Vitamin D status is not associated with clinical severity of COVID-19 in pregnant women.

PURPOSE: To investigate the association between vitamin D status and the clinical severity of COVID-19 in pregnant women. METHODS: This prospective case-control study included 147 pregnant women with COVID-19 and 300 matched controls. Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin (25(OH)D) concentrations were measured on admission. Patients with mild-to-moderate disease (n = 114, 77.6%) and severe-to-critical disease (n = 33, 22.4%) were classified as symptomatic patients who did not require oxygen support and those who received oxygen support, respectively. SARS-CoV-2 positivity rates, clinical severity of COVID-19, and pulmonary involvement were compared according to vitamin D status. RESULTS: Serum 25(OH)D concentrations were found to be 36.6 ± 26.8 and 31.3 ± 20.7 nmol/L in pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2 and healthy controls, respectively (p = 0.001). The clinical severity of pregnant women with COVID-19 did not differ concerning vitamin D deficiency (RR = 0.568, 95% CI [0.311-1.036]; p = 0.065), even after excluding patients on vitamin supplementation (RR = 0.625, 95% CI [0.275-1.419]; p = 0.261). Testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 was not related to vitamin D status in the overall cohort of pregnant women (RR = 0.767, 95% CI [0.570-1.030]; p = 0.078). Pulmonary involvement of COVID-19 was found to be similar between patients with vitamin D deficiency and adequate vitamin D levels (RR = 0.954; 95% CI [0.863-1.055]; p = 0.357). CONCLUSION: The clinical severity and pulmonary involvement of COVID-19 may not be associated with vitamin D status in pregnant women. Vitamin D deficiency/adequacy rates were comparable in pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2 and healthy pregnant women.

The Comparison of Transvaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery and Conventional Laparoscopy in Opportunistic Bilateral Salpingectomy for Permanent Female Sterilization.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) approach with conventional laparoscopy (CL) in opportunistic bilateral salpingectomy (BS) alone for permanent female sterilization as an opportunistic cancer prevention strategy. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Two-centered tertiary hospitals. PATIENTS: Ninety-six women with a nonprolapsed uterus seeking definitive surgical permanent contraception. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were scheduled for BS and assigned to a study arm in a 2:1 fashion (CL:vNOTES allocation ratio) concerning patient's choice. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients were followed at their postoperative first week and first month. The visual analog score (VAS), Patient Global Impression of Improvement, and Female Sexual Function Index scales were used to assess the pain, patient satisfaction, and discomfort/pain after vaginal penetration, respectively. Patients who underwent to vNOTES had a significantly higher number of previous abdominal surgery (median difference, 1.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-3.48; p = .016). Compared with CL, vNOTES was associated with lower 6-hour (rate ratio [RR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.50-0.77) and 24-hour (RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.23-0.46) postoperative VAS scores and less amount of postoperative analgesics (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36-0.78). The slope of change in postoperative VAS scores was in a shorter time in the vNOTES group (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.36-0.60). The rate of postoperative improvement was higher in the vNOTES group than the CL group at the postoperative first week (87.5% vs 68.2%, χ2 = 4.232, p = .032) and first month (96.9% vs 87.9%, χ2 = 2.091, p = .140). The rate of patients reporting postoperative decline in Female Sexual Function Index /pain scores (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.47-1.96) was found to be similar in both of the study groups, and no postoperative complication was observed in either group. CONCLUSION: Women seeking permanent sterilization and who underwent BS for ovarian cancer risk reduction purposes had higher satisfaction, less postoperative pain, lower analgesic requirement, and similar surgical outcomes in the vNOTES group than the CL group, even in patients with previous surgeries and a nonprolapsed uterus. vNOTES approach could be the preferred method for the opportunistic BS in female sterilization.

