Gestational diabetes in twin pregnancies-a pathology requiring treatment or a benign physiological adaptation?

There is level-1 evidence that screening for and treating gestational diabetes in singleton pregnancies reduce maternal and neonatal morbidity. However, similar data for gestational diabetes in twin pregnancies are currently lacking. Consequently, the current approach for the diagnosis and management of gestational diabetes in twin pregnancies is based on the same diagnostic criteria and glycemic targets used in singleton pregnancies. However, twin pregnancies have unique physiological characteristics, and many of the typical gestational diabetes-related complications are less relevant for twin pregnancies. These differences raise the question of whether the greater increase in insulin resistance observed in twin pregnancies (which is often diagnosed as diet-treated gestational diabetes) should be considered physiological and potentially beneficial in which case alternative criteria should be used for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes in twin pregnancies. In this review, we summarize the most up-to-date evidence on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and clinical consequences of gestational diabetes in twin pregnancies and review the available data on twin-specific screening and diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes. Although twin pregnancies are associated with a higher incidence of diet-treated gestational diabetes, diet-treated gestational diabetes in twin pregnancies is less likely to be associated with adverse outcomes and accelerated fetal growth than in singleton pregnancies and may reduce the risk for intrauterine growth restriction. In addition, there is currently no evidence that treatment of diet-treated gestational diabetes in twin pregnancies improves outcomes, whereas preliminary data suggest that strict glycemic control in such cases might increase the risk for intrauterine growth restriction. Overall, these findings provide support to the hypothesis that the greater transient increase in insulin resistance observed in twin pregnancies is merely a physiological exaggeration of the normal increase in insulin resistance observed in singleton pregnancies (that is meant to support 2 fetuses) rather than a pathology that requires treatment. These data illustrate the need to develop twin-specific screening and diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes to avoid overdiagnosis of gestational diabetes and to reduce the risks associated with overtreatment of diet-treated gestational diabetes in twin pregnancies. Although data on twin-specific screening and diagnostic criteria are presently scarce, preliminary data suggest that the optimal screening and diagnostic criteria in twin pregnancies are higher than those currently used in singleton pregnancies.

Outcomes of dichorionic twin pregnancies with fused versus separate placentas.

PURPOSE: In a certain proportion of dichorionic twin pregnancies, the two placentas are fused. The clinical significance of this finding remains unclear. Our objective was to compare outcomes of dichorionic twin pregnancies with fused versus separate placentas as determined on first-trimester ultrasound. METHODS: Retrospective study of patients with dichorionic twins followed at a tertiary center between 2014 and 2022. The co-primary outcomes were fetal growth restriction and preeclampsia. Associations between fused placentas and the study outcomes were estimated using multivariable Poisson regression and were reported as adjusted relative risk (aRR) with a 95%-confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Of the 328 eligible patients, 175 (53.4%) and 153 (46.6%) had fused and separate placentas, respectively. Compared with pregnancies with separate placentas, patients with fused placentas had a lower risk of preeclampsia [aRR 0.48 (95%-CI 0.24-0.97)] but a higher risk of fetal growth restriction [aRR 1.23 (95%-CI 1.02-1.48)] and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit [aRR 1.31 (95%-CI 1.01-1.71)]. In addition, pregnancies with fused placentas were more likely to have a total placental weight below the 10th percentile than those with separate placentas [aRR 1.93 (95%-CI 1.16-3.21)]. DISCUSSION: Dichorionic twin pregnancies with fused placentas have a lower risk of preeclampsia but are more likely to be complicated by fetal growth restriction, observations that may be attributed to the lower total placentas mass in pregnancies with fused compared with separate placentas. Fused placentas can be used as a potential biomarker for the prediction of pregnancy complications in dichorionic twin pregnancies.

Bridging the notch: quantification of the end diastolic notch to better predict fetal growth restriction.

PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate several quantitative methods to describe the diastolic notch (DN) and compare their performance in the prediction of fetal growth restriction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent a placental scan at 16-26 weeks of gestation and delivered between Jan 2016 and Dec 2020 were included. The uterine artery pulsatility index was measured for all of the patients. In patients with a DN, it was quantified using the notch index and notch depth index. Odds ratios for small for gestational age neonates (defined as birth weight <10th and <5th percentile) were calculated. Predictive values of uterine artery pulsatility, notch, and notch depth index for fetal growth restriction were calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 514 patients were included, with 69 (13.4%) of them delivering a small for gestational age neonate (birth weight<10th percentile). Of these, 20 (20.9%) had a mean uterine artery pulsatility index >95th percentile, 13 (18.8%) had a unilateral notch, and 11 (15.9%) had a bilateral notch. 16 patients (23.2%) had both a high uterine artery pulsatility index (>95th percentile) and a diastolic notch. Comparison of the performance between uterine artery pulsatility, notch, and notch depth index using receiver operating characteristic curves to predict fetal growth restriction <10th percentile found area under the curve values of 0.659, 0.679, and 0.704, respectively, with overlapping confidence intervals. CONCLUSION: Quantifying the diastolic notch at 16-26 weeks of gestation did not provide any added benefit in terms of prediction of neonatal birth weight below the 10th or 5th percentile for gestational age, compared with uterine artery pulsatility index.

Neonatal and Early Childhood Outcomes of Twin and Singleton Infants Born Preterm.

