Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
1.
Obstet Gynecol ; 144(1): 126-134, 2024 Jul 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38949541

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate maternal and neonatal outcomes by type of antihypertensive used in participants of the CHAP (Chronic Hypertension in Pregnancy) trial. METHODS: We conducted a planned secondary analysis of CHAP, an open-label, multicenter, randomized trial of antihypertensive treatment compared with standard care (no treatment unless severe hypertension developed) in pregnant patients with mild chronic hypertension (blood pressure 140-159/90-104 mm Hg before 20 weeks of gestation) and singleton pregnancies. We performed three comparisons based on medications prescribed at enrollment: labetalol compared with standard care, nifedipine compared with standard care, and labetalol compared with nifedipine. Although active compared with standard care groups were randomized, medication assignment within the active treatment group was not random but based on clinician or patient preference. The primary outcome was the occurrence of superimposed preeclampsia with severe features, preterm birth before 35 weeks of gestation, placental abruption, or fetal or neonatal death. The key secondary outcome was small for gestational age (SGA) neonates. We also compared medication adverse effects between groups. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs were estimated with log binomial regression to adjust for confounding. RESULTS: Of 2,292 participants analyzed, 720 (31.4%) received labetalol, 417 (18.2%) received nifedipine, and 1,155 (50.4%) received no treatment. The mean gestational age at enrollment was 10.5±3.7 weeks; nearly half of participants (47.5%) identified as non-Hispanic Black; and 44.5% used aspirin. The primary outcome occurred in 217 (30.1%), 130 (31.2%), and 427 (37.0%) in the labetalol, nifedipine, and standard care groups, respectively. Risk of the primary outcome was lower among those receiving treatment (labetalol use vs standard adjusted RR 0.82, 95% CI, 0.72-0.94; nifedipine use vs standard adjusted RR 0.84, 95% CI, 0.71-0.99), but there was no significant difference in risk when labetalol was compared with nifedipine (adjusted RR 0.98, 95% CI, 0.82-1.18). There were no significant differences in SGA or serious adverse events between participants receiving labetalol and those receiving nifedipine. CONCLUSION: No significant differences in predetermined maternal or neonatal outcomes were detected on the basis of the use of labetalol or nifedipine for treatment of chronic hypertension in pregnancy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02299414.


Asunto(s)
Antihipertensivos , Hipertensión , Labetalol , Nifedipino , Resultado del Embarazo , Humanos , Embarazo , Femenino , Labetalol/administración & dosificación , Labetalol/efectos adversos , Labetalol/uso terapéutico , Nifedipino/administración & dosificación , Nifedipino/efectos adversos , Nifedipino/uso terapéutico , Antihipertensivos/administración & dosificación , Antihipertensivos/efectos adversos , Antihipertensivos/uso terapéutico , Adulto , Hipertensión/tratamiento farmacológico , Recién Nacido , Complicaciones Cardiovasculares del Embarazo/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipertensión Inducida en el Embarazo/tratamiento farmacológico , Administración Oral , Recién Nacido Pequeño para la Edad Gestacional , Preeclampsia/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad Crónica
2.
Obstet Gynecol ; 144(1): 101-108, 2024 Jul 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38781591

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the association between mean arterial pressure during pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in participants with chronic hypertension using data from the CHAP (Chronic Hypertension and Pregnancy) trial. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the CHAP trial, an open-label, multicenter randomized trial of antihypertensive treatment in pregnancy, was conducted. The CHAP trial enrolled participants with mild chronic hypertension (blood pressure [BP] 140-159/90-104 mm Hg) and singleton pregnancies less than 23 weeks of gestation, randomizing them to active treatment (maintained on antihypertensive therapy with a goal BP below 140/90 mm Hg) or standard treatment (control; antihypertensives withheld unless BP reached 160 mm Hg systolic BP or higher or 105 mm Hg diastolic BP or higher). We used logistic regression to measure the strength of association between mean arterial pressure (average and highest across study visits) and to select neonatal outcomes. Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (per 1-unit increase in millimeters of mercury) of the primary neonatal composite outcome (bronchopulmonary dysplasia, retinopathy of prematurity, necrotizing enterocolitis, or intraventricular hemorrhage grade 3 or 4) and individual secondary outcomes (neonatal intensive care unit admission [NICU], low birth weight [LBW] below 2,500 g, and small for gestational age [SGA]) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 2,284 participants were included: 1,155 active and 1,129 control. Adjusted models controlling for randomization group demonstrated that increasing average mean arterial pressure per millimeter of mercury was associated with an increase in each neonatal outcome examined except NEC, specifically neonatal composite (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.12, 95% CI, 1.09-1.16), NICU admission (aOR 1.07, 95% CI, 1.06-1.08), LBW (aOR 1.12, 95% CI, 1.11-1.14), SGA below the fifth percentile (aOR 1.03, 95% CI, 1.01-1.06), and SGA below the 10th percentile (aOR 1.02, 95% CI, 1.01-1.04). Models using the highest mean arterial pressure as opposed to average mean arterial pressure also demonstrated consistent associations. CONCLUSION: Increasing mean arterial pressure was positively associated with most adverse neonatal outcomes except NEC. Given that the relationship between mean arterial pressure and adverse pregnancy outcomes may not be consistent at all mean arterial pressure levels, future work should attempt to further elucidate whether there is an absolute threshold or relative change in mean arterial pressure at which fetal benefits are optimized along with maternal benefits. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02299414.