An internally validated prediction model for critical COVID-19 infection and intensive care unit admission in symptomatic pregnant women.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant women are at an increased risk of mortality and morbidity owing to COVID-19. Many studies have reported on the association of COVID-19 with pregnancy-specific adverse outcomes, but prediction models utilizing large cohorts of pregnant women are still lacking for estimating the risk of maternal morbidity and other adverse events. OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to develop a prediction model to quantify the risk of progression to critical COVID-19 and intensive care unit admission in pregnant women with symptomatic infection. STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study including 8 hospitals from 4 countries (the United Kingdom, Austria, Greece, and Turkey). The data extraction was from February 2020 until May 2021. Included were consecutive pregnant and early postpartum women (within 10 days of birth); reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome was progression to critical illness requiring intensive care. The secondary outcomes included maternal death, preeclampsia, and stillbirth. The association between the primary outcome and 12 candidate predictors having a known association with severe COVID-19 in pregnancy was analyzed with log-binomial mixed-effects regression and reported as adjusted risk ratios. All the potential predictors were evaluated in 1 model and only the baseline factors in another. The predictive accuracy was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Of the 793 pregnant women who were positive for SARS-CoV-2 and were symptomatic, 44 (5.5%) were admitted to intensive care, of whom 10 died (1.3%). The 'mini-COvid Maternal Intensive Therapy' model included the following demographic and clinical variables available at disease onset: maternal age (adjusted risk ratio, 1.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.95; P=.015); body mass index (adjusted risk ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.66; P=.010); and diagnosis in the third trimester of pregnancy (adjusted risk ratio, 3.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.78-8.46; P=.001). The optimism-adjusted area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.73. The 'full-COvid Maternal Intensive Therapy' model included body mass index (adjusted risk ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.95; P=.015), lower respiratory symptoms (adjusted risk ratio, 5.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.81-21.4; P=.007), neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (adjusted risk ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.36-1.89; P<.001); and serum C-reactive protein (adjusted risk ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-1.44; P<.001), with an optimism-adjusted area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.85. Neither model showed signs of a poor fit. Categorization as high-risk by either model was associated with a shorter diagnosis to intensive care unit admission interval (log-rank test P<.001, both), higher maternal death (5.2% vs 0.2%; P<.001), and preeclampsia (5.7% vs 1.0%; P<.001). A spreadsheet calculator is available for risk estimation. CONCLUSION: At presentation with symptomatic COVID-19, pregnant and recently postpartum women can be stratified into high- and low-risk for progression to critical disease, even where resources are limited. This can support the nature and place of care. These models also highlight the independent risk for severe disease associated with obesity and should further emphasize that even in the absence of other comorbidities, vaccination is particularly important for these women. Finally, the model also provides useful information for policy makers when prioritizing national vaccination programs to quickly protect those at the highest risk of critical and fatal COVID-19.

Lung Ultrasound Can Influence the Clinical Treatment of Pregnant Women With COVID-19.

Lung ultrasound (LUS) is an effective tool to detect and monitor patients infected with 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The use of LUS on pregnant women is an emerging trend, considering its effectiveness during the outbreak. Eight pregnant women with a diagnosis of COVID-19 confirmed by nasal/throat real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing who underwent point-of-care LUS examinations after routine obstetric ultrasound are described. A routinely performed LUS examination revealed serious lung involvement in 7 cases: 2 were initially asymptomatic; 3 have chest computed tomography; 1 had initial negative real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction results; and 1 had initial negative computed tomographic findings. Treatment for COVID-19 was either commenced or changed in 87.5% of the patients (n = 7 of 8) on LUS findings. Among patients with abnormal LUS findings, treatment was commenced in 5 patients (71.5%) and changed in 2 patients (28.5%). One normal and 7 abnormal LUS cases indicate the impact of routine LUS on the clinical outcome and treatment of pregnant women.

Pregnancy worsens the morbidity of COVID-19 and this effect becomes more prominent as pregnancy advances.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate pregnancy outcomes and compare the clinical characteristics of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) disease in pregnant and agematched non-pregnant women. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Hospital records of four tertiary care centers were reviewed retrospectively. The subjects comprised 188 pregnant patients and 799 non-pregnant women who were admitted to these hospitals. RESULTS: Pregnancy significantly affected the clinical severity of COVID-19 and this effect was more prominent in pregnant women at >20 weeks gestation (p<0.001). Rates of oxygen support (10.1% vs 4.8%; p≤0.001), intensive care unit admission (3.2% vs 0.6%; p=0.009), presence of fever (12.8% vs 4.4%; p<0.001), tachypnea (7.0% vs 2.4%; p=0.003) and tachycardia (16.0% vs 1.9%; p<0.001) were significantly more frequent in pregnant women compared with non-pregnant women. Pregnancy was strongly associated with the need for oxygen support [relative risk (RR), 2.125; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.25-3.60] and admission to the intensive care unit (RR, 5.1; 95% CI: 1.57-16.53) compared with non-pregnant women. Some 14.4% of the pregnant women had co-morbidities. Sixty of the 188 pregnant women (31.9%) delivered during the Severe Acute Respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection, 11 (18.3%) had vaginal deliveries and 49 (81.7%) were by cesarean section. Of these 60 deliveries, 40 (66.7%) were <37 weeks gestation. CONCLUSION: Pregnancy worsens the morbidity of COVID-19 and this effect seems to increase as the pregnancy advances, but not the mortality rate.

