Idiopathic Polyhydramnios: Severity and Perinatal Morbidity.

Objective To estimate the association between the severity of idiopathic polyhydramnios and adverse outcomes. Study Design Retrospective cohort study of deliveries at one hospital from 2000 to 2012 with an amniotic fluid index (AFI) measurement ≥24 + 0 weeks' gestation. Pregnancies complicated by diabetes, multiples, or fetal anomalies were excluded. Exposure was the degree of polyhydramnios: normal (AFI 5-24 cm), mild (≥ 24-30 cm), and moderate-severe (> 30 cm). Primary outcomes were perinatal mortality, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, and postpartum hemorrhage. Results There were 10,536 pregnancies: 10,188 with a normal AFI, 274 mild (78.74%), and 74 moderate-severe polyhydramnios (21.26%). Adverse outcomes were increased with idiopathic polyhydramnios: NICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 3.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.77-4.99), postpartum hemorrhage (AOR 15.81, 95% CI 7.82-31.96), macrosomia (AOR 3.41, 95% CI 2.61-4.47), low 5-minute Apgar score (AOR 2.60, 95% CI 1.57-4.30), and cesarean (AOR 2.16, 95% CI 1.74-2.69). There were increasing odds of macrosomia (mild: AOR 3.19, 95% CI 2.36-4.32; moderate-severe: AOR 4.44, 95% CI 2.53-7.79) and low 5-minute Apgar score (mild: AOR 2.24, 95% CI 1.23-4.08; moderate-severe: AOR 3.93, 95% CI 1.62-9.55) with increasing severity of polyhydramnios. Conclusion Idiopathic polyhydramnios is independently associated with increased risks of morbidity. There appears to be a dose-response relationship for neonatal macrosomia and low 5-minute Apgar score risks.

Machine Learning and Statistical Models to Predict Postpartum Hemorrhage.

OBJECTIVE: To predict a woman's risk of postpartum hemorrhage at labor admission using machine learning and statistical models. METHODS: Predictive models were constructed and compared using data from 10 of 12 sites in the U.S. Consortium for Safe Labor Study (2002-2008) that consistently reported estimated blood loss at delivery. The outcome was postpartum hemorrhage, defined as an estimated blood loss at least 1,000 mL. Fifty-five candidate risk factors routinely available on labor admission were considered. We used logistic regression with and without lasso regularization (lasso regression) as the two statistical models, and random forest and extreme gradient boosting as the two machine learning models to predict postpartum hemorrhage. Model performance was measured by C statistics (ie, concordance index), calibration, and decision curves. Models were constructed from the first phase (2002-2006) and externally validated (ie, temporally) in the second phase (2007-2008). Further validation was performed combining both temporal and site-specific validation. RESULTS: Of the 152,279 assessed births, 7,279 (4.8%, 95% CI 4.7-4.9) had postpartum hemorrhage. All models had good-to-excellent discrimination. The extreme gradient boosting model had the best discriminative ability to predict postpartum hemorrhage (C statistic: 0.93; 95% CI 0.92-0.93), followed by random forest (C statistic: 0.92; 95% CI 0.91-0.92). The lasso regression model (C statistic: 0.87; 95% CI 0.86-0.88) and logistic regression (C statistic: 0.87; 95% CI 0.86-0.87) had lower-but-good discriminative ability. The above results held with validation across both time and sites. Decision curve analysis demonstrated that, although all models provided superior net benefit when clinical decision thresholds were between 0% and 80% predicted risk, the extreme gradient boosting model provided the greatest net benefit. CONCLUSION: Postpartum hemorrhage on labor admission can be predicted with excellent discriminative ability using machine learning and statistical models. Further clinical application is needed, which may assist health care providers to be prepared and triage at-risk women.

Maternal-fetal surgery: where are we and how did we get here?

Using the criteria proposed in 1982 to justify consideration of in utero surgical treatment of fetal disorders, the development of maternal-fetal treatment is described, and an assessment of current status is provided. Significant issues remain, and many questions are unanswered. By using three different disorders, congenital diaphragmatic hernia, open spina bifida, and twin-to-twin transfusion, the complexity and sophistication of the field are explored, as well as the existing gaps in understanding.

