Adjusting models to better predict obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASIS) in forceps-assisted vaginal deliveries: A retrospective cross-sectional trial.

OBJECTIVE: Obesity and maternal age are increasing among pregnant patients. The understood effect of body mass index (BMI), advanced maternal age (AMA), and second stage of labor on obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASIS) at delivery is varied. The objective of this study was to assess whether incorporating BMI, second stage of labor length, and AMA into a model for predicting OASIS among forceps-assisted vaginal deliveries (FAVD) had a higher predictivity value compared to models without these additions. METHOD: This was an IRB-approved retrospective cohort study of singleton gestations who underwent a FAVD between 2017 and 2021. The primary outcome was prediction of OASIS via established models versus models including the addition of new predictive factors. RESULTS: A total of 979 patients met inclusionary criteria and were included in the final analysis. 20.4% of patients had an OASIS laceration, 11.3% of neonates had NICU admissions, 23.7% had a composite all neonatal outcome, and 8% had a composite subgaleal/cephalohematoma outcome. Comparisons of known factors that predict OASIS (nulliparity, race, episiotomy status) to known factors with additional predictors (BMI, AMA, and length of second stage in labor) were explored. After comparing each model's AUC to one another (a total of 3 comparisons made), there was no statistically significant difference between the models (all P > 0.62). CONCLUSION: Including BMI, AMA, and second stage of labor length does not improve the predictivity of OASIS in patients with successful FAVD. These factors should not impact a provider's decision to perform a FAVD when solely considering increased odds of OASIS.

Pain perception during transabdominal chorionic villus sampling: a randomized trial comparing topical ethyl chloride anesthetic spray and lidocaine injection.

Background: Chorionic villus sampling is an important invasive procedure used for early antenatal genetic testing that can be associated with anxiety and fear of pain. Pain analgesia prior to chorionic villus sampling can be offered with subdermal lidocaine; however, lidocaine injection itself is associated with pain. Our objective was to determine whether administration of topical ethyl chloride anesthetic spray is associated with decreased pain perception during transabdominal chorionic villus sampling compared to 1% lidocaine subdermal injection.Study design: Women undergoing transabdominal chorionic villus sampling from 10 to 13 weeks and 6 days in an outpatient setting were randomized with equal allocation to either 1% lidocaine injection or topical ethyl chloride anesthetic spray prior to the procedure. Women were asked about their pain on a scale of 0-100 prior to, during, and after the procedure. The primary outcome was pain perception during time of transabdominal chorionic villus sampling as measured on a 100-mm visual analog scale. The secondary outcome was pain immediately after procedure.Results: From October 2016 to June 2017, a total of 120 women were enrolled (63 in the lidocaine injection group and 57 in the topical ethyl chloride anesthetic spray group). Baseline demographic characteristics were similar between groups. During the procedure, patients in the topical ethyl chloride arm demonstrated significantly higher pain scores compared to the lidocaine injection group (median score of 50 mm (interquartile range [IQR]: 40-65) versus 50 mm (IQR: 30-60); p = .03). There was no significant difference in pain scores before or after the procedure.Conclusion: During transabdominal chorionic villus sampling procedures, topical ethyl chloride anesthetic spray is associated with a higher distribution of pain scores as compared to 1% lidocaine subdermal injection, which suggests higher levels of pain.Clinical trial registration: This trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03140293). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03140293?term=NCT03140293&rank=1.

A Survey of Labor and Delivery Practices in New York City during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Recently, a novel coronavirus, precisely severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), that causes the disease novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been declared a worldwide pandemic. Over a million cases have been confirmed in the United States. As of May 5, 2020, New York State has had over 300,000 cases and 24,000 deaths with more than half of the cases and deaths occurring in New York City (NYC). Little is known, however, of how this virus impacts pregnancy. Given this lack of data and the risk for severe disease in this relatively immunocompromised population, further understanding of the obstetrical management of COVID-19, as well as hospital level preparation for its control, is crucial. Guidance has come from expert opinion, professional societies and public health agencies, but to date, there is no report on how obstetrical practices have adapted these recommendations to their local situations. We therefore developed an internet-based survey to elucidate the practices put into place to guide the care of obstetrical patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. We surveyed obstetrical leaders in four academic medical centers in NYC who were implementing and testing protocols at the height of the pandemic. We found that all sites made changes to their practices, and that there appeared to be agreement with screening and testing for COVID-19, as well as labor and delivery protocols, for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. We found less consensus with respect to inpatient antepartum fetal surveillance. We hope that this experience is useful to other centers as they formulate their plans to face this pandemic. KEY POINTS: · Practices changed to accommodate public health needs.. · Most practices are screened for novel COVID-19 on admission.. · Fetal testing in COVID-19 patients varied..

