National Partnership for Maternal Safety: Consensus Bundle on Support After a Severe Maternal Event.

Supporting women, families, and clinicians with information, emotional support, and health care resources should be part of an institutional response after a severe maternal event. A multidisciplinary approach is needed for an effective response during and after the event. As a member of the maternity care team, the nurse's role includes coordination, documentation, and ensuring patient safety in emergency situations. The National Partnership for Maternal Safety, under the guidance of the Council on Patient Safety in Women's Health Care, has developed interprofessional work groups to develop safety bundles on diverse topics. This article provides the rationale and supporting evidence for the support after a severe maternal event bundle, which includes structure- and evidence-based resources for women, families, and maternity care providers. The bundle is organized into four domains: Readiness, Recognition, Response, and Reporting and Systems Learning, and it may be adapted by nurses and multidisciplinary leaders in birthing facilities for implementation as a standardized approach to providing support for everyone involved in a severe maternal event.

Amniotic fluid embolism syndrome: analysis of the Unites States International Registry.

BACKGROUND: Incidence, risk factors, and perinatal morbidity and mortality rates related to amniotic fluid embolism remain a challenge to evaluate, given the presence of differing international diagnostic criteria, the lack of a gold standard diagnostic test, and a significant overlap with other causes of obstetric morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were (1) to analyze the clinical features and outcomes of women using the largest United States-based contemporary international amniotic fluid embolism registry, and (2) to investigate differences in demographic and obstetric variables, clinical presentation, and outcomes between women with typical versus atypical amniotic fluid embolism, using previously published and validated criteria for the research reporting of amniotic fluid embolism. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The AFE Registry is an international database established at Baylor College of Medicine (Houston, TX) in partnership with the Amniotic Fluid Embolism Foundation (Vista, CA) and the Perinatology Research Branch of the Division of Intramural Research of the NICHD/NIH/DHHS (Detroit, MI). Charts submitted to the registry between August 2013 and September 2017 were reviewed, and cases were categorized into typical, atypical, non-amniotic fluid embolism, and indeterminate, using the previously published and validated criteria for the research reporting of AFE. Demographic and clinical variables, as well as outcomes for patients with typical and atypical AFE, were recorded and compared. Student t tests, χ2 tests, and analysis of variance tables were used to compare the groups, as appropriate, using SAS/STAT software, version 9.4. RESULTS: A total of 129 charts were available for review. Of these, 46% (59/129) represented typical amniotic fluid embolism and 12% (15/129) atypical amniotic fluid embolism, 21% (27/129) were non-amniotic fluid embolism cases with a clear alternative diagnosis, and 22% (28/129) had an uncertain diagnosis. Of the 27 women misclassified as an amniotic fluid embolism with an alternative diagnosis, the most common actual diagnosis was hypovolemic shock secondary to postpartum hemorrhage. Ten percent (6/59) of the women with typical amniotic fluid embolism had a pregnancy complicated by placenta previa, and 8% (5/61) had undergone in vitro fertilization to achieve pregnancy. In all, 66% (49/74) of the women with amniotic fluid embolism reported a history of atopy or latex, medication, or food allergy, compared to 34% of the obstetric population delivered at our hospital over the study period (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Our data represent a series of women with amniotic fluid embolism whose diagnosis has been validated by detailed chart review, using recently published and validated criteria for research reporting of amniotic fluid embolism. Although no definitive risk factors were identified, a high rate of placenta previa, reported allergy, and conceptions achieved through in vitro fertilization was observed.

Amniotic fluid embolism: principles of early clinical management.

Amniotic fluid embolism is an uncommon, but potentially lethal, complication of pregnancy. Because amniotic fluid embolism usually is seen with cardiac arrest, the initial immediate response should be to provide high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation. We describe key features of initial treatment of patients with amniotic fluid embolism. Where available, we recommend performing transthoracic or transesophageal echocardiography as soon as possible because this is an easy and reliable method of identifying a failing right ventricle. If such failure is identified, treatment that is tailored at improving right ventricular performance should be initiated with the use of inotropic agents and pulmonary vasodilators. Blood pressure support with vasopressors is preferred over fluid infusion in the setting of severe right ventricular compromise. Amniotic fluid embolism-related coagulopathy should be managed with hemostatic resuscitation with the use of a 1:1:1 ratio of packed red cells, fresh frozen plasma, and platelets (with cryoprecipitate as needed to maintain a serum fibrinogen of >150-200 mg/dL). In cases that require prolonged cardiopulmonary resuscitation or, after arrest, severe ventricular dysfunction refractory to medical management, consideration for venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation should be given.

Reproductive decisions after the diagnosis of amniotic fluid embolism.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the subsequent reproductive outcomes in women who either correctly or incorrectly were diagnosed with amniotic fluid embolism (AFE). STUDY DESIGN: Medical records were obtained, abstracted and reviewed by authors with extensive experience in critical care obstetrics. Telephone interviews of all survivors were conducted to determine obstetrical and contraceptive history. A subgroup underwent further telephone interview to address subsequent reproductive decisions. RESULTS: By November 2015, 116 medical records of patients diagnosed with AFE were reviewed. Patients who had undergone hysterectomy (n=26), died (n=9), or developed Sheehan's syndrome (n=1) at the time of the original event were excluded from the present analysis. Of the remaining 80 women, 30% (24/80) had subsequently conceived and 32.5% (26/80) patients or their partners had undergone permanent sterilization. At the time of this report, 66% (21/32) of registry participants were categorized to have had AFE and 34% (11/32) as not likely AFE or indeterminate. CONCLUSIONS: The syndrome of AFE is over-diagnosed. Women diagnosed with AFE who survive conceive another pregnancy less frequently than US women over similar time intervals and often choose a permanent sterilization method, whether or not they actually had AFE, largely out of fear of AFE recurrence.