Anxiety levels and obsessive compulsion symptoms of pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Reliable data regarding maternal mental well-being during the Severe Acute Respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic are scarce. This study aimed to assess the state/trait anxiety and obsessive-compulsive symptoms of pregnant women and compare those with the non-pregnant population using patient-reported validated outcome measures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective case-control study was conducted at a tertiary 'Coronavirus Pandemic Hospital' in Istanbul, Turkey in April, 2020. Pregnant and non-pregnant women were consecutively allocated to two groups regardless of gestational age. The primary outcome was to identify the anxiety levels and obsessive-compulsive symptoms of pregnant women during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic using the State-Trait Anxiety inventory (STAI) and Maudsley Obsessive-Compulsive inventory (MOCI), respectively. RESULTS: Two hundred three pregnant women and 101 non-pregnant women were included. The mean STAI-S questionnaire score of pregnant and nonpregnant women was 41.96±9.15 and 46.62±12, respectively (p=0.001). The overall incidence of STAI >40 in pregnant and non-pregnant women was 62.6% and 73.3%, respectively. The mean total score of MOCI was 17.9±6.7 and 15±6.6 in pregnant and non-pregnant women, respectively. The overall incidence of 30-item-MOCI ≥13.1 in pregnant and non-pregnant women was 61.6% (125/203) and 30.7% (31/103), respectively (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: State anxiety and obsessive-compulsive symptoms in pregnant women were found increased during the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Pregnant women showed more favourable anxiety levels compared with non-pregnant women. These findings can be used to improve the coping skills of pregnant women during the pandemic, to prepare for the post-pandemic period, and to deal with the long-term mental health impact of COVID-19.

How to perform and interpret the lung ultrasound by the obstetricians in pregnant women during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence for the use of lung ultrasound scan (LUS) examinations in coronavirus 2019 pneumonia is rapidly growing. The safe and non-ionizing nature of LUS drew attention, particularly for pregnant women. This study aimed to contribute to the interpretation of LUS findings in pregnant women for the obstetricians. MATERIALS AND METHODS: LUS was performed to pregnant women suspected of or diagnosed as having Severe Acute Respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the first 24 hours of admission. Fourteen areas (3 posterior, 2 lateral, and 2 anterior) were scanned per patient for at least 10 seconds along the indicated anatomical landmarks. The scan was performed in supine, right-sided and left-sided positions, respectively. Each area was given a score between 0 and 3 according to the specific pattern. RESULTS: In this study, 21 still images and 21 videoclips that enabled dynamic and real-time evaluation were provided. Pleural line assessment, physiologic A-lines, pathologic B-lines, light beam pattern, white lung pattern, and specific patterns for quick recognition and evaluation are described. CONCLUSION: The potential advantages and limitations of LUS and its areas of use for obstetricians are discussed. LUS is a promising supplementary imaging tool during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. It is easy to perform and may be feasible in the hands of obstetricians after a brief didactic course. It may be a firstline imaging modality for pregnant women.

Outcomes of universal SARS-CoV-2 testing program in pregnant women admitted to hospital and the adjuvant role of lung ultrasound in screening: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The emerging evidence for the asymptomatic carriers of SARS-CoV-2 infection emphasized the critical need for universal screening of pregnant women. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to present the prevalence of overall and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection rates in pregnant women admitted to the hospital, and assess the diagnostic accuracy of maternal symptoms and lung ultrasound (LUS) findings in detecting the infection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective cohort study was conducted at a single tertiary center in Istanbul, Turkey, for a month period starting from 27 April 2020. Women with a confirmed pregnancy regardless of the gestational week admitted to the obstetric unit with any indication were consecutively underwent LUS and PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: A total of 296 patients were included for the final analysis. The universal screening strategy diagnosed 23 pregnant women (7.77%) with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The rate of symptomatic and asymptomatic patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 was found as 3.72% (n = 11) and 4.05% (n = 12), respectively. Four of nine women who underwent a second testing for SARS-CoV-2 upon abnormal LUS findings were found positive eventually (17.4%, n = 4/23). The asymptomatic pregnant women with LUS score of 1 and those with normal LUS findings were considered as likely to be normal. Symptomatic patients with LUS score of 1 and those with score of 2 or 3 were considered as abnormal. On a secondary diagnostic performance analysis, the positive predictive value and the sensitivity were found as 44% and 47.8% for the triage based on maternal symptoms and, 82.3% and 60.9% for the triage based on LUS, respectively. CONCLUSION: A one-month trial period of universal testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection with RT-PCR in pregnant women who admitted to the hospital showed an overall and asymptomatic infection diagnose rate of 7.77% and 4%, respectively. Using lung ultrasound was found more predictive in detecting the infection than the use of symptomatology solely.