OBJECTIVE: To compare neonatal and early-childhood outcomes of twins and singletons born preterm and explore the association of chorionicity with outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: This was a national retrospective cohort study of singleton and twin infants admitted at 230/7-286/7 weeks to level III neonatal intensive care units in Canada (2010-2020). The primary neonatal outcome was a composite of neonatal death or severe neonatal morbidities. The primary early-childhood outcome was a composite of death or significant neurodevelopmental impairment. RESULTS: The study cohort included 3554 twin and 12 815 singleton infants. Twin infants born at 230/7-256/7 weeks had a greater risk of the composite neonatal outcome (adjusted risk ratio 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.07). However, these differences were limited to the subgroups of same-sex and monochorionic twin pregnancies. Twin infants of 230/7-256/7 weeks were also at an increased risk of the composite early-childhood outcome (adjusted risk ratio 1.22, 95% CI 1.09-1.37). Twin infants of 260/7-286/7 weeks were not at an increased risk of adverse neonatal outcomes or the composite early-childhood outcome compared with singleton infants. CONCLUSIONS: Among infants born at 230/7-256/7 weeks, twins have a greater risk of adverse neonatal outcomes and the composite early-childhood outcome than singleton infants. However, the increased risk of adverse neonatal outcomes is mostly limited to monochorionic twins and may thus be driven by complications related to monochorionic placentation.

A decrease in endometrial thickness before embryo transfer is not associated with preterm birth and placenta-mediated pregnancy complications.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does a decrease in endometrial thickness (compaction ≥10%) before embryo transfer prognosticate the risk for preterm birth and placenta-mediated pregnancy complications among IVF pregnancies? DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study at a large private fertility practice. Patients with a singleton live birth after a fresh or frozen embryo transfer between 2016 and 2019 were included. The primary outcome was preterm birth (delivery before 37 weeks gestational age). Secondary outcomes included gestational hypertension, pre-eclampsia, intrauterine growth restriction and placental abruption. RESULTS: Of the 252 patients that met the study criteria, 122 (48%) demonstrated endometrial compaction (≥10%) and 130 (52%) did not. Age, body mass index (BMI), parity, history of preterm birth or history of pre-existing maternal conditions between the compaction and no-compaction groups were not significantly different. The overall prevalence of placenta-mediated complications across all participants was 25% (n = 62). The number of preterm births between the compaction and no-compaction groups (13% and 6%, respectively, P = 0.09) as well as the prevalence of placenta-mediated complications (29.5% and 20%, respectively, P = 0.08) were not significantly different. Findings for the primary outcome (preterm birth) persisted even after adjustment for potential confounding variables, including maternal age, parity, BMI, embryo score and type of embryo transfer (fresh versus frozen) (adjusted OR 1.86, 95% CI 0.64 to 5.38). CONCLUSIONS: Endometrial compaction (or decrease in endometrial thickness) before embryo transfer is not associated with preterm birth or placenta-mediated pregnancy complications.

A prediction tool for mode of delivery in twin pregnancies-a secondary analysis of the Twin Birth Study.

BACKGROUND: One of the controversies regarding the management of twin gestations relates to the mode of delivery. Currently, counseling regarding the mode of delivery and the chance of successful vaginal twin delivery is based on the average risk for intrapartum cesarean delivery in the general population of twin pregnancies. Decision support tools that provide an individualized risk for intrapartum cesarean delivery based on the unique characteristics of each patient can improve counseling and decision-making regarding the choice of mode of delivery in twin pregnancies. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop and validate a prediction model to determine the risk for intrapartum cesarean delivery in twin pregnancies. STUDY DESIGN: In this secondary analysis of the Twin Birth Study, a multicenter randomized controlled trial, we considered the subgroup of individuals who underwent a trial of vaginal delivery. Candidate predictors included maternal age, parity, previous cesarean delivery, conception method, chorionicity, diabetes and hypertension in pregnancy, gestational age at birth, the onset of labor, presentation of the second twin, sonographic fetal weight estimation, and fetal sex. The co-primary outcomes were overall intrapartum cesarean delivery and cesarean delivery of the second twin. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate the probability of the study outcomes. Model performance was evaluated using measures of discrimination (the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve), calibration, and predictive accuracy. Internal validation was performed using the bootstrap resampling technique. RESULTS: A total of 1221 individuals met the study criteria. The rate of overall intrapartum cesarean delivery and cesarean delivery for the second twin was 25.4% and 5.7%, respectively. The most contributory predictor variables were nulliparity, term birth (≥37 weeks), a noncephalic presentation of the second twin, previous cesarean delivery, and labor induction. The models for overall intrapartum cesarean delivery and cesarean delivery of the second twin had good overall discriminatory accuracy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.720; 95% confidence interval, 0.688-0.752 and 0.736; 95% confidence interval, 0.669-0.803, respectively) and calibration (as illustrated by the calibration plot and Brier scores of 0.168; 95% confidence interval, 0.156-0.180 and 0.051; 95% confidence interval, 0.040-0.061, respectively). The models achieved good specificity (66.7% and 81.6%, respectively), high negative predictive value (86.0% and 96.9%, respectively), and moderate sensitivity (68.1% and 57.1%, respectively). CONCLUSION: The prediction models developed in this study may assist care providers in counseling individuals regarding the optimal timing and mode of delivery in twin pregnancies by providing individualized estimates of the risk for intrapartum cesarean delivery.

