euploidy rates on cumulative implantation rates. Design: mathematical modeling. Setting: not applicable. Patient(s): not applicable. Intervention(s): mathematical modeling of cumulative implantation probability on the basis of published blastocyst euploidy rates across categories of female age. Main Outcome Measure(s): the number of blastocysts required to achieve 95% cumulative implantation probability under the assumption of the absence of any other factor affecting implantation. Result(s): when the euploidy status of the transferred embryo is unknown (i.e., not subjected to preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies), our simulation shows that no age category reaches 95% cumulative probability of implantation of at least one embryo until after transfer of seven blastocysts. The number of blastocysts required to reach the same threshold is higher for older patients. For example, women older than 38 years require transfer of more than 10 untested blastocysts for the upper range of predictive probability to meet the threshold of 95%. On the other hand, if the implantation rate for a euploid blastocyst is assumed to be 55%, then 4 blastocysts are enough to reach a cumulative probability rate greater than 95%, regardless of age. Conclusion(s): the term ""recurrent implantation failure""should be a functional term guiding further management. We suggest that recurrent implantation failure should not be called until implantation failure becomes reasonably likely to be caused by factors other than embryo aneuploidy, the leading cause of implantation failure. We propose a new definition that factors in anticipated blastocyst euploidy rates across categories of female age, euploid blastocyst implantation rate, and a specified threshold of cumulative probability of implantation. / Objetivo: Presentar una definicion de fallo recurre

Aim: to evaluate the clinical factors associated with false-negative RT-PCR results and to report the outcome of a cohort of pregnant women with COVID-19. Methods: this cohort study was conducted in a tertiary referral pandemic hospital and included 56 pregnant women. A study including pregnant women with either a laboratory or clinical diagnosis for COVID-19 were included in the study. The primary outcome was clinical factors associated with false-negative RT-PCR results defined as a positive immunoglobulin M assessed by rapid testing in clinically diagnosed patients. Clinical outcomes of laboratory diagnosed patients were also reported. Results: in total, 56 women with either RT-PCR or clinical COVID-19 diagnosis were included in the study. Forty-three women either had RT-PCR positivity or IgM positivity. The clinical outcome of these pregnancies was as follows: mean maternal age 27.7, immunoglobulin M positive patients 76.7%, RT-PCR positive patients 55.8%, maternal comorbidities 11.5%, complications in patients below 20 weeks 34.8%, complications in patients above 20 weeks 65.1%, elevated CRP 83.7%, lymphopenia 30.2%, time from hospital admission to final follow-up days 37 and stillbirth 8.3%. The proportion of women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin M was 100% in the RT-PCR positive group and 56.5% in the clinical diagnosis group (P = .002). The symptom onset to RT-PCR testing interval longer than a week (risk ratio: 2.72, 95% CI: 1.14-5.40, P = .003) and presence of dyspnoea (risk ratio: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.14-0.89, P = .035) were associated with false-negative RT-PCR tests. The area under the curve of these parameters predicting false-negative RT-PCR was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.57-0.89). Conclusions: symptomatic women with a negative RT-PCR should not be dismissed as potential COVID-19 patients, especially in the presence of prolonged symptom onset-test interval and in women without dyspnoea.

Background: women with chronic hypertension face a 5- to 6-fold increased risk of developing preeclampsia compared with normotensive women. Angiogenic markers, especially soluble fms-like kinase 1 (sFlt-1) and placental growth factor (PlGF), were identified as clinically useful markers predicting the development of preeclampsia, but data on the prediction of superimposed preeclampsia are scarce. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the predictive value of the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio for delivery because of superimposed preeclampsia in women with chronic hypertension. Methods and results: this retrospective study included 142 women with chronic hypertension and suspected superimposed preeclampsia. Twenty-seven women (19.0%) delivered because of maternal indications only, 17 women (12.0%) because of fetal indications primarily, and 98 women (69.0%) for other reasons. Women who both delivered because of maternal indications and for fetal indications had a significantly higher sFlt-1/PlGF ratio (median 99.9 and 120.2 versus 7.3, respectively, P<0.001 for both) and lower PlGF levels (median 73.6 and 53.3 versus 320.0 pg/mL, respectively, P<0.001 for both) compared with women who delivered for other reasons. SFlt-1/PlGF ratio and PlGF were strong predictors for delivery because of superimposed preeclampsia, whether for maternal or fetal indications (P<0.05). Half of women with angiogenic imbalance (sFlt-1/PlGF ratio >= 85 or PlGF levels <100 pg/mL) delivered because of maternal or fetal indications within 1.6 weeks (95% CI, 1.0-2.4 weeks). Conclusions: angiogenic marker imbalance in women with suspected superimposed preeclampsia can predict delivery because of maternal and fetal indications related to superimposed preeclampsia and is associated with a significantly shorter time to delivery interval.

