Antimicrobial Dressing versus Standard Dressing in Obese Women Undergoing Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a novel antimicrobial dressing on patient satisfaction and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) following a cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: This was an open-label, single-center, two-arm randomized controlled trial. This study was done at the tertiary center, maternal unit, Galveston, TX. Pregnant women with body mass indices ≥35 kg/m2 were screened for eligibility. Women were randomized to ReliaTect Post-Op Dressing (RELIATECT) or standard wound dressing (STANDARD). Primary outcome was patient satisfaction and HRQoL using validated questionnaires. Secondary outcomes were provider satisfaction, surgical site infection (SSI) rates, and wound complications. RESULTS: In total, 160 women were randomized. Population characteristics were not significant among groups. RELIATECT dressing group had an overall higher score of satisfaction and HRQoL compared with STANDARD group. Women in the RELIATECT group reported less incision odor and incisional pain. Compared with the STANDARD group, most women in RELIATECT dressing group reported better daily activities, self-esteem, personal hygiene, body image, and sleep. Providers reported that the RELIATECT dressing allowed better assessment of the surgical incision site, allowed patients to shower early, and did observe less wound dressing leakage. No differences were found in other secondary end points. CONCLUSION: Postcesarean RELIATECT dressing for wound care in pregnant women with obesity had better patient and provider satisfaction as well as better HRQoL scores. Further, level 1 evidence is needed to assess its impact on SSI rates and wound complication, as this trial was not powered to accomplish this goal. KEY POINTS: · This study was conducted to evaluate RELIATECT on patient satisfaction and HRQoL following a cesarean.. · Post-cesarean RELIATECT dressing for wound care had better HRQoL and patient and provider satisfaction scores.. · This is the first randomized controlled trial evaluating RELIATECT dressing in obese pregnant women undergoing cesarean section..

The Quantose Insulin Resistance Test for Maternal Insulin Resistance: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: Insulin resistance (IR) increases during pregnancy which can lead to hyperinsulinemia, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), and neonatal hypoglycemia (NH), especially in obese women. Glucose tolerance testing (GTT) is used clinically to evaluate IR in pregnancy. Quantose IR score index is a novel blood screen of IR validated in nonpregnant individuals. The score is generated using an algorithm that combines insulin and three biomarkers of fatty acid pathways (α-hydroxybutyrate, oleic acid, linoleoyl-glycerophospocholine). Our objective was to determine the validity of Quantose IR test (Metabolan Inc. Morrisville, NC) in assessing IR in pregnant obese women, as compared with the homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), and its ability to predict GDM and NH. STUDY DESIGN: Women between 100/7 and 136/7 weeks of gestation with a pre-pregnancy or early pregnancy body mass index more than 30 kg/m2, and no pregestational diabetes, were included. Fasting blood samples were collected at 100/7 to 136/7 (T1) and 240/7 to 280/7 (T2) weeks. Quantose IR and HOMA-IR were calculated. All women underwent an early (T1; indicated for women with obesity) and a T2 glucose tolerance tests. GDM was diagnosed using the two-step approach, and NH was defined as a neonatal glucose less than 40 mg/dL in the first 24 hours of life. Linear regression and receiver operating characteristic curves were used for analysis. RESULTS: The trial enrolled 100 patients. Ten subjects (10%) were diagnosed with GDM in the second trimester and none in the first trimester. At T1, Quantose IR (R2 = 0.48), but not 1-hour glucose tolerance test (R2 = 0.07), correlated with HOMA-IR. Similar correlations were observed at T2. The 1-hour glucose tolerance test followed by HOMA-IR and Quantose IR (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.82, 0.68, and 0.62, respectively) were predictors of GDM. Quantose IR (AUC: 0.74) and 1-hour glucose tolerance test (AUC: 0.72) at T1 and T2 (AUC: 0.75; AUC: 0.93; respectively) were best predictors of NH. The best cut offs, sensitivities, and specificities for prediction of NH were determined. CONCLUSION: Similar to nonpregnant individuals, Quantose IR appears to be a valid measure of IR in obese pregnant women. First trimester Quantose IR is a predictor of GDM diagnosed in the second trimester and NH. Given that it requires a single blood draw and no glucose challenge, it may be a useful test to evaluate and monitor IR in pregnancy. Our findings may be used as pilot data to explore the potential use of Quantose IR in pregnancy further. KEY POINTS: · Traditional testing methods for insulin resistance in pregnancy are often performed late, are time consuming, and unpleasant to patients.. · The first trimester one-step Quantose IR test reflects insulin resistance in pregnancy and predicts GDM and neonatal hypoglycemia.. · This is the first known prospective clinical study validating Quantose IR score index in an obstetrical population at risk for developing GDM..

Class III Obese Women's Preferences and Concerns for Cesarean Skin Incision: A Multicenter Survey.

Objective This study aims to assess class III obese women's preferences and concerns regarding cesarean delivery (CD) skin incisions. Study Design Through the National Perinatal Research Consortium (NPRC), women with body mass index ≥ 40 kg/m2 at the time of enrollment completed an anonymous survey in English or Spanish. We evaluated seven domains of preferences and concerns about the cesarean skin incision. Results We surveyed 546 women at five NPRC sites. Median age (interquartile range) was 29 (25, 35) years; 364 (66%) were parous and 161 (30%) had a prior CD. Women self-identified race/ethnicity as White (31%), non-Hispanic Black (31%), Hispanic (31%), other (6%), and not reported (1%). A total of 542 women (99%) rated both delivering the baby in the best possible condition and decreasing incision opening/infection risk as important. Women were less likely to rate other domains as important (all p < 0.001), including: having least pain possible, n = 521 (95%); decreasing the risk of complications in the next pregnancy, n = 490 (90%); decreasing interference with breastfeeding, n = 474 (87%); decreasing operative time, n = 388 (71%); and having the least visible incision, n = 369 (68%). Conclusion Women with class III obesity prioritize immediate maternal and fetal safety regarding CD skin incision over other concerns including cosmetic outcome.