Optimal timing of labor induction after prelabor rupture of membranes at term: a secondary analysis of the TERMPROM study.

BACKGROUND: In the case of prelabor rupture of membranes at term, the risk for neonatal and maternal infectious morbidity increases progressively with time from prelabor rupture of membranes. Although most studies identified a benefit associated with early induction within the first 24 hours following term prelabor rupture of membranes, there is currently no precise data regarding how early should induction be scheduled. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify the optimal timing of labor induction among women with term prelabor rupture of membranes by comparing the maternal and neonatal outcomes associated with labor induction with those of expectant management at any given 1-hour interval following prelabor rupture of membranes. STUDY DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of data from the TERMPROM trial, an international, multicenter, randomized clinical trial on immediate delivery vs expectant management of women with prelaor rupture of membranes at term (≥37+0/7 weeks' gestation). We considered all participants as a single cohort of women with term prelabor rupture of membranes, irrespective of the original randomized study group allocation. For each given 1-hour time interval within the first 36 hours following prelabor rupture of membranes, we compared the outcomes of subjects for whom labor induction was initiated during this interval with those of subjects managed expectantly at the same time interval. The primary neonatal outcome was a composite of neonatal infection and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit. The primary maternal outcomes included maternal infection (clinical chorioamnionitis or postpartum fever) and cesarean delivery. RESULTS: Of the 4742 subjects who met the study criteria, 2622 underwent labor induction, and 2120 experienced a spontaneous onset of labor. The rates of the neonatal composite outcome, neonatal admission to intensive care unit, and maternal infection increased progressively with time after prelabor rupture of membranes. The risk for these outcomes was lower among women who underwent induction when compared with those managed expectantly within the first 15 to 20 hours after prelabor rupture of membranes without affecting the risk for cesarean delivery. In addition, women who underwent labor induction within the first 30 to 36 hours had a shorter prelabor rupture of membranes to delivery time and a shorter total maternal hospital stay when compared with those managed expectantly at the same time interval. Among women managed expectantly, less than two-thirds (64%; 1365/2120) experienced a spontaneous onset of labor within the first 24 hours following prelabor rupture of membranes. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that immediate labor induction seems to be the optimal management strategy to minimize neonatal and maternal morbidity in the setting of prelabor rupture of membranes at term gestations. In cases for which immediate induction is not feasible, labor induction remains the preferred option over expectant management if performed within the first 15 to 20 hours after prelabor rupture of membranes.

Glycemic control and neonatal outcomes in twin pregnancies with gestational diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary data suggest that strict glycemic control in twin pregnancies with gestational diabetes mellitus may not improve outcomes but might increase the risk of fetal growth restriction. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the association of maternal glycemic control with the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus-related complications and small for gestational age in twin pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients with a twin pregnancy complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus in a single tertiary center between 2011 and 2020, and a matched control group of patients with a twin pregnancy without gestational diabetes mellitus in a 1:3 ratio. The exposure was the level of glycemic control, described as the proportion of fasting, postprandial, and overall glucose values within target. Good glycemic control was defined as a proportion of values within target above the 50th percentile. The first coprimary outcome was a composite variable of neonatal morbidity, defined as at least 1 of the following: birthweight >90th centile for gestational age, hypoglycemia requiring treatment, jaundice requiring phototherapy, birth trauma, or admission to the neonatal intensive care unit at term. A second coprimary outcome was small for gestational age, defined as birthweight <10th centile or <3rd centile for gestational age. Associations between the level of glycemic control and the study outcomes were estimated using logistic regression analysis and were expressed as adjusted odds ratio with 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients with gestational diabetes mellitus in a twin pregnancy met the study criteria. The overall rate of the primary outcome was 32.4% (34/105), and the overall proportion of pregnancies with a small for gestational age newborn at birth was 43.8% (46/105). Good glycemic control was not associated with a reduction in the risk of composite neonatal morbidity when compared with suboptimal glycemic control (32.1% vs 32.7%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.06 [95% confidence interval, 0.77-5.49]). However, good glycemic control was associated with higher odds of small for gestational age compared with nongestational diabetes mellitus pregnancies, especially in the subgroup of diet-treated gestational diabetes mellitus (65.5% vs 34.0%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 4.17 [95% confidence interval, 1.74-10.01] for small for gestational age <10th centile; and 24.1% vs 7.0%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 3.97 [95% confidence interval, 1.42-11.10] for small for gestational age <3rd centile). In contrast, the rate of small for gestational age in gestational diabetes mellitus pregnancies with suboptimal control was not considerably different when compared with non-gestational diabetes mellitus pregnancies. In addition, in cases of diet-treated gestational diabetes mellitus, good glycemic control was associated with a left-shift of the distribution of birthweight centiles, whereas the distribution of birthweight centiles among gestational diabetes mellitus pregnancies with suboptimal control was similar to that of nongestational diabetes mellitus pregnancies. CONCLUSION: In patients with gestational diabetes mellitus in a twin pregnancy, good glycemic control is not associated with a reduction in the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus-related complications but may increase the risk of a small for gestational age newborn in the subgroup of patients with mild (diet-treated) gestational diabetes mellitus. These findings further question whether the gestational diabetes mellitus glycemic targets used in singleton pregnancies also apply to twin pregnancies and support the concern that applying the same diagnostic criteria and glycemic targets in twin pregnancies may result in overdiagnosis and overtreatment of gestational diabetes mellitus and potential neonatal harm.