Lung ultrasonography in pregnant women during the COVID-19 pandemic: an interobserver agreement study among obstetricians.

PURPOSE: This study investigated interobserver agreement in lung ultrasonography (LUS) in pregnant women performed by obstetricians with different levels of expertise, with confirmation by an expert radiologist. METHODS: This prospective study was conducted at a tertiary "Coronavirus Pandemic Hospital" in April 2020. Pregnant women suspected to have coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were included. Two blinded experienced obstetricians performed LUS on pregnant women separately and noted their scores for 14 lung zones. Following a theoretical and hands-on practical course, one experienced obstetrician, two novice obstetric residents, and an experienced radiologist blindly evaluated anonymized and randomized still images and videoclips retrospectively. Weighted Cohen's kappa and Krippendorff's alpha tests were used to assess the interobserver agreement. RESULTS: Fifty-two pregnant women were included, with confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis rate of 82.7%. In total, 336 eligible still images and 115 videoclips were included in the final analysis. The overall weighted Cohen's kappa values ranged from 0.706 to 0.912 for the 14 lung zones. There were only seven instances of major disagreement (>1 point) in the evaluation of 14 lung zones of 52 patients (n=728). The overall agreement between the radiologist and obstetricians for the still images (Krippendorff's α=0.856, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.797 to 0.915) and videoclips (Krippendorff's α=0.785; 95% CI, 0.709 to 0.861) was good. CONCLUSION: The interobserver agreement between obstetricians with different levels of experience on still images and videoclips of LUS was good. Following a brief theoretical course, obstetricians' performance of LUS in pregnant women and interpretation of pre-acquired LUS images can be considered consistent.

Near-term pregnant women's attitude toward, concern about and knowledge of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: COVID-19 is a novel type of the coronavirus family with an incompletely described clinical course. Little is known about the psychological aspects, particularly for vulnerable populations including pregnant women.Objectives: To understand the attitude, concerns, and knowledge of the non-infected pregnant women toward the COVID-19 outbreak in order to constitute base data for detailed counseling and to develop targeted messages.Patients and methods: This cross-sectional survey research presented analysis of prospectively collected data yielded at a single tertiary "Coronavirus Pandemic Hospital" referral center for a ten days period following the first confirmed death due to the COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey. Non-infected women with a confirmed pregnancy over 30th gestational week were consecutively included. A patient-reported non-validated questionnaire formed by the expert committee that includes 15 specific questions was used. Non-infected, pregnant women over 30th gestational week who applied to the outpatient clinic were consecutively included. A total of 213 women were enrolled, 37 were excluded: 7 for being in the first trimester, 3 were illiterate, and 27 were Syrian refugees having difficulties in translation.Results: A total of 172 pregnant women were included. Overall, four women refused to participate to the survey (1.9%). The mean age was 27.5 ± 5.3 years. Median gestational week and parity were 35 ± 11 weeks and 1 ± 2, respectively. Pregnant women were observed to trust the authorities (65%) and the healthcare staff (92.4%), and their respect was increased (82.5%) during the outbreak. Majority of the women (87.2%) comply with the self-quarantine rules. Half of the women (52%) reported that they felt vulnerable and predominantly were concerned (80%). Approximately one-third of the women constantly keep thinking that they may get infected (35.5%) or they might get infected during/following the delivery or their baby might get infected after being born (42%). Half of the women (50%) were reported that they either had no idea about or think the breastfeeding is not safe during the outbreak. About 45% of the women were confused or had doubts about if the mode of delivery may be affected by the pandemic. Greater part of the participants does not know if COVID-19 might cause birth defects (76%) or preterm birth (64.5%). Counseling flow keys helping pregnant women to overcome misleads, regarding the COVID-19 outbreak is proposed.Conclusions: Non-infected pregnant women with a viable pregnancy at near term were observed to have positive attitude and compliance toward the COVID-19 outbreak and frontline healthcare staff; increased concern and vulnerability; and restricted knowledge about the pregnancy-related outcomes. While the clinical evidence was growing rapidly, this data may guide obstetricians and midwives to perceive what accurate information should be provided to the pregnant women.