Serum Uric Acid Measurement in Women With Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy.

A 27-year-old asymptomatic primigravid woman at 36 weeks of gestation is evaluated in the labor and delivery unit with new-onset hypertension of 145/92 mm Hg (with similar measurements 4 hours apart). A spot urine protein/creatinine ratio is 0.35, serum transaminases and creatinine level are normal, and uric acid is 6.0 mg/dL (upper limit of normal for adult woman is 6.0 mg/dL but typically 4-5 mg/dL in the third trimester). Antenatal fetal testing and growth on ultrasound scan are reassuring. She is discharged for home management and ultimately delivered at 37 weeks of gestation for preeclampsia without severe features.

Survival of infants with spina bifida and the role of maternal prepregnancy body mass index.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate first-year survival of infants born with spina bifida, and examine the association of maternal prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) with infant mortality. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of 1,533 liveborn infants with nonsyndromic spina bifida with estimated dates of delivery from 1998 to 2011 whose mothers were eligible for the National Birth Defects Prevention Study (NBDPS). NBDPS data were linked to death records to conduct survival analyses. Kaplan-Meier survival functions estimated mortality risk over the first year of life. Cox proportional hazards models estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for maternal prepregnancy BMI categorized as underweight (<18.5), normal (18.5-24.9), overweight (25-29.9), and obese (≥30). RESULTS: Infant mortality risk among infants with spina bifida was (4.4% [3.52, 5.60%]). Infants with multiple co-occurring defects, very preterm delivery, multiple gestation, high-level spina bifida lesions, or non-Hispanic Black mothers had an elevated risk of infant mortality. Maternal prepregnancy underweight and obesity were associated with higher infant mortality (15.7% [7.20, 32.30%] and 5.82% [3.60, 9.35%], respectively). Adjusted HR estimates showed underweight and obese mothers had greater hazard of infant mortality compared to normal weight mothers (HR: 4.5 [1.08, 16.72] and 2.6 [1.36, 8.02], respectively). CONCLUSION: The overall risk of infant mortality for infants born with spina bifida was lower than most previously reported estimates. Infants born with spina bifida to mothers who were underweight or obese prepregnancy were at higher risk of infant mortality. This study provides additional evidence of the importance of healthy maternal weight prior to pregnancy.

Bias in Obstetrician-Gynecologists' Workplaces.

Obstetrician-gynecologists (ob-gyns) face similar types of biases in the workplace as any people in society. In this first of three articles exploring this issue, we present the stories from ob-gyns who describe their experiences dealing with these biases. These stories serve to personalize the issue and to encourage us to personally face bias in the workplace to build our own resilience and strength, to support those who are personally attacked or diminished, and to develop workplace cultures that are inclusive, diverse, and strong.

Institutional Responses to Harassment and Discrimination in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Institutional harassment and discrimination are prevalent in the field of medicine and are detrimental to the well-being of individuals, teams, and the work environment. The familiar framework of an obstetric safety bundle is used here to propose 11 practical steps a health care team or institution may take to prepare for and respond to workplace harassment and discrimination in a systematic fashion.

Use of the STROBE Checklist to Evaluate the Reporting Quality of Observational Research in Obstetrics.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate observational research manuscripts submitted to Obstetrics & Gynecology to determine the level of adherence to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist and highlight specific areas that could be improved. METHODS: A scoring system based on the STROBE checklist was developed and validated for consistency by volunteer medical students or doctors. Using this scoring system, we performed a cross-sectional analysis on 198 observational research manuscripts submitted to Obstetrics & Gynecology from 2008 to 2016. Each manuscript was given a score based on the STROBE checklist. Comparisons were made among acceptance status, country of origin, and study type. Descriptive statistics (means, medians, and frequencies) were calculated for each manuscript category. The t test or Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare differences between two groups and analysis of variance or the Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare differences among three or more groups. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference between the mean score for accepted (23.2±2.7) compared with rejected (19.7±4.1) manuscripts (P<.001). This difference was not seen when comparing country of origin and study type. Poor reporting was seen among all manuscript categories for objectives, study size, missing data, study participants, and translation of risk. Additionally, rejected manuscripts had poor reporting for eligibility criteria, variables, bias and confounding, statistical methods, unadjusted and adjusted estimates, and category boundaries. CONCLUSION: Overall, accepted manuscripts show better adherence to the STROBE checklist, but there are several critical items that are poorly reported in all manuscripts.