National and international guidelines on the management of twin pregnancies: a comparative review.

Twin gestations are associated with increased risk of pregnancy complications. However, high-quality evidence regarding the management of twin pregnancies is limited, often resulting in inconsistencies in the recommendations of various national and international professional societies. In addition, some recommendations related to the management of twin gestations are often missing from the clinical guidelines dedicated to twin pregnancies and are instead included in the practice guidelines on specific pregnancy complications (eg, preterm birth) of the same professional society. This can make it challenging for care providers to easily identify and compare recommendations for the management of twin pregnancies. This study aimed to identify, summarize, and compare the recommendations of selected professional societies from high-income countries on the management of twin pregnancies, highlighting areas of both consensus and controversy. We reviewed clinical practice guidelines of selected major professional societies that were either specific to twin pregnancies or were focused on pregnancy complications or aspects of antenatal care that may be relevant for twin pregnancies. We decided a priori to include clinical guidelines from 7 high-income countries (United States, Canada, United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Australia and New Zealand grouped together) and from 2 international societies (International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology and the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics). We identified recommendations regarding the following care areas: first-trimester care, antenatal surveillance, preterm birth and other pregnancy complications (preeclampsia, fetal growth restriction, and gestational diabetes mellitus), and timing and mode of delivery. We identified 28 guidelines published by 11 professional societies from the 7 countries and 2 international societies. Thirteen of these guidelines focus on twin pregnancies, whereas the other 16 focus on specific pregnancy complications predominantly in singletons but also include some recommendations for twin pregnancies. Most of the guidelines are recent, with 15 of the 29 guidelines published over the past 3 years. We identified considerable disagreement among guidelines, primarily in 4 key areas: screening and prevention of preterm birth, using aspirin to prevent preeclampsia, defining fetal growth restriction, and the timing of delivery. In addition, there is limited guidance on several important areas, including the implications of the "vanishing twin" phenomenon, technical aspects and risks of invasive procedures, nutrition and weight gain, physical and sexual activity, the optimal growth chart to be used in twin pregnancies, the diagnosis and management of gestational diabetes mellitus, and intrapartum care.This consolidation of key recommendations across several clinical practice guidelines can assist healthcare providers in accessing and comparing recommendations on the management of twin pregnancies and identifies high-priority areas for future research based on either continued disagreement among societies or limited current evidence to guide care.

Exploring patients' perspectives of gestational diabetes mellitus screening and counselling in Ontario: A grounded theory study.

INTRODUCTION: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. Approaches to screening for GDM continue to evolve, introducing potential variability of care. This study explored the impact of these variations on GDM counselling and screening from the perspectives of pregnant individuals. METHODS: Following a Corbin and Strauss approach to qualitative, grounded theory we recruited 28 individuals from three cities in Ontario, Canada who had a singleton pregnancy under the care of either a midwife, family physician or obstetrician. Convenience and purposive sampling techniques were used. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted and transcribed verbatim between March and December 2020. Transcripts were analysed inductively resulting in codes, categories and themes. RESULTS: Three themes were derived from the data about GDM screening and counselling: 'informing oneself', 'deciding' and 'screening'. All participants, regardless of geographical region, or antenatal care provider, moved through these three steps during the GDM counselling and screening process. Differences in counselling approaches between pregnancy care providers were noted throughout the 'informing' and 'deciding' stages of care. Factors influencing these differences included communication, healthcare autonomy and patient motivation to engage with health services. No differences were noted within care provider groups across the three geographic regions. Participant experiences of GDM screening were influenced by logistical challenges and personal preferences towards testing. CONCLUSION: Informing oneself about GDM may be a crucial step for facilitating decision-making and screening uptake, with an emphasis on information provision to facilitate patient autonomy and motivation. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Participants of our study included patients and service users. Participants were actively involved in the study design due to the qualitative, patient-centred nature of the research methods employed. Analysis of results was structured according to the emergent themes of the data which were grounded in patient perspectives and experiences.

Guideline No. 442: Fetal Growth Restriction: Screening, Diagnosis, and Management in Singleton Pregnancies.

OBJECTIVE: Fetal growth restriction is a common obstetrical complication that affects up to 10% of pregnancies in the general population and is most commonly due to underlying placental diseases. The purpose of this guideline is to provide summary statements and recommendations to support a clinical framework for effective screening, diagnosis, and management of pregnancies that are either at risk of or affected by fetal growth restriction. TARGET POPULATION: All pregnant patients with a singleton pregnancy. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: Implementation of the recommendations in this guideline should increase clinician competency to detect fetal growth restriction and provide appropriate interventions. EVIDENCE: Published literature in English was retrieved through searches of PubMed or MEDLINE, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library through to September 2022 using appropriate controlled vocabulary via MeSH terms (fetal growth retardation and small for gestational age) and key words (fetal growth, restriction, growth retardation, IUGR, FGR, low birth weight, small for gestational age, Doppler, placenta, pathology). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. Grey literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies. VALIDATION METHODS: The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix A (Table A1 for definitions and Table A2 for interpretations of strong and conditional [weak] recommendations). INTENDED AUDIENCE: Obstetricians, family physicians, nurses, midwives, maternal-fetal medicine specialists, radiologists, and other health care providers who care for pregnant patients. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Updated guidelines on screening, diagnosis, and management of pregnancies at risk of or affected by FGR. SUMMARY STATEMENTS: RECOMMENDATIONS: Prediction of FGR Prevention of FGR Detection of FGR Investigations in Pregnancies with Suspected Fetal Growth Restriction Management of Early-Onset Fetal Growth Restriction Management of Late-Onset FGR Postpartum management and preconception counselling.