Asunto(s)
Antihipertensivos , Hipertensión , Complicaciones Cardiovasculares del Embarazo , Humanos , Femenino , Embarazo , Recién Nacido , Adulto , Antihipertensivos/uso terapéutico , Hipertensión/tratamiento farmacológico , Resultado del Embarazo , Presión Arterial , Hipertensión Inducida en el Embarazo/tratamiento farmacológico
3.
Obstet Gynecol ; 2024 Jul 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39013178

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the optimal gestational age to deliver pregnant people with chronic hypertension to improve perinatal outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a planned secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of chronic hypertension treatment to different blood pressure goals. Participants with term, singleton gestations were included. Those with fetal anomalies and those with a diagnosis of preeclampsia before 37 weeks of gestation were excluded. The primary maternal composite outcome included death, serious morbidity (heart failure, stroke, encephalopathy, myocardial infarction, pulmonary edema, intensive care unit admission, intubation, renal failure), preeclampsia with severe features, hemorrhage requiring blood transfusion, or abruption. The primary neonatal outcome included fetal or neonatal death, respiratory support beyond oxygen mask, Apgar score less than 3 at 5 minutes, neonatal seizures, or suspected sepsis. Secondary outcomes included intrapartum cesarean birth, length of stay, neonatal intensive care unit admission, respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), transient tachypnea of the newborn, and hypoglycemia. Those with a planned delivery were compared with those expectantly managed at each gestational week. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% CIs are reported. RESULTS: We included 1,417 participants with mild chronic hypertension; 305 (21.5%) with a new diagnosis in pregnancy and 1,112 (78.5%) with known preexisting hypertension. Groups differed by body mass index (BMI) and preexisting diabetes. In adjusted models, there was no association between planned delivery and the primary maternal or neonatal composite outcome in any gestational age week compared with expectant management. Planned delivery at 37 weeks of gestation was associated with RDS (7.9% vs 3.0%, aOR 2.70, 95% CI, 1.40-5.22), and planned delivery at 37 and 38 weeks was associated with neonatal hypoglycemia (19.4% vs 10.7%, aOR 1.97, 95% CI, 1.27-3.08 in week 37; 14.4% vs 7.7%, aOR 1.82, 95% CI, 1.06-3.10 in week 38). CONCLUSION: Planned delivery in the early-term period compared with expectant management was not associated with a reduction in adverse maternal outcomes. However, it was associated with increased odds of some neonatal complications. Delivery timing for individuals with mild chronic hypertension should weigh maternal and neonatal outcomes in each gestational week but may be optimized by delivery at 39 weeks.

4.
J Am Osteopath Assoc ; 115(4): 265-7, 2015 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25830585

RESUMEN

The launch of Osteopathic Continuous Certification (OCC) signifes the next stage of the osteopathic board certification process. The OCC process replaces the old recertification system for all osteopathic physicians who earned time-limited certificates from American Osteopathic Association (AOA) certifying boards. All 18 AOA certifying boards are now engaged in the continuous certification process. With the advent of any new system, many questions and concerns will arise. The AOA Bureau of Osteopathic Specialists continues to evaluate its new certification system and prepare for modifcations in response to this feedback.


Asunto(s)
Certificación , Competencia Clínica , Medicina Osteopática/educación , Sociedades Médicas/tendencias , Consejos de Especialidades/normas , Humanos , Médicos Osteopáticos , Estados Unidos
5.
Am J Obstet Gynecol ; 187(4): 964-7, 2002 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12388987

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the percentage of the women who call a teratology information service who take folic acid before conception. STUDY DESIGN: A pilot-tested questionnaire was used to survey women who called a teratology information service about their use of folic acid supplementation. Frequencies were generated by pregnancy status, age, race, and parity. RESULTS: Of the 693 pregnant callers, 42% of the women initiated folic acid use 6 weeks before pregnancy, 35% of the women initiated folic acid use during pregnancy. Thirty-seven percent of the total caller population reported taking folic acid. Forty-seven percent of pregnant white women versus 27% of pregnant black women reported preconceptional folic acid use (P =.005). Thirty-nine percent of pregnant women who were <30 years old reported preconceptional folic acid use versus 48% of women who were >30 years old (P =.018). CONCLUSION: Most pregnant women take folic acid; however, only a minority of them start before conception. The use of preconceptional folic acid, although higher than the national average of 30%, was still low. Many women start taking folic acid in their pregnancy after the neural tube is closed.


Asunto(s)
Suplementos Dietéticos/estadística & datos numéricos , Ácido Fólico/uso terapéutico , Servicios de Información , Defectos del Tubo Neural/prevención & control , Atención Preconceptiva , Teratología , Negro o Afroamericano/estadística & datos numéricos , Distribución por Edad , Femenino , Humanos , Proyectos Piloto , Embarazo , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Población Blanca/estadística & datos numéricos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA