Fate plasticity and reprogramming in genetically distinct populations of Danio leucophores.

Understanding genetic and cellular bases of adult form remains a fundamental goal at the intersection of developmental and evolutionary biology. The skin pigment cells of vertebrates, derived from embryonic neural crest, are a useful system for elucidating mechanisms of fate specification, pattern formation, and how particular phenotypes impact organismal behavior and ecology. In a survey of Danio fishes, including the zebrafish Danio rerio, we identified two populations of white pigment cells-leucophores-one of which arises by transdifferentiation of adult melanophores and another of which develops from a yellow-orange xanthophore or xanthophore-like progenitor. Single-cell transcriptomic, mutational, chemical, and ultrastructural analyses of zebrafish leucophores revealed cell-type-specific chemical compositions, organelle configurations, and genetic requirements. At the organismal level, we identified distinct physiological responses of leucophores during environmental background matching, and we showed that leucophore complement influences behavior. Together, our studies reveal independently arisen pigment cell types and mechanisms of fate acquisition in zebrafish and illustrate how concerted analyses across hierarchical levels can provide insights into phenotypes and their evolution.

Evolution of Endothelin signaling and diversification of adult pigment pattern in Danio fishes.

Fishes of the genus Danio exhibit diverse pigment patterns that serve as useful models for understanding the genes and cell behaviors underlying the evolution of adult form. Among these species, zebrafish D. rerio exhibit several dark stripes of melanophores with sparse iridophores that alternate with light interstripes of dense iridophores and xanthophores. By contrast, the closely related species D. nigrofasciatus has an attenuated pattern with fewer melanophores, stripes and interstripes. Here we demonstrate species differences in iridophore development that presage the fully formed patterns. Using genetic and transgenic approaches we identify the secreted peptide Endothelin-3 (Edn3)-a known melanogenic factor of tetrapods-as contributing to reduced iridophore proliferation and fewer stripes and interstripes in D. nigrofasciatus. We further show the locus encoding this factor is expressed at lower levels in D. nigrofasciatus owing to cis-regulatory differences between species. Finally, we show that functions of two paralogous loci encoding Edn3 have been partitioned between skin and non-skin iridophores. Our findings reveal genetic and cellular mechanisms contributing to pattern differences between these species and suggest a model for evolutionary changes in Edn3 requirements for pigment patterning and its diversification across vertebrates.

Progressing towards standard outcomes in gestational diabetes Cochrane reviews and randomised trials.

Outcomes in gestational diabetes Cochrane protocols and reviews before and after development of 'standard outcomes' by WOMBAT (WOMen and Babies health and well-being: Action through Trials) were surveyed. An increase in 'common' outcomes (those prespecified by ≥50% of the protocols and reviews) over time was observed (2001-2009: 27 vs 2010-2014: 46). There were discrepancies in outcomes prespecified in reviews and reported by randomised trials. Efforts are needed to develop a core outcome set, to reduce research waste and improve health outcomes.

Mediator subunit 12 coordinates intrinsic and extrinsic control of epithalamic development.

In the developing brain, the production of neurons from multipotent precursors must be carefully regulated in order to generate the appropriate numbers of various differentiated neuronal types. Inductive signals from extrinsic elements such as growth factors need to be integrated with timely expression of intrinsic elements such as transcription factors that define the competence of the cell. The transcriptional Mediator complex offers a mechanism to coordinate the timing and levels of intrinsic and extrinsic influences by acting as a rapid molecular switch for transcription of poised RNA pol II. The epithalamus is a highly conserved region of the vertebrate brain that differentiates early and rapidly in the zebrafish. It includes the pineal and parapineal organs and the habenular nuclei. Mutation of the Mediator complex subunit Med12 impairs the specification of habenular and parapineal neurons and causes a loss of differentiation in pineal neurons and photoreceptors. Although FGF ligands and transcription factors for parapineal and photoreceptor development are still expressed in the pineal complex of med12 mutants, FGF signaling is impaired and transcription factor expression is reduced and/or delayed. We find that the timely expression of one of these transcription factors, tbx2b, is controlled by Med12 and is vital for parapineal specification. We propose that the Mediator complex is responsible for subtle but significant changes in transcriptional timing and amplitude that are essential for coordinating the development of neurons in the epithalamus.

Screening and subsequent management for thyroid dysfunction pre-pregnancy and during pregnancy for improving maternal and infant health.

BACKGROUND: Thyroid dysfunction pre-pregnancy and during pregnancy (both hyper- and hypothyroidism) is associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes for mothers and infants in the short- and long-term. Managing the thyroid dysfunction (e.g. thyroxine for hypothyroidism, or antithyroid medication for hyperthyroidism) may improve outcomes. The best method of screening to identify and subsequently manage thyroid dysfunction pre-pregnancy and during pregnancy is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of different screening methods (and subsequent management) for thyroid dysfunction pre-pregnancy and during pregnancy on maternal and infant outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (14 July 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials, comparing any screening method (e.g. tool, program, guideline/protocol) for detecting thyroid dysfunction (including hypothyroidism, hyperthyroidism, and/or thyroid autoimmunity) pre-pregnancy or during pregnancy with no screening, or alternative screening methods. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed eligibility of studies, extracted and checked data accuracy, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We included two randomised controlled trials (involving 26,408 women) - these trials were considered to be at low risk of bias. Universal screening (screening all women) versus case finding (screening only those at perceived increased risk) in pregnancy for thyroid dysfunctionOne trial (4562 women) compared universal screening with case finding for thyroid dysfunction. Before 11 weeks' gestation, women in the universal screening group, and 'high-risk' women in the case finding group had their sera tested for TSH (thyroid stimulating hormone), fT4 (free thyroxine) and TPO-Ab (thyroid peroxidase antibody); women with hypothyroidism (TSH > 2.5 mIU/litre) received levothyroxine; women with hyperthyroidism (undetectable TSH and elevated fT4) received antithyroid medication.In regards to this review's primary outcomes, compared with the case finding group, more women in the universal screening group were diagnosed with hypothyroidism (risk ratio (RR) 3.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.91 to 5.20; 4562 women; GRADE: high quality evidence), with a trend towards more women being diagnosed with hyperthyroidism (RR 4.50, 95% CI 0.97 to 20.82; 4562 women; P = 0.05; GRADE: moderate quality evidence). No clear differences were seen in the risks of pre-eclampsia (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.18; 4516 women; GRADE: moderate quality evidence), or preterm birth (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.24; 4516 women; GRADE: high quality evidence) between groups. This trial did not report on neurosensory disability for the infant as a child.Considering this review's secondary outcomes, more women in the universal screening group received pharmacological treatment for thyroid dysfunction (RR 3.15, 95% CI 1.91 to 5.20; 4562 women). No clear differences between groups were observed for miscarriage (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.19; 4516 women; GRADE: moderate quality evidence), fetal and neonatal death (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.42 to 2.02; 4516 infants; GRADE: moderate quality evidence), or other secondary outcomes: pregnancy-induced hypertension, gestational diabetes, congestive heart failure, thyroid storm, mode of birth (caesarean section), preterm labour, placental abruption, respiratory distress syndrome, low birthweight, neonatal intensive care unit admission, or other congenital malformations. The trial did not report on a number of outcomes including adverse effects associated with the intervention. Universal screening versus no screening in pregnancy for hypothyroidismOne trial (21,846 women) compared universal screening with no screening for hypothyroidism. Before 15 + 6 weeks' gestation, women in the universal screening group had their sera tested; women who screened 'positive' (TSH > 97.5th percentile, fT4 < 2.5th percentile, or both) received levothyroxine.Considering primary review outcomes, compared with the no screening group, more women in the universal screening screened 'positive' for hypothyroidism (RR 998.18, 95% CI 62.36 to 15,978.48; 21,839 women; GRADE: high quality evidence). No data were provided for the outcome pre-eclampsia, and for preterm birth, the trial reported rates of 5.6% and 7.9% for the screening and no screening groups respectively (it was unclear if these percentages related to the entire cohort or women who screened positive). No clear difference was seen for neurosensory disability for the infant as a child (three-year follow-up IQ score < 85) (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.22; 794 infants; GRADE: moderate quality evidence).More women in the universal screening group received pharmacological treatment for thyroid dysfunction (RR 1102.90, 95% CI 69.07 to 17,610.46; 1050 women); 10% had their dose lowered because of low TSH, high fT4 or minor side effects. No clear differences were observed for other secondary outcomes, including developmental delay/intellectual impairment at three years. Most of our secondary outcomes, including miscarriage, fetal or neonatal death were not reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the existing evidence, though universal screening for thyroid dysfunction in pregnancy increases the number of women diagnosed with hypothyroidism who can be subsequently treated, it does not clearly impact (benefit or harm) maternal and infant outcomes.While universal screening versus case finding for thyroid dysfunction increased diagnosis and subsequent treatment, we found no clear differences for the primary outcomes: pre-eclampsia or preterm birth. No clear differences were seen for secondary outcomes, including miscarriage and fetal or neonatal death; data were lacking for the primary outcome: neurosensory disability for the infant as a child, and for many secondary outcomes. Though universal screening versus no screening for hypothyroidism similarly increased diagnosis and subsequent treatment, no clear difference was seen for the primary outcome: neurosensory disability for the infant as a child (IQ < 85 at three years); data were lacking for the other primary outcomes: pre-eclampsia and preterm birth, and for the majority of secondary outcomes.For outcomes assessed using the GRADE approach the evidence was considered to be moderate or high quality, with any downgrading of the evidence based on the presence of wide confidence intervals crossing the line of no effect.More evidence is needed to assess the benefits or harms of different screening methods for thyroid dysfunction in pregnancy, on maternal, infant and child health outcomes. Future trials should assess impacts on use of health services and costs, and be adequately powered to evaluate the effects on short- and long-term outcomes.

Diet and exercise interventions for preventing gestational diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with a wide range of adverse health consequences for women and their babies in the short and long term. With an increasing prevalence of GDM worldwide, there is an urgent need to assess strategies for GDM prevention, such as combined diet and exercise interventions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of combined diet and exercise interventions for preventing GDM and associated adverse health consequences for women and their babies. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (11 February 2014) and reference lists of retrieved studies. We updated the search in February 2015 but these results have not yet been incorporated and are awaiting classification. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs assessing the effects of interventions that included diet and exercise components. We included studies where combined diet and exercise interventions were compared with no intervention (i.e. standard care).We planned to also compare diet and exercise interventions with alternative diet and/or exercise interventions but no trials were identified for this comparison. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Data were checked for accuracy. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 randomised controlled trials (involving 4983 women and their babies). We assessed the included trials as being of moderate risk of bias overall.When comparing women receiving a diet and exercise intervention with those receiving no intervention, there was no clear difference in the risk of developing GDM (average risk ratio (RR) 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68 to 1.23; 11 trials, 3744 women), caesarean section (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.01; seven trials, 3246 women), or large-for-gestational age (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.05; 2950 infants). Only one trial reported on perinatal mortality, and found no clear difference in the risk of stillbirth (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.29 to 3.42; 2202 fetuses) or neonatal death (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.85; 2202 neonates).Very few differences were shown between groups for the review's secondary outcomes, including for induction of labour, perineal trauma, pre-eclampsia, postpartum haemorrhage and infection, macrosomia, birthweight, small-for-gestational age, ponderal index, neonatal hypoglycaemia requiring treatment, hyperbilirubinaemia requiring treatment, shoulder dystocia, bone fracture or nerve palsy. Women receiving a combined diet and exercise intervention were, however, found to have a reduced risk of preterm birth compared with women receiving no intervention (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.93; five trials, 2713 women).A trend towards reduced weight gain during pregnancy was shown for women receiving the combined diet and exercise intervention (mean difference (MD) -0.76 kg, 95% CI -1.55 to 0.03; eight trials, 2707 women; P = 0.06, random-effects); but no clear difference in postnatal weight retention was observed overall.In relation to adherence to the interventions, a number of trials that reported on behaviour modifications showed benefits in diet- (5/8 trials) and physical activity- (4/8 trials) related behaviours for women receiving the combined diet and exercise intervention, compared with women receiving no intervention; however there was notable variation across trials in outcomes measured and results observed. Only two trials reported on well-being and quality of life of women, and did not observe differences between groups for these outcomes.Very few trials reported on outcomes relating to the use of health services, although one trial suggested a reduced length of antenatal hospital stay for women receiving a combined diet and exercise intervention (MD -0.27 days, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.05; 2153 women).No information was available on outcomes for the infant as a child or adult, or for most longer-term outcomes for the mother. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are limitations associated with the available RCT evidence on the effects of combined diet and exercise interventions during pregnancy for preventing GDM. Results from 13 RCTs (of moderate quality) suggest no clear difference in the risk of developing GDM for women receiving a combined diet and exercise intervention compared with women receiving no intervention. However, the ability to draw firm conclusions was limited by variations in the quality of trials, characteristics of the interventions and populations assessed, and outcome definitions between trials.Based on the data currently available, conclusive evidence is not available to guide practice. Further large, well-designed RCTs, addressing the limitations of previous studies, are needed to assess the effects of combined interventions on preventing GDM and other relevant pregnancy outcomes including caesarean birth, large-for-gestational age and perinatal mortality. Health service utilisation and costs, and longer-term outcomes for mothers and their babies should be included. We identified another 16 trials which are ongoing and we will consider these for inclusion in the next update of this review.

Barriers and enablers to implementing antenatal magnesium sulphate for fetal neuroprotection guidelines: a study using the theoretical domains framework.

BACKGROUND: Strong evidence supports administration of magnesium sulphate prior to birth at less than 30 weeks' gestation to prevent very preterm babies dying or developing cerebral palsy. This study was undertaken as part of The WISH (Working to Improve Survival and Health for babies born very preterm) Project, to assess health professionals' self-reported use of antenatal magnesium sulphate, and barriers and enablers to implementation of 2010 Australian and New Zealand clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: Semi-structured, one-to-one interviews were conducted with obstetric and neonatal consultants and trainees, and midwives in 2011 (n = 24) and 2012-2013 (n = 21) at the Women's and Children's Hospital, South Australia. Transcribed interview data were coded using the Theoretical Domains Framework (describing 14 domains related to behaviour change) for analysis of barriers and enablers. RESULTS: In 2012-13, health professionals more often reported 'routinely' or 'sometimes' administering or advising their colleagues to administer magnesium sulphate for fetal neuroprotection (86% in 2012-13 vs. 46% in 2011). 'Knowledge and skills', 'memory, attention and decision processes', 'environmental context and resources', 'beliefs about consequences' and 'social influences' were key domains identified in the barrier and enabler analysis. Perceived barriers were the complex administration processes, time pressures, and the unpredictability of preterm birth. Enablers included education for staff and women at risk of very preterm birth, reminders and 'prompts', simplified processes for administration, and influential colleagues. CONCLUSIONS: This study has provided valuable data on barriers and enablers to implementing magnesium sulphate for fetal neuroprotection, with implications for designing and modifying future behaviour change strategies, to ensure optimal uptake of this neuroprotective therapy for very preterm infants.

Nonreceipt of antenatal magnesium sulphate for fetal neuroprotection at the Women's and Children's Hospital, Adelaide 2010-2013.

BACKGROUND: Australian and New Zealand clinical practice guidelines, endorsed by the NHMRC in 2010, recommend administration of antenatal magnesium sulphate to women at risk of imminent preterm birth at less than 30 weeks' gestation to reduce the risk of their very preterm babies dying or having cerebral palsy. The purpose of the ongoing Working to Improve Survival and Health for babies born very preterm (WISH) implementation project is to monitor and improve the uptake of this neuroprotective therapy across Australia and New Zealand. AIMS: To quantify and explore reasons for nonreceipt of antenatal magnesium sulphate at the Women's and Children's Hospital, in Adelaide, South Australia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from the case records of women who gave birth between 23(+0) and 29(+6) weeks' gestation from 2010 to mid-2013 were reviewed to determine the proportion of eligible mothers not receiving antenatal magnesium sulphate and to explore reason(s) for nonreceipt over this time period. RESULTS: There was a reduction in the proportion of eligible mothers not receiving antenatal magnesium sulphate from 2010 (69.7%) to 2011 (26.9%), which was maintained in 2012 and 2013 (22.5%). In 2012-2013, nonreceipt was predominantly associated with immediately imminent (advanced labour, rapid progression of labour) or indicated emergent birth (actual or suspected maternal or fetal compromise). CONCLUSIONS: Use of antenatal magnesium sulphate at the Women's and Children's Hospital is now predominantly in-line with the binational guideline recommendations. Ongoing education and enhanced familiarity with procedures may facilitate timely administration in the context of some precipitous or immediately imminent births.

Drug-drug interaction between methotrexate and levetiracetam resulting in delayed methotrexate elimination.

OBJECTIVE: To report a case of delayed methotrexate (MTX) elimination while receiving concomitant levetiracetam. CASE REPORT: A 46-year-old man with relapsed osteosarcoma of the base of the skull receiving high-dose MTX tolerated his first cycle of MTX with elimination to nontoxic MTX levels (≤0.1 µmol/L) within 90 hours. After hospital discharge, the patient experienced seizures secondary to brain metastasis and started on levetiracetam, which was continued as maintenance therapy. The patient experienced delayed MTX elimination during cycles 2, 3, and 4 while receiving levetiracetam. On average, elimination to nontoxic MTX levels took 130 hours (106-144 hours). Before the fifth cycle of MTX, lorazepam was substituted for the levetiracetam. MTX was eliminated to nontoxic levels within 95 hours. During all cycles, the patient received standard supportive care and serum creatinine remained stable. No other drugs known to interact with MTX were administered. DISCUSSION: This possible drug interaction has only been reported once in the pediatric population. With a score of 6 on the Drug Interaction Probability Scale for evaluating causation of drug interactions, it is probable that the delayed MTX elimination was caused by an interaction with levetiracetam. CONCLUSION: Coadministration of levetiracetam and MTX may result in delayed elimination of MTX, increasing the likelihood of toxicity. Consideration should be given to temporarily switching from levetiracetam to another antiepileptic (ie, lorazepam) to prevent this interaction. This is particularly important in those experiencing delayed elimination with prior cycles of concomitant MTX and levetiracetam or those at greater risk for MTX toxicity.

Magnesium supplementation in pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Magnesium is an essential mineral required for regulation of body temperature, nucleic acid and protein synthesis and in maintaining nerve and muscle cell electrical potentials. Many women, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds, have low intakes of magnesium. Magnesium supplementation during pregnancy may be able to reduce fetal growth restriction and pre-eclampsia, and increase birthweight. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of magnesium supplementation during pregnancy on maternal, neonatal/infant and paediatric outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 March 2013). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials assessing the effects of dietary magnesium supplementation during pregnancy were included. The primary outcomes were perinatal mortality (including stillbirth and neonatal death prior to hospital discharge), small-for-gestational age, maternal mortality and pre-eclampsia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: Ten trials involving 9090 women and their babies were included; one trial had a cluster design (with randomisation by study centre). All 10 trials randomly allocated women to either an oral magnesium supplement or a control group; in eight trials a placebo was used, and in two trials no treatment was given to the control group. In the 10 included trials, the compositions of the magnesium supplements, gestational ages at commencement, and doses administered varied, including: magnesium oxide, 1000 mg daily from ≤ four months post-conception (one trial); magnesium citrate, 365 mg daily from ≤ 18 weeks until hospitalisation after 38 weeks (one trial), and 340 mg daily from nine to 27 weeks' gestation (one trial); magnesium gluconate, 2 to 3 g from 28 weeks' gestation until birth (one trial), and 4 g daily from 23 weeks' gestation (one trial); magnesium aspartate, 15 mmol daily (three trials, commencing from either six to 21 weeks' gestation until birth, ≤ 16 weeks' gestation until birth, or < 12 weeks until birth), or 365 mg daily from 13 to 24 weeks until birth (one trial); and magnesium stearate, 128 mg elemental magnesium from 10 to 35 weeks until birth (one trial).In the analysis of all trials, oral magnesium supplementation compared to no magnesium was associated with no significant difference in perinatal mortality (stillbirth and neonatal death prior to discharge) (risk ratio (RR) 1.10; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 1.67; five trials, 5903 infants), small-for-gestational age (RR 0.76; 95% CI 0.54 to 1.07; three trials, 1291 infants), or pre-eclampsia (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.58 to 1.32; three trials, 1042 women). None of the included trials reported on maternal mortality.Considering secondary outcomes, while no increased risk of stillbirth was observed, a possible increased risk of neonatal death prior to hospital discharge was shown for infants born to mothers who had received magnesium (RR 2.21; 95% CI 1.02 to 4.75; four trials, 5373 infants). One trial contributed over 70% of the participants to the analysis for this outcome; the trial authors suggested that the large number of severe congenital anomalies in the supplemented group (unlikely attributable to magnesium) and the deaths of two sets of twins (with birthweights < 750 g) in the supplemented group likely accounted for the increased risk of death observed, and thus this result should be interpreted with caution. Furthermore, when the deaths due to severe congenital abnormalities in this trial were excluded from the meta-analysis, no increased risk of neonatal death was seen for the magnesium supplemented group. Magnesium supplementation was associated with significantly fewer babies with an Apgar score less than seven at five minutes (RR 0.34; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.80; four trials, 1083 infants), with meconium-stained liquor (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.99; one trial, 4082 infants), late fetal heart decelerations (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.88; one trial, 4082 infants), and mild hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy (RR 0.38; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.98; one trial, 4082 infants). Women receiving magnesium were significantly less likely to require hospitalisation during pregnancy (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.86; three trials, 1158 women).Of the 10 trials included in the review, only two were judged to be of high quality overall. When an analysis was restricted to these two trials none of the review's primary outcomes (perinatal mortality, small-for-gestational age, pre-eclampsia) were significantly different between the magnesium supplemented and control groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is not enough high-quality evidence to show that dietary magnesium supplementation during pregnancy is beneficial.

Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolic disease in pregnancy and the early postnatal period.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), although rare, is a major cause of maternal mortality and morbidity, and methods of prophylaxis are therefore often used for women considered to be at risk. This may include women who have given birth by caesarean section, those with a personal or family history of VTE and women with inherited or acquired thrombophilias (conditions that predispose people to thrombosis). Many methods of prophylaxis carry risks of adverse effects, and as the risk of VTE is often low, it is possible that the benefits of thromboprophylaxis may be outweighed by harms. Guidelines for clinical practice have been based on expert opinion rather than high-quality evidence from randomised trials. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of thromboprophylaxis in women who are pregnant or have recently given birth and are at increased risk of VTE on the incidence of VTE and adverse effects of treatment. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (27 November 2013).  SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing one method of thromboprophylaxis with placebo or no treatment, and randomised trials comparing two (or more) methods of thromboprophylaxis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors assessed trial eligibility and quality and extracted the data. MAIN RESULTS: Nineteen trials, at an overall moderate risk of bias, met the inclusion criteria for the review. Only 16 trials, involving 2592 women, assessing a range of methods of thromboprophylaxis, contributed data to the review. Six trials compared methods of antenatal prophylaxis: heparin versus no treatment/placebo (two trials), and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) versus unfractionated heparin (UFH) (four trials). Nine trials assessed prophylaxis after caesarean section: four compared heparin with placebo; three compared LMWH with UFH; one compared hydroxyethyl starch (HES) with UFH; and one compared five-day versus 10-day LMWH. One study examined prophylaxis with UFH in the postnatal period (including following vaginal births).For antenatal prophylaxis, none of the included trials reported on maternal mortality, and no differences were detected for the other primary outcomes of symptomatic thromboembolic events, symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE) and symptomatic deep venous thrombosis (DVT) when LMWH or UFH was compared with no treatment/placebo or when LMWH was compared with UFH. The risk ratios (RR) for symptomatic thromboembolic events were: antenatal LMWH/UFH versus no heparin, RR 0.33; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 2.99 (two trials, 56 women); and antenatal LMWH versus UFH, RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.09 to 2.49 (four trials, 404 women). No differences were shown when antenatal LMWH or UFH was compared with no treatment/placebo for any secondary outcomes. Antenatal LMWH was associated with fewer adverse effects sufficient to stop treatment (RR 0.07; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.54; two trials, 226 women), and fewer fetal losses (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.95; three trials, 343 women) when compared with UFH. In two trials, antenatal LMWH compared with UFH was associated with fewer bleeding episodes (defined in one trial of 121 women as bruises > 1 inch (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.36); and in one trial of 105 women as injection site haematomas of ≥ 2 cm, bleeding during delivery or other bleeding (RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.53)), however in a further trial of 117 women no difference between groups was shown for bleeding at delivery. The results for these secondary outcomes should be interpreted with caution, being derived from small trials that were not of high methodological quality.For post-caesarean/postnatal prophylaxis, only one trial comparing five-day versus 10-day LMWH after caesarean section reported on maternal mortality, observing no deaths. No differences were seen across any of the comparisons for the other primary outcomes (symptomatic thromboembolic events, symptomatic PE and symptomatic DVT). The RRs for symptomatic thromboembolic events were: post-caesarean LMWH/UFH versus no heparin, RR 1.30; 95% CI 0.39 to 4.27 (four trials, 840 women); post-caesarean LMWH versus UFH, RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.01 to 7.99 (three trials, 217 women); post-caesarean five-day versus 10-day LMWH, RR 0.36; 95% CI 0.01 to 8.78 (one trial, 646 women); postnatal UFH versus no heparin, RR 0.16; 95% CI 0.02 to 1.36 (one trial, 210 women). For prophylaxis after caesarean section, in one trial (of 580 women), women receiving UFH and physiotherapy were more likely to have bleeding complications ('complications hémorragiques') than women receiving physiotherapy alone (RR 5.03; 95% CI 2.49 to 10.18). In two additional trials, that compared LMWH with placebo, no difference between groups in bleeding episodes (major bleeding; major bruising; bleeding/bruising reported at discharge) were detected. No other differences in secondary outcomes were shown when LMWH was compared with UFH post-caesarean, nor when post-caesarean HES was compared with UFH, post-caesarean five-day LMWH was compared with 10-day LMWH, or when UFH was compared to no heparin postnatally. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence on which to base recommendations for thromboprophylaxis during pregnancy and the early postnatal period, with the small number of differences detected in this review being largely derived from trials that were not of high methodological quality. Large scale, high-quality randomised trials of currently used interventions are warranted.

Creatine for women in pregnancy for neuroprotection of the fetus.

BACKGROUND: Creatine is an amino acid derivative and, when phosphorylated (phosphocreatine), is involved in replenishing adenosine triphosphate (ATP) via the creatine kinase reaction. Cells obtain creatine from a diet rich in fish, meat, or dairy and by endogenous synthesis from the amino acids arginine, glycine, and methionine in an approximate 50:50 ratio. Animal studies have shown that creatine may provide fetal neuroprotection when given to the mother through her diet in pregnancy. It is important to assess whether maternally administered creatine in human pregnancy (at times of known, suspected, or potential fetal compromise) may offer neuroprotection to the fetus and may accordingly reduce the risk of adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes, such as cerebral palsy and associated impairments and disabilities arising from fetal brain injury. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of creatine when used for neuroprotection of the fetus. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 November 2014). SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include all published, unpublished, and ongoing randomised trials and quasi-randomised trials. We planned to include studies reported as abstracts only as well as full-text manuscripts. Trials using a cross-over or cluster-randomised design were not eligible for inclusion.We planned to include trials comparing creatine given to women in pregnancy for fetal neuroprotection (regardless of the route, timing, dose, or duration of administration) with placebo, no treatment, or with an alternative agent aimed at providing fetal neuroprotection. We also planned to include comparisons of different regimens for administration of creatine. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We identified no completed or ongoing randomised controlled trials. MAIN RESULTS: We found no randomised controlled trials for inclusion in this review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: As we did not identify any randomised controlled trials for inclusion in this review, we are unable to comment on implications for practice. Although evidence from animal studies has supported a fetal neuroprotective role for creatine when administered to the mother during pregnancy, no trials assessing creatine in pregnant women for fetal neuroprotection have been published to date. If creatine is established as safe for the mother and her fetus, research efforts should first be directed towards randomised trials comparing creatine with either no intervention (ideally using a placebo), or with alternative agents aimed at providing fetal neuroprotection (including magnesium sulphate for the very preterm infant). If appropriate, these trials should then be followed by studies comparing different creatine regimens (dosage and duration of exposure). Such trials should be high quality and adequately powered to evaluate maternal and infant short and longer-term outcomes (including neurodevelopmental disabilities such as cerebral palsy), and should consider utilisation/costs of health care.

Interventions for managing asthma in pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is the most common respiratory disorder complicating pregnancy, and is associated with a range of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. There is strong evidence however, that the adequate control of asthma can improve health outcomes for mothers and their babies. Despite known risks of poorly controlled asthma during pregnancy, a large proportion of women have sub-optimal asthma control, due to concerns surrounding risks of pharmacological agents, and uncertainties regarding the effectiveness and safety of different management strategies. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions (pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic) for managing women's asthma in pregnancy on maternal and fetal/infant outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (2 June 2014) and the Cochrane Airways Group's Trials Register (4 June 2014). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any intervention used to manage asthma in pregnancy, with placebo, no intervention, or an alternative intervention. We included pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions (including combined interventions). Cluster-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion (but none were identified). Cross-over trials were not eligible for inclusion.We included multi-armed trials along with two-armed trials. We also included studies published as abstracts only. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and quality and extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy. MAIN RESULTS: We included eight trials in this review, involving 1181 women and their babies. Overall we judged two trials to be at low risk of bias, two to be of unclear risk of bias, and four to be at moderate risk of bias.Five trials assessed pharmacological agents, including inhaled corticosteroids (beclomethasone or budesonide), inhaled magnesium sulphate, intravenous theophylline, and inhaled beclomethasone verus oral theophylline. Three trials assessed non-pharmacological interventions, including a fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO)-based algorithm versus a clinical guideline-based algorithm to adjust inhaled corticosteroid therapy, a pharmacist-led multi-disciplinary approach to management versus standard care, and progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) versus sham training.The eight included trials were assessed under seven separate comparisons. Pharmacological interventionsPrimary outcomes: one trial suggested that inhaled magnesium sulphate in addition to usual treatment could reduce exacerbation frequency in acute asthma (mean difference (MD) -2.80; 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.21 to -2.39; 60 women). One trial assessing the addition of intravenous theophylline to standard care in acute asthma did not report on exacerbations (65 women). No clear difference was shown in the risk of exacerbations with the use of inhaled beclomethasone in addition to usual treatment for maintenance therapy in one trial (risk ratio (RR) 0.36; 95% CI 0.13 to 1.05; 60 women); a second trial also showed no difference, however data were not clearly reported to allow inclusion in a meta-analysis. No difference was shown when inhaled beclomethasone was compared with oral theophylline for maintenance therapy (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.59 to 1.33; one trial, 385 women). None of these trials reported on neonatal intensive care admissions. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: inhaled magnesium sulphate in acute asthma was shown to improve lung function measures (one trial, 60 women); intravenous theophylline in acute asthma was not associated with benefits (one trial, 65 women). No clear differences were seen with the addition of inhaled corticosteroids to routine treatment in three trials (374 women). While inhaled beclomethasone, compared with oral theophylline, significantly reduced treatment discontinuation due to adverse effects in one trial (384 women), no other differences were observed, except for higher treatment adherence with theophylline. Four of the five trials did not report on adverse effects. Non-pharmacological interventionsPrimary outcomes: in one trial, the use of a FENO-based algorithm was shown to significantly reduce asthma exacerbations (RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.90; 220 women); and a trend towards fewer neonatal hospitalisations was observed (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.21 to 1.02; 214 infants). No exacerbations occurred in one trial assessing pharmacist-led management; this approach did not reduce neonatal intensive care admissions (RR 1.50; 95% CI 0.27 to 8.32; 58 infants). One trial (64 women) assessing PMR did not report on exacerbations or neonatal intensive care admissions. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: the use of a FENO-based algorithm to adjust therapy led to some improvements in quality of life scores, as well as more frequent use of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting ß-agonists, and less frequent use of short-acting ß-agonists (one trial, 220 women). The FENO-based algorithm was associated with fewer infants with recurrent episodes of bronchiolitis in their first year of life, and a trend towards fewer episodes of croup for infants. Pharmacist-led management improved asthma control scores at six months (one trial, 60 women); PMR improved lung function and quality of life measures (one trial, 64 women). No other differences between comparisons were observed. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on eight included trials, of moderate quality overall, no firm conclusions about optimal interventions for managing asthma in pregnancy can be made. Five trials assessing pharmacological interventions did not provide clear evidence of benefits or harms to support or refute current practice. While inhaled magnesium sulphate for acute asthma was shown to reduce exacerbations, this was in one small trial of unclear quality, and thus this finding should be interpreted with caution. Three trials assessing non-pharmacological interventions provided some support for the use of such strategies, however were not powered to detect differences in important maternal and infant outcomes. While a FENO-based algorithm reduced exacerbations, the effects on perinatal outcomes were less certain, and thus widespread implementation is not yet appropriate. Similarly, though positive effects on asthma control were shown with PMR and pharmacist-led management, the evidence to date is insufficient to draw definitive conclusions.In view of the limited evidence base, further randomised trials are required to determine the most effective and safe interventions for asthma in pregnancy. Future trials must be sufficiently powered, and well-designed, to allow differences in important outcomes for mothers and babies to be detected. The impact on health services requires evaluation. Any further trials assessing pharmacological interventions should assess novel agents or those used in current practice. Encouragingly, at least five trials have been identified as planned or underway.

Analgesia for forceps delivery.

BACKGROUND: A forceps delivery may be indicated when a fetus fails to progress to delivery, or when delivery needs to be expedited in the second stage of labour. Effective analgesia is required to ensure that the woman is comfortable throughout the delivery, to allow the obstetrician to safely perform the procedure. It is currently unclear what the most effective and safe agent or method is to provide pain relief during forceps delivery. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of different analgesic agents and methods available for forceps delivery for women and their babies. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 July 2013), reviewed published guidelines and searched the reference lists of review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing an analgesic agent or method used for forceps delivery with placebo/no treatment or an alternative agent or method. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We included four trials involving 388 women that were judged to be at an unclear to high risk of bias overall. A variety of different agents for providing analgesia were assessed in the trials, and a number of different methods to measure pain relief were used, and thus results could not be combined in meta-analysis. Three trials compared diazepam with an alternative agent (ketamine; vinydan-ether; "other" anaesthesic agent) for the provision of general anaesthesia, and one trial compared spinal analgesia to pudendal nerve block (in both groups lignocaine was administered).With regard to the primary outcomes, women receiving diazepam for forceps delivery in one small trial were more likely to judge their pain relief as effective compared with women receiving vinydan-ether (risk ratio (RR) 1.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 1.25; 101 women). In a further small trial, no significant difference was seen in the number of women judging their pain relief as effective when diazepam was compared with ketamine (RR 1.42; 95% CI 0.98 to 2.07; 26 women). In the trial that compared spinal analgesia to pudendal nerve block, women receiving spinal analgesia were significantly more likely to regard their analgesia as adequate (RR 3.36; 95% CI 2.46 to 4.60; 183 women) and were less likely to report severe pain during forceps delivery (RR 0.02; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.27; 183 women). No trials reported on the review's other two primary outcomes of serious maternal adverse effects or complications, and neonatal mortality or serious morbidity.In terms of secondary outcomes, women receiving diazepam compared with vinydan-ether, were significantly less likely to experience vomiting (RR 0.04; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.62; 101 women). No significant differences were seen for the few neonatal outcomes that were reported across any of the comparisons (including Agpar score of less than seven at five minutes and acidosis as defined by cord blood arterial pH less than 7.2). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to support any particular analgesic agent or method as most effective in providing pain relief for forceps delivery. Neonatal outcomes have largely not been evaluated.

Interconception care for women with a history of gestational diabetes for improving maternal and infant outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with adverse health outcomes for both mother and infant both perinatally and long-term. Women with a history of GDM are at risk of recurrence in subsequent pregnancies and may benefit from intervention in the interconception period to improve maternal and infant health outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of interconception care for women with a history of GDM on maternal and infant health outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 January 2013). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, including quasi-randomised controlled trials and cluster-randomised trials evaluating any protocol of interconception care with standard care or other forms of interconception care for women with a history of GDM in a previous pregnancy on maternal and infant health outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility. In future updates of this review, at least two review authors will extract data and assess the risk of bias of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: One ongoing trial was identified. No eligible completed trials were identified. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The role of interconception care for women with a history of gestational diabetes remains unclear. Randomised controlled trials are required evaluating different forms and protocols of interconception care for these women on perinatal and long-term maternal and infant health outcomes, acceptability of such interventions and cost-effectiveness.

Relaxin for preventing preterm birth.

BACKGROUND: Preterm birth is a leading cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality. Early animal and clinical studies have provided some evidence to support an inhibitory effect of relaxin on preterm birth for women in preterm labour. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of relaxin for women in preterm labour on preterm birth and associated maternal and neonatal/infant health outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 June 2013), and the reference lists of relevant papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials assessing the effects of relaxin compared with no treatment, a placebo, or an alternative tocolytic, for preventing preterm birth for women in preterm labour. Primary review outcomes included birth within 28 hours of treatment, birth within seven days of treatment, perinatal mortality, and a serious neonatal adverse outcome composite. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We included three quasi-randomised controlled trials, with a total of 149 women and their babies. All three trials were at a high risk of bias. When comparing women receiving relaxin with those who did not receive relaxin, there was a significant reduction in birth within seven days of treatment in one trial of 30 women (risk ratio (RR) 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 0.87), yet no significant difference was seen for perinatal mortality in this trial (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.32 to 2.15). The second and third included trials did not report on any of the primary outcomes pre-specified in the review, including birth within 48 hours of treatment, birth within seven days of treatment, perinatal mortality, and serious neonatal adverse outcomes.One trial found a significant increase in pregnancy prolongation for women receiving relaxin (RR 8.00, 95% CI 1.14 to 56.33; 30 women). None of the three included trials found significant differences in the outcomes of fetal death, neonatal death, birthweight or preterm birth, and no trial reported on longer-term outcomes for the babies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is limited randomised controlled trial evidence available on the effect of relaxin during pregnancy for preventing preterm birth for women in preterm labour. Evidence from one quasi-randomised trial suggested a reduction in birth within seven days of treatment for women receiving relaxin, compared with women in a control group, however this trial was at a high risk of bias and included only 30 women. There is thus insufficient evidence to support or refute the use of relaxin in women in preterm labour for preventing preterm birth.

Magnesium sulphate for women at term for neuroprotection of the fetus.

BACKGROUND: Magnesium sulphate is extensively used in obstetrics for the treatment and prevention of eclampsia. A recent meta-analysis has shown that magnesium sulphate is an effective fetal neuroprotective agent when given antenatally to women at risk of very preterm birth. Term infants account for more than half of all cases of cerebral palsy, and the incidence has remained fairly constant. It is important to assess if antenatal administration of magnesium sulphate to women at term protects the fetus from brain injury, and associated neurosensory disabilities including cerebral palsy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of magnesium sulphate given to women at term as a neuroprotective agent for the fetus. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trial Register (31 July 2012) and the reference lists of other Cochrane reviews assessing magnesium sulphate in pregnancy. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing antenatally administered magnesium sulphate to women at term with placebo, no treatment or a different fetal neuroprotective agent. We also planned to include cluster-randomised trials, and exclude cross-over trials and quasi-randomised trials. We planned to exclude studies reported as abstracts only. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and for risk of bias. Two authors independently extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy. MAIN RESULTS: We included one trial (involving 135 women with mild pre-eclampsia at term). An additional six studies are awaiting further assessment.The included trial compared magnesium sulphate with a placebo and was at a low risk of bias. The trial did not report any of this review's prespecified primary outcomes. There was no significant difference between magnesium sulphate and placebo in Apgar score less than seven at five minutes (risk ratio (RR) 0.51; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 5.46; 135 infants), nor gestational age at birth (mean difference (MD) -0.20 weeks; 95% CI -0.62 to 0.22; 135 infants).There were significantly more maternal side effects (feeling warm and flushed) in the magnesium sulphate group than in the placebo group (RR 3.81; 95% CI 2.22 to 6.53; 135 women). However, no significant difference in adverse effects severe enough to cease treatment was observed (RR 3.04; 95% CI 0.13 to 73.42; 135 women). There were no significant differences seen between groups in the rates of postpartum haemorrhage (RR 4.06; 95% CI 0.47 to 35.38; 135 women) and caesarean section (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.39 to 1.63; 135 women). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently insufficient evidence to assess the efficacy and safety of magnesium sulphate when administered to women for neuroprotection of the term fetus. As there has been recent evidence for the use of magnesium sulphate for neuroprotection of the preterm fetus, high-quality randomised controlled trials are needed to determine the safety profile and neurological outcomes for the term fetus. Strategies to reduce maternal side effects during treatment also require evaluation.

Maintenance therapy with calcium channel blockers for preventing preterm birth after threatened preterm labour.

BACKGROUND: Calcium channel blocker maintenance therapy is one of the types of tocolytic therapy that may be used after an episode of threatened preterm labour (and usually an initial dose of tocolytic therapy) in an attempt to prevent the onset of further preterm contractions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of calcium channel blockers as maintenance therapy on preventing preterm birth after threatened preterm labour. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 May 2013) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of calcium channel blockers used as maintenance therapy to prevent preterm birth after threatened preterm labour, compared with placebo or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We included six trials that enrolled 794 women and their babies and all assessed nifedipine as calcium channel blocker maintenance therapy. The six trials were judged to be at a moderate risk of bias overall. No differences in the incidence of preterm birth (risk ratio (RR) 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.09; five trials, 681 women), birth within 48 hours of treatment (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.07 to 3.00; two trials, 128 women) or neonatal mortality (average RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.05 to 11.76; two trials, 133 infants) were seen when nifedipine maintenance therapy was compared with placebo or no treatment. No stillbirths were reported in the one trial that provided data for this outcome. No trials reported on longer-term follow-up of infants.Women receiving nifedipine maintenance therapy were significantly more likely to have their pregnancy prolonged (mean difference (MD) 5.35 days; 95% CI 0.49 to 10.21; four trials, 275 women); however, no differences between groups were shown for birth at less than 34 weeks' gestation, birth at less than 28 weeks' gestation, birth within seven days of treatment, or gestational age at birth. No significant differences were shown between the nifedipine and control groups for any of the secondary neonatal morbidities reported. Similarly, no significant differences were seen for the outcomes relating to the use of health services, except for in one trial, where infants whose mothers received nifedipine were significantly more likely to have a longer length of hospital stay as compared with infants born to mothers who received a placebo (MD 14.00 days; 95% CI 4.21 to 23.79; 60 infants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current available evidence, maintenance treatment with a calcium channel blocker after threatened preterm labour does not prevent preterm birth or improve maternal or infant outcomes.

Different corticosteroids and regimens for accelerating fetal lung maturation for women at risk of preterm birth.

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread use of antenatal corticosteroids to prevent respiratory distress syndrome in preterm infants, there is currently no consensus as to the type of corticosteroid to use; nor the dose, frequency, timing of use or the route of administration. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of different corticosteroid regimens for women at risk of preterm birth. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (13 February 2013). SELECTION CRITERIA: All identified published and unpublished randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised control trials comparing any two corticosteroids (dexamethasone or betamethasone or any other corticosteroid that can cross the placenta), comparing different dose regimens (including frequency and timing of administration) in women at risk of preterm birth were included. We planned to exclude cross-over trials and cluster-randomised trials. We included studies published as abstracts only along with studies published as full-text manuscripts DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Data were checked for accuracy. MAIN RESULTS: For this update, 12 trials (1557 women and 1661 infants) were included. Dexamethasone was associated with a reduced risk of intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH) compared with betamethasone (risk ratio (RR) 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21 to 0.92; four trials, 549 infants). No statistically significant differences were seen for other primary outcomes: respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.27; five trials, 753 infants) and perinatal death (neonatal death RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.54 to 3.67; four trials, 596 infants). Similarly, very few differences were seen for secondary outcomes such as rate of admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) although in one trial, those infants exposed to dexamethasone, compared with betamethasone, had a significantly shorter length of NICU admission (mean difference (MD) -0.91 days, 95% CI -1.77 to -0.05; 70 infants). Results for biophysical parameters were inconsistent, but mostly no clinically important differences were seen.Compared with intramuscular dexamethasone, oral dexamethasone significantly increased the incidence of neonatal sepsis (RR 8.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 64.93) in one trial of 183 infants. No statistically significant differences were seen for other outcomes reported.Apart from a reduced maternal postpartum length of stay for women who received betamethasone at 12-hourly intervals compared to 24-hourly intervals in one trial (MD -0.73 days, 95% CI -1.28 to -0.18; 215 women), no differences in maternal or neonatal outcomes were seen between the different betamethasone dosing intervals assessed. Similarly, no significant differences in outcomes were seen when betamethasone acetate and phosphate was compared with betamethasone phosphate in one trial. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: It remains unclear whether one corticosteroid (or one particular regimen) has advantages over another.Dexamethasone may have some benefits compared with betamethasone such as less IVH, and a shorter length of stay in the NICU. The intramuscular route may have advantages over the oral route for dexamethasone, as identified in one small trial. Apart from the suggestion that 12-hour dosing may be as effective as 24-hour dosing of betamethasone based on one small trial, few other conclusions about optimal antenatal corticosteroid regimens were able to be made. No long-term results were available except for a small subgroup of 18 month old children in one trial. Trials comparing the commonly used corticosteroids are most urgently needed, as are trials of dosages and other variations in treatment regimens.

Interventions for clinical and subclinical hypothyroidism pre-pregnancy and during pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade there has been enhanced awareness of the appreciable morbidity of thyroid dysfunction, particularly thyroid deficiency. Since treating clinical and subclinical hypothyroidism may reduce adverse obstetric outcomes, it is crucial to identify which interventions are safe and effective. OBJECTIVES: To identify interventions used in the management of hypothyroidism and subclinical hypothyroidism pre-pregnancy or during pregnancy and to ascertain the impact of these interventions on important maternal, fetal, neonatal and childhood outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 March 2013). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared a pharmacological intervention for hypothyroidism and subclinical hypothyroidism pre-pregnancy or during pregnancy with another intervention or placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and quality and extracted the data. MAIN RESULTS: We included four RCTs of moderate risk of bias involving 362 women. In one trial of 115 women, levothyroxine therapy to treat pregnant euthyroid (normal thyroid function) women with thyroid peroxidase antibodies was not shown to reduce pre-eclampsia significantly (risk ratio (RR) 0.61; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 3.48) but did significantly reduce preterm birth by 72% (RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.80). Two trials of 30 and 48 hypothyroid women respectively compared levothyroxine doses, but both trials reported only biochemical outcomes. A trial of 169 women compared the trace element selenomethionine (selenium) with placebo and no significant differences were seen for either pre-eclampsia (RR 1.44; 95% CI 0.25 to 8.38) or preterm birth (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.20 to 4.61). None of the four trials reported on childhood neurodevelopmental delay.There was a non-significant trend towards fewer miscarriages with levothyroxine, and selenium showed some favourable impact on postpartum thyroid function and a decreased incidence of moderate to advanced postpartum thyroiditis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review found no difference between levothyroxine therapy and a control for treating pregnant euthyroid women with thyroid peroxidase antibodies for the outcome of pre-eclampsia, however a reduction in preterm birth and a trend towards reduced miscarriage with levothyroxine was shown. This review also showed no difference for pre-eclampsia or preterm birth when selenium was compared with placebo, however a promising reduction in postpartum thyroiditis was shown. Childhood neurodevelopmental delay was not assessed by any trial included in the review.Given that this review is based on four trials of moderate risk of bias, with only two trials contributing data (n = 284), there is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of one intervention for clinical or subclinical hypothyroidism pre-pregnancy or during pregnancy over another, for improving maternal, fetal, neonatal and childhood outcomes.