Directive clinique no 442 : Retard de croissance intra-utérin : Dépistage, diagnostic et prise en charge en contexte de grossesse monofœtale.

OBJECTIF: Le retard de croissance intra-utérin est une complication obstétricale fréquente qui touche jusqu'à 10 % des grossesses dans la population générale et qui est le plus souvent due à une pathologie placentaire sous-jacente. L'objectif de la présente directive clinique est de fournir des déclarations sommaires et des recommandations pour appuyer un protocole clinique de dépistage, diagnostic et prise en charge du retard de croissance intra-utérin pour les grossesses à risque ou atteintes. POPULATION CIBLE: Toutes les patientes enceintes menant une grossesse monofœtale. BéNéFICES, RISQUES ET COûTS: La mise en application des recommandations de la présente directive devrait améliorer la compétence des cliniciens quant à la détection du retard de croissance intra-utérin et à la réalisation des interventions indiquées. DONNéES PROBANTES: La littérature publiée a été colligée par des recherches effectuées jusqu'en septembre 2022 dans les bases de données PubMed, Medline, CINAHL et Cochrane Library en utilisant un vocabulaire contrôlé au moyen de termes MeSH pertinents (fetal growth retardation and small for gestational age) et de mots-clés (fetal growth, restriction, growth retardation, IUGR, FGR, low birth weight, small for gestational age, Doppler, placenta, pathology). Seuls les résultats de revues systématiques, d'essais cliniques randomisés ou comparatifs et d'études observationnelles ont été retenus. La littérature grise a été obtenue par des recherches menées dans des sites Web d'organismes s'intéressant à l'évaluation des technologies dans le domaine de la santé et d'organismes connexes, dans des collections de directives cliniques, des registres d'essais cliniques et des sites Web de sociétés de spécialité médicale nationales et internationales. MéTHODES DE VALIDATION: Les auteurs ont évalué la qualité des données probantes et la force des recommandations en utilisant le cadre méthodologique GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Voir l'annexe A en ligne (tableau A1 pour les définitions et tableau A2 pour l'interprétation des recommandations fortes et conditionnelles [faibles]). PROFESSIONNELS CONCERNéS: Obstétriciens, médecins de famille, infirmières, sages-femmes, spécialistes en médecine fœto-maternelle, radiologistes et autres professionnels de la santé qui prodiguent des soins aux patientes enceintes. RéSUMé POUR TWITTER: Mise à jour de la directive sur le dépistage, le diagnostic et la prise en charge du retard de croissance intra-utérin pour les grossesses à risque ou atteintes. DÉCLARATIONS SOMMAIRES: RECOMMANDATIONS: Prédiction du retard de croissance intra-utérin Prévention du retard de croissance intra-utérin Détection du retard de croissance intra-utérin Examens en cas de retard de croissance intra-utérin soupçonné Prise en charge du retard de croissance intra-utérin précoce Prise en charge du retard de croissance intra-utérin tardif Prise en charge du post-partum et consultations préconception.

Should twin-specific growth charts be used to assess fetal growth in twin pregnancies?

One of the hallmarks of twin pregnancies is the slower rate of fetal growth when compared with singleton pregnancies during the third trimester. The mechanisms underlying this phenomenon and whether it represents pathology or benign physiological adaptation are currently unclear. One important implication of these questions relates to the type growth charts that should be used by care providers to monitor growth of twin fetuses. If the slower growth represents pathology (ie, intrauterine growth restriction caused uteroplacental insufficiency), it would be preferable to use a singleton growth chart to identify a small twin fetus that is at risk for perinatal mortality and morbidity. If, however, the relative smallness of twins is the result of benign adaptive mechanisms, it is likely preferable to use a twin-based charts to avoid overdiagnosis of intrauterine growth restriction in twin pregnancies. In the current review, we addressed this question by describing the differences in fetal growth between twin and singleton pregnancies, reviewing the current knowledge regarding the mechanisms responsible for slower fetal growth in twins, summarizing available empirical evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of the 2 types of charts for intrauterine growth restriction in twin pregnancies, and addressing the question of whether uncomplicated dichorionic twins are at an increased risk for fetal death when compared with singleton fetuses. We identified a growing body of evidence that shows that the use of twin charts can reduce the proportion of twin fetuses identified with suspected intrauterine growth restriction by up to 8-fold and can lead to a diagnosis of intrauterine growth restriction that is more strongly associated with adverse perinatal outcomes and hypertensive disorders than a diagnosis of intrauterine growth restriction based on a singleton-based chart without compromising the detection of twin fetuses at risk for adverse outcomes caused by uteroplacental insufficiency. We further found that small for gestational age twins are less likely to experience adverse perinatal outcomes or to have evidence of uteroplacental insufficiency than small for gestational age singletons and that recent data question the longstanding view that uncomplicated dichorionic twins are at an increased risk for fetal death caused by placental insufficiency. Overall, it seems that, based on existing evidence, the of use twin charts is reasonable and may be preferred over the use of singleton charts when monitoring the growth of twin fetuses. Still, it is important to note that the available data have considerable limitations and are primarily derived from observational studies. Therefore, adequately-powered trials are likely needed to confirm the benefit of twin charts before their use is adopted by professional societies.

Timing of cesarean delivery in women with ≥2 previous cesarean deliveries.

BACKGROUND: The rate of cesarean delivery is continuously increasing with the leading indication being a previous cesarean delivery. For women with 1 previous cesarean delivery, it is generally agreed that the optimal timing of delivery by elective cesarean delivery is during the 39th week of gestation, whereas for women with ≥2 previous cesarean deliveries, the optimal delivery time remains debatable. OBJECTIVE: To assess the maternal and neonatal risks associated with elective delivery at different gestational ages ranging from 37 0/7 to 39 6/7 weeks' gestation and to compare it with expectant management among women with at least 2 previous cesarean deliveries. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective, population-based cohort study of all women with at least 2 previous cesarean deliveries who delivered after 36 6/7 weeks of gestation in Ontario, Canada, between April 2012 and March 2019. Women with multifetal pregnancies or major fetal anomalies were excluded. For each completed gestational week, outcomes of women who had an elective repeat cesarean delivery at that week solely because of 2 previous cesarean deliveries were compared with the outcomes of those who were managed expectantly and delivered at a later gestational age. The primary outcome was a composite of maternal outcomes including mortality and severe maternal morbidity. Secondary outcomes were adverse neonatal outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 26,522 women met the inclusion criteria. The maternal risk was similar for elective delivery at 37 0/7 to 38 6/7 weeks of gestation compared with expectant management. However, elective delivery at 39 0/7 to 39 6/7 weeks' gestation was associated with a decreased risk for adverse outcomes when compared with expectant management (adjusted risk ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.91). For the neonate, elective delivery during the 37th week of gestation significantly increased the incidence of the composite adverse outcome than in an ongoing pregnancy (adjusted risk ratio, 1.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.39-2.01), but was comparable for elective delivery at 38 0/7 to 39 6/7 weeks' gestation and expectant management. The risk for an unplanned cesarean delivery increased from 6.5% before 38 weeks' gestation to 21.7% before 39 weeks' gestation and to 32.6% before 40 weeks' gestation. CONCLUSION: For women with ≥2 cesarean deliveries, elective delivery at 38 0/7 to 38 6/7 weeks' gestation likely represents the optimal balance between neonatal and maternal risk while decreasing the likelihood of an unplanned cesarean delivery.

Diagnostic utility of serial circulating placental growth factor levels and uterine artery Doppler waveforms in diagnosing underlying placental diseases in pregnancies at high risk of placental dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Placental pathology assessment following delivery in pregnancies complicated by preeclampsia, fetal growth restriction, abruption, and stillbirth reveals a range of underlying diseases. The most common pathology is maternal vascular malperfusion, characterized by high-resistance uterine artery Doppler waveforms and abnormal expression of circulating maternal angiogenic growth factors. Rare placental diseases (massive perivillous fibrinoid deposition and chronic histiocytic intervillositis) are reported to have high recurrence risks, but their associations with uterine artery Doppler waveforms and angiogenic growth factors are presently ill-defined. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the patterns of serial placental growth factor measurements and uterine artery Doppler waveform assessments in pregnancies that develop specific types of placental pathology to gain insight into their relationships with the timing of disease onset and pregnancy outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study conducted between January 2017 and November 2021 included all singleton pregnancies with at least 1 measurement of maternal circulating placental growth factor between 16 and 36 weeks' gestation, delivery at our institution, and placental pathology analysis demonstrating diagnostic features of maternal vascular malperfusion, fetal vascular malperfusion, villitis of unknown etiology, chronic histiocytic intervillositis, or massive perivillous fibrinoid deposition. Profiles of circulating placental growth factor as gestational age advanced were compared between these placental pathologies. Maternal and perinatal outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 337 pregnancies from 329 individuals met our inclusion criteria. These comprised placental pathology diagnoses of maternal vascular malperfusion (n=109), fetal vascular malperfusion (n=87), villitis of unknown etiology (n=96), chronic histiocytic intervillositis (n=16), and massive perivillous fibrinoid deposition (n=29). Among patients who developed maternal vascular malperfusion, placental growth factor levels gradually declined as pregnancy progressed (placental growth factor <10th percentile at 16-20 weeks' gestation in 42.9%; 20-24 weeks in 61.9%; 24-28 weeks in 77%; and 28-32 weeks in 81.4%) accompanied by mean uterine artery Doppler pulsatility index >95th percentile in 71.6% cases. Patients who developed either fetal vascular malperfusion or villitis of unknown etiology mostly exhibited normal circulating placental growth factor values in association with normal uterine artery Doppler waveforms (mean [standard deviation] pulsatility index values: fetal vascular malperfusion, 1.14 [0.49]; villitis of unknown etiology, 1.13 [0.45]). Patients who developed either chronic histiocytic intervillositis or massive perivillous fibrinoid deposition exhibited persistently low placental growth factor levels from the early second trimester (placental growth factor <10th centile at 16-20 weeks' gestation in 80% and 77.8%, respectively; 20-24 weeks in 88.9% and 63.6%; 24-28 weeks in 85.7% and 75%), all in combination with normal uterine artery Doppler waveforms (mean pulsatility index >95th centile: chronic histiocytic intervillositis, 25%; massive perivillous fibrinoid deposition, 37.9%). Preeclampsia developed in 83 of 337 (24.6%) patients and was most common in those developing maternal vascular malperfusion (54/109, 49.5%) followed by chronic histiocytic intervillositis (7/16, 43.8%). There were 29 stillbirths in the cohort (maternal vascular malperfusion, n=10 [9.2%]; fetal vascular malperfusion, n=5 [5.7%]; villitis of unknown etiology, n=1 [1.0%]; chronic histiocytic intervillositis, n=7 [43.8%]; massive perivillous fibrinoid deposition, n=6 [20.7%]). Most patients experiencing stillbirth exhibited normal uterine artery Doppler waveforms (21/29, 72.4%) and had nonmaternal vascular malperfusion pathologies (19/29, 65.5%). By contrast, 28 of 29 (96.5%) patients experiencing stillbirth had ≥1 low placental growth factor values before fetal death. CONCLUSION: Serial circulating maternal placental growth factor tests, in combination with uterine artery Doppler waveform assessments in the second trimester, may indicate the likely underlying type of placental pathology mediating severe adverse perinatal events. This approach has the potential to test disease-specific therapeutic strategies to improve clinical outcomes. Serial placental growth factor testing, compared with uterine artery Doppler studies, identifies a greater proportion of patients destined to have a poor perinatal outcome because diseases other than maternal vascular malperfusion are characterized by normal uteroplacental circulation.

Individualized treatment of preterm premature rupture of membranes to prolong the latency period, reduce the rate of preterm birth, and improve neonatal outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Preterm premature rupture of membranes complicates approximately 3% of pregnancies. Currently, in the absence of chorioamnionitis or placental abruption, expectant management, including antenatal steroids for lung maturation and prophylactic antibiotic treatment, is recommended. The benefits of individualized management have not been adequately explored. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the impact of 2 different management strategies of preterm premature rupture of membranes in 2 tertiary obstetrical centers on latency of >7 days, latency to birth, chorioamnionitis, funisitis, and short-term adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter retrospective study of women with singleton pregnancies with preterm premature rupture of membranes from 23 0/7 to 33 6/7 weeks of gestation between 2014 and 2018 and undelivered within 24 hours after hospital admission managed at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center, Toronto, Canada (standard management group), and BCNatal (Hospital Clínic of Barcelona and Hospital Sant Joan de Déu Barcelona), Barcelona, Spain (individualized management group), following local protocols. The standard management group received similar management for all patients, which included a standard antibiotic regimen and routine maternal and fetal surveillance, whereas the individualized management group received personalized management on the basis of amniocentesis at hospital admission (if possible), to rule out microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity and targeted treatment. The exclusion criteria were cervical dilatation >2 cm, active labor, contraindications to expectant management (acute chorioamnionitis, placental abruption, or abnormal fetal tracing), and major fetal anomalies. The primary outcome was latency of >7 days, and the secondary outcomes included latency to birth, chorioamnionitis, and short-term adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Statistical comparisons between groups were conducted with propensity score weighting. RESULTS: A total of 513 pregnancies with preterm premature rupture of membranes were included in this study: 324 patients received standard management, and 189 patients received individualized management, wherein amniocentesis was performed in 112 cases (59.3%). After propensity score weighting, patients receiving individualized management had a higher latency of >7 days (76.0% vs 41.6%; P<.001) and latency to birth (18.1±14.7 vs 9.7±9.7 days; P<.001). Although a higher rate of clinical chorioamnionitis was suspected in the individualized management group than the standard group (34.5% vs 22.0%; P<.01), there was no difference between the groups in terms of histologic chorioamnionitis (67.2% vs 73.4%; P=.16), funisitis (57.6% vs 58.1%; P=.92), or composite infectious maternal outcomes (9.1% vs 7.9%; P=.64). Prolonged latency in the individualized management group was associated with a significant reduction of preterm birth at <32 weeks of gestation (72.1% vs 90.5%; P<.001), neonatal intensive care unit admission (75.6% vs 83.0%; P=.046), and neonatal respiratory support at 28 days of life (16.1% vs 26.1%; P<.01) compared with that in the standard management group. Moreover, prolonged latency was not associated with neonatal severe morbidity at discharge (survival without severe morbidity, 80.4% vs 73.5%; P=.09). CONCLUSION: Individualized management of preterm premature rupture of membranes may prolong pregnancy and reduce preterm birth at <32 weeks of gestation, the need for neonatal support, and neonatal intensive care unit admissions, without an increase in histologic chorioamnionitis, funisitis, neonatal infection-related morbidity, and short-term adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Survey of iron prescribing practices for post-partum anaemia.

OBJECTIVE: Treatment for postpartum anaemia frequently entails iron supplementation, but questions remain regarding its optimal dosing, frequency, and efficacy. Our objective was to learn about the current prescribing practices of obstetrical providers at multiple hospitals, including indications and regimens used; further, we sought to understand how these practices are learned. METHODS: A 10-question web-based survey was developed via expert consensus. The survey was distributed via email to obstetrical providers (including trainees) practising at seven hospitals affiliated with the University of Toronto, including from Obstetrics & Gynaecology (OBGYN), Family Practice (FP-OB) and midwifery. RESULTS: The survey was directly sent to 469 participants and 140 responses were collected from the direct email recruitment pool (response rate 30%). Half of respondents were OBGYN physicians. The most common indication was a post-partum haemoglobin threshold of 90 g/L. Both intravenous and oral formulations were used; the most common oral formulation was ferrous fumarate (77%). Prescribing practices were most commonly shaped using passed-down knowledge. CONCLUSION: Through this survey, we have learned about the most common post-partum iron supplementation indications, formulations and regimens used in both academic and community hospitals in the greater Toronto area. This insight will help inform future studies investigating the efficacy of oral iron supplementation in the treatment of post-partum anaemia.