A randomized trial of Foley balloon induction of labor trial in nulliparas (FIAT-N).

BACKGROUND: With an increasing rate of induction of labor, it is important to choose induction methods that are safe and efficient in achieving a vaginal delivery. The optimal method for inducing nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix is not known. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine if induction of labor with simultaneous use of oxytocin and Foley balloon vs sequential use of Foley balloon followed by oxytocin decreases the time to delivery in nulliparous women. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a randomized controlled trial of nulliparous women presenting for induction at a single institution from December 2013 through March 2015. After decision for induction was made by their primary provider, women with gestational age ≥24 weeks with a nonanomalous, singleton fetus in vertex presentation with intact membranes were offered participation. Exclusion criteria included history of uterine surgery, unexplained vaginal bleeding, latex allergy, or contraindication to vaginal delivery. Participants were randomized to either simultaneous (oxytocin and Foley balloon) or sequential (oxytocin after expulsion of Foley balloon) induction group. The primary outcome was time from induction to delivery. Secondary outcomes included mode of delivery, estimated blood loss, postpartum hemorrhage, chorioamnionitis, and composite neonatal outcome. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were collected via chart review. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: A total of 166 patients were enrolled; 82 in the simultaneous and 84 in the sequential group. There were no differences in baseline characteristics in the 2 groups. Patients who received simultaneous oxytocin with insertion of a Foley balloon delivered significantly earlier (15.92 vs 18.87 hours, P = .004) than those in the sequential group. There was no difference in rate of cesarean delivery, estimated blood loss, postpartum hemorrhage, chorioamnionitis, or composite neonatal outcome. CONCLUSION: Simultaneous use of oxytocin and Foley balloon for induction of labor results in a significantly shorter interval to delivery in nulliparas.

Predictive value of combined serum biomarkers for adverse pregnancy outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if a combination of first and second trimester serum biomarkers (pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A), free ßhCG, and maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein (msAFP)) may be utilized to develop a predictive model for adverse pregnancy outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective analysis including all women who delivered at our institution between 2007 and 2010. We estimated the area under the ROC curve (AUC) to compare predictive abilities of PAPP-A, free ßhCG, and msAFP singularly, and in combination for adverse pregnancy outcomes. We sought to predict the risks of preeclampsia, preterm delivery (PTD, <37 weeks gestational age) and low birth weight (LBW, <2500g). Using logistic regression analysis, we created models that controlled for maternal age, race, parity, body mass index, and histories of chronic hypertension and tobacco use. RESULTS: The final sample included 2199 women. Determining the AUC and optimal cutoff probability values for each of the biomarkers, we found that for PTD and LBW, the combination of all three biomarkers was most predictive, while for preeclampsia the combination of msAFP and PAPP-A was most predictive. The AUC of the three biomarker combination to detect adverse pregnancy outcomes are as follows: LBW 67%, PTD 72%, and preeclampsia 77%. We created race-specific logistic regression models to predict the risk probabilities. To illustrate, the predictive probability for a 33-year-old African American, nullipara with a BMI of 50, chronic hypertension, tobacco use, PAPP-A 0.3, msAFP 2.0 and free ßhCG 0.98 MOMs are: PTD 59%, LBW 61% and Preeclampsia 91%. CONCLUSION: The combination of biomarkers currently utilized in Down syndrome screening may also be used to predict additional adverse pregnancy outcomes. Further studies are needed to determine optimal maternal and fetal surveillance, if and when increased risks are identified.