To evaluate the reproducibility of mid-trimester intracranial anatomy assessment. Women undergoing mid-trimester scan (between 18th to 25th gestational weeks) for fetal anatomy assessment were included in the study. Measurements of lateral ventricle (LV), cisterna magna (CM) and transverse cerebellar diameter (TCD) were obtained for reproducibility analyses. Inter-observer reproducibility analysis was made with correlation coefficients. A total of 162 women were included in the analysis while one woman was excluded from the study due to diagnosis of vermian agenesis. Correlation coefficient (CC) of cisterna magna measurements have shown weak to moderate interclass correlation (r=0.28, P=0.001). Measurements of lateral ventricle have shown moderate to strong interclass correlation (r=0.73, P<0.0001). Transverse cerebellar diameter measurements have shown the best interclass correlation (r=0.88, respectively P<0.0001). Mean difference between different observers were-0.4 mm (95% CI:-3.0 to 2.1 mm), 0.7mm (95% CI:-1.0 to 2.5 mm) and 0.53 mm (95% CI:-2.5 to 3.6 mm) for measurements of cerebellum, lateral ventricle and cisterna magna, respectively. When grouped according to BMI (Over 30 kg/m2 and lower than 25 kg/m2) and presentation (cephalic and breech), there were no differences between groups regarding the prevalence of an absolute difference gre ater than 1 mm between paired measurements by different observers. Measurements of TCD, LV and CM during mid-trimester scan have good interobserver reliability with the exception of CM measurements. Methods used for measuring these structures have shown good consistency between different BMI categories and different fetal presentations during ultrasound scans., NA

Objective: the use of twin-specific versus singleton charts in the assessment of twin pregnancies has been controversial. The aim of the study was to assess whether a diagnosis of small for gestational age (SGA) made using twin specific estimated fetal weight (EFW) and birthweight (BW) charts is more strongly associated with adverse neonatal outcomes compared to singleton charts in twin pregnancies. Methods: this was a cohort study of twin pregnancies delivered at St George's Hospital in London between January 2007 and May 2020. Twin pregnancies complicated by intrauterine demise of one or both twins; aneuploidy or major fetal abnormality, twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome or twin anemia polycythemia sequence (TAPS); and those delivered before 32 weeks' gestation, were excluded. SGA was defined as EFW or BW below the 10th centile. The main study outcome was composite neonatal morbidity, which was stratified to mild or severe for sensitivity analysis. Mixed-effects logistic regression analysis with random pregnancy level intercepts was used to test the association between different SGA classifications and adverse neonatal outcomes. Results: a total of 1329 twin pregnancies were identified, and 913 twin pregnancies (1826 infants) included in the analysis. Of these, 723 (79.2%) were dichorionic and 190 (20.8%) monochorionic. Using the singleton charts, 33.3% and 35.7% were classified as SGA by the singleton chart when using EFW and BW, respectively. The corresponding figures were 5.9% and 5.8% when using the twin specific charts. EFW SGA according to the twin charts, had a significant association with neonatal morbidity (OR 4.78, 95% CI 1.47-14.7, P=0.007), when compared to AGA twins. However, EFW below the 10th percentile according to singleton standards did not have a significant association with neonatal morbidity (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.63-2.88, P=0.424). SGA classification of EFW using twin specific standards significantly better model fit than using singleton standard, NA

NA