Guideline No. 428: Management of Dichorionic Twin Pregnancies.

OBJECTIVE: To review evidence-based recommendations for the management of dichorionic twin pregnancies. TARGET POPULATION: Pregnant women with a dichorionic twin pregnancy. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: Implementation of the recommendations in this guideline may improve the management of twin pregnancies and reduce neonatal and maternal morbidity and mortality. EVIDENCE: Published literature was retrieved through searches of PubMed and the Cochrane Library using appropriate controlled vocabulary (e.g., twin, preterm birth). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. There were no date limits, but results were limited to English- or French-language materials. VALIDATION METHODS: The content and recommendations were drafted and agreed upon by the principal authors. The Board of the SOGC approved the final draft for publication. The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations of strong and weak recommendations). INTENDED AUDIENCE: Obstetricians, family physicians, nurses, midwives, maternal-fetal medicine specialists, radiologists, and other health care providers who care for women with twin pregnancies. SUMMARY STATEMENTS: RECOMMENDATIONS.

Directive clinique no 428 : Prise en charge de la grossesse gémellaire bichoriale.

OBJECTIF: Examiner les recommandations fondées sur des données probantes pour la prise en charge de la grossesse gémellaire bichoriale. POPULATION CIBLE: Femmes enceintes qui mènent une grossesse gémellaire bichoriale. BéNéFICES, RISQUES ET COûTS: La mise en œuvre des recommandations de la présente directive pourrait améliorer la prise en charge de la grossesse gémellaire et réduire les risques de morbidité et mortalité néonatales et maternelles. DONNéES PROBANTES: La littérature publiée a été rassemblée par des recherches dans les bases de données PubMed et Cochrane Library au moyen d'un vocabulaire contrôlé approprié (p. ex., twin, preterm birth). Seuls les résultats de revues systématiques, d'essais cliniques randomisés ou comparatifs et d'études observationnelles ont été retenus. Aucune contrainte n'a été appliquée quant à la date de publication, mais les résultats ont été limités aux contenus en anglais ou en français. MéTHODES DE VALIDATION: Le contenu et les recommandations ont été rédigés et acceptés par les auteurs principaux. Le conseil d'administration de la SOGC a approuvé la version définitive aux fins de publication. Les auteurs ont évalué la qualité des données probantes et la force des recommandations en utilisant le cadre méthodologique d'évaluation, de développement et d'évaluation (GRADE). Consulter l'annexe A en ligne (le tableau A1 pour les définitions et le tableau A2 pour les interprétations des recommandations fortes et faibles). PROFESSIONNELS CONCERNéS: Obstétriciens, médecins de famille, infirmières, sages-femmes, spécialistes en médecine fœto-maternelle, radiologistes et autres professionnels de la santé qui prodiguent des soins aux femmes enceintes de jumeaux. DÉCLARATIONS SOMMAIRES: RECOMMANDATIONS.

Directive clinique no 430 : Diagnostic et prise en charge de la rupture prématurée des membranes avant terme.

OBJECTIF: Fournir des directives claires et concises pour le diagnostic et la prise en charge de la rupture prématurée des membranes avant terme (RPMAT). POPULATION CIBLE: Toute patiente manifestant une rupture prématurée des membranes avant 37 semaines d'aménorrhée. BéNéFICES, RISQUES ET COûTS: La présente directive clinique vise à fournir les premières recommandations générales canadiennes sur la prise en charge de la rupture des membranes avant terme. Elle repose sur un examen complet et à jour des données probantes sur le diagnostic de la rupture et sur la prise en charge, le bon moment et les modes d'accouchement. DONNéES PROBANTES: Des recherches ont été effectuées dans PubMed-Medline et Cochrane en 2021 en utilisant les termes suivants : preterm premature rupture of membranes, PPROM, chorioamnionitis, Nitrazine test, ferning, commercial tests, PAMG-1, IGFBP-1 test, ultrasonography, PPROM/antenatal corticosteroids, PPROM/Magnesium sulphate, PPROM/antibiotic treatment, PPROM/tocolysis, PPROM/preterm labour, PPROM/neonatal outcomes, PPROM/mortality, PPROM/outpatient/inpatient, PPROM/cerclage, previable PPROM. Les articles retenus sont des essais cliniques randomisés, des méta-analyses, des revues systématiques, des directives cliniques et des études observationnelles. D'autres publications pertinentes ont été sélectionnées à partir des notices bibliographiques de ces articles. Seuls les articles en anglais ont été examinés. MéTHODES DE VALIDATION: Les auteurs ont évalué la qualité des données probantes et la force des recommandations en utilisant le cadre méthodologique GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). Voir l'annexe A (tableau A1 pour les définitions et tableau A2 pour l'interprétation des recommandations fortes et faibles). PROFESSIONNELS CONCERNéS: Tous les fournisseurs de soins de santé prénatale ou périnatale. DÉCLARATIONS SOMMAIRES: RECOMMANDATIONS.