Subspecialty Influence on Scientific Peer Review for an Obstetrics and Gynecology Journal With a High Impact Factor.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether quality of peer review and reviewer recommendation differ based on reviewer subspecialty in obstetrics and gynecology and to determine the role of experience on reviewer recommendation. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of reviews submitted to Obstetrics & Gynecology between January 2010 and December 2014. Subspecialties were determined based on classification terms selected by each reviewer and included all major obstetrics and gynecology subspecialties, general obstetrics and gynecology, and nonobstetrics and gynecology categories. Review quality (graded on a 5-point Likert scale by the journal's editors) and reviewer recommendation of "reject" were compared across subspecialties using χ, analysis of variance, and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 20,027 reviews from 1,889 individual reviewers. Reviewers with family planning subspecialty provided higher-quality peer reviews compared with reviewers with gynecology only, reproductive endocrinology and infertility, gynecologic oncology, and general obstetrics and gynecology specialties (3.61±0.75 compared with 3.44±0.78, 3.42±0.72, 3.35±0.75, and 3.32±0.81, respectively, P<.05). Reviewers with gynecology-only subspecialty recommended rejection more often compared with reviewers with a nonobstetrics and gynecology subspecialty (57.7% compared with 38.7%, P<.05). Editorial Board members recommended rejection more often than new reviewers (68.0% compared with 41.5%, P<.05). Increased adjusted odds of manuscript rejection recommendation were associated with reproductive endocrinology, female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery, and gynecology-only reviewer subspecialty (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.23 [1.07-1.41], 1.21 [1.05-1.39], and 1.11 [1.02-1.20]). Manuscript rejection recommendation rate was also increased for reviewers who had completed the highest quintile of peer reviews (greater than 195) compared with the lowest quintile (one to seven) (adjusted OR 2.85 [2.60-3.12]). CONCLUSION: Peer review quality differs based on obstetrics and gynecology subspecialty. Obstetrics and gynecology subspecialty and reviewer experience have implications for manuscript rejection recommendation. Reviewer assignment is pivotal to maintaining a rigorous manuscript selection process.

The National Institutes of Health Workshop on Fetal Treatment: needs assessment and future directions.

The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and Office of Rare Diseases convened a multidisciplinary group of experts on August 16-17, 2004, for a workshop entitled ''Fetal Treatment: Needs Assessment and Future Directions.'' The purpose of the workshop was to develop a plan for the surgical, obstetric, neonatal, and maternal-fetal fields for the evaluation and dissemination of maternal-fetal surgical innovations and to further the scientific evaluation of maternal-fetal surgery. This article highlights the discussions and outlines recommendations for the future. An overarching recommendation was for the formation of a cooperative group of investigators and clinicians to help set a national agenda for research and clinical progress, as well as emphasize ethical issues.

Evidence-based medicine and fetal treatment: how to get involved.

The Management of Myelomeningocele Study is a multicenter randomized controlled trial of in utero compared with postnatal repair of isolated spina bifida. Referral of potential patients to the Management of Myelomeningocele Study trial will provide the pregnant woman with substantial information about the fetal condition as well as the trial. The referral rate has been very slow. Possible reasons for this are physicians' and the public's belief that in utero surgery has already been proven to be better than postnatal repair or conversely to offer no benefit over standard therapy; that the trial does not address fundamental issues of maternal and fetal outcomes and safety; and that trial is not well designed. These beliefs are ill-founded. The practicing obstetrician has a fundamental role to inform potential patients about this and other research trials.