SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy during the first wave of COVID-19 in the Netherlands: a prospective nationwide population-based cohort study (NethOSS).

OBJECTIVE: To describe characteristics, risk factors and maternal, obstetric and neonatal outcomes of pregnant women infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). DESIGN: Multi-centre prospective population-based cohort study. SETTING: Nationwide study in the Netherlands. POPULATION: Pregnant women with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to hospital or in home-isolation: 1 March 2020 to 31 August 2020. METHODS: Pregnant women with positive polymerase chain reaction or antibody tests were registered using the Netherlands Obstetrics Surveillance System (NethOSS). (Selective) testing occurred according to national guidelines. Data from the national birth registry (pregnant pre-coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19] cohort) and an age-matched cohort of COVID-19-positive women (National Institute for Public Health and the Environment; fertile age COVID-19 cohort) were used as reference. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant women. Maternal, obstetric and neonatal outcomes including hospital and intensive care admission. RESULTS: Of 376 registered pregnant women with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, 20% (74/376) were admitted to hospital, of whom 84% (62/74) were due to SARS-CoV-2; 10% (6/62) were admitted to intensive care and 15% (9/62) to obstetric high-care units. Risk factors for admission were non-European country of origin (odds ratio [OR] 1.73, 95% CI 1.01-2.96) and being overweight/obese (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.51-3.20). No maternal or perinatal deaths occurred. Caesarean section after labour-onset was increased (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.09-2.28). Hospital and intensive care admission were higher compared with the fertile age COVID-19 cohort (OR 6.75, 95% CI 5.18-8.81 and OR 2.52, 95% CI 1.11-5.77, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Non-European country of origin and being overweight/obese are risk factors for severe course of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy, risk of caesarean section and hospital and intensive care unit admission are increased. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 in the Netherlands show increased hospital/ICU admission and caesarean section.

Cost effectiveness of nifedipine compared with atosiban in the treatment of threatened preterm birth (APOSTEL III trial).

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of treatment with nifedipine compared with atosiban in women with threatened preterm birth. DESIGN: An economic analysis alongside a randomised clinical trial (the APOSTEL III study). SETTING: Obstetric departments of 12 tertiary hospitals and seven secondary hospitals in the Netherlands and Belgium. POPULATION: Women with threatened preterm birth between 25 and 34 weeks of gestation, randomised for tocolysis with either nifedipine or atosiban. METHODS: We performed an economic analysis from a societal perspective. We estimated costs from randomisation until discharge. Analyses for singleton and multiple pregnancies were performed separately. The robustness of our findings was evaluated in sensitivity analyses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean costs and differences were calculated per woman treated with nifedipine or atosiban. Health outcomes were expressed as the prevalence of a composite of adverse perinatal outcomes. RESULTS: Mean costs per patients were significantly lower in the nifedipine group [singleton pregnancies: €34,897 versus €43,376, mean difference (MD) -€8479 [95% confidence interval (CI) -€14,327 to -€2016)]; multiple pregnancies: €90,248 versus €102,292, MD -€12,044 (95% CI -€21,607 to € -1671). There was a non-significantly higher death rate in the nifedipine group. The difference in costs was mainly driven by a lower neonatal intensive care unit admission (NICU) rate in the nifedipine group. CONCLUSION: Treatment with nifedipine in women with threatened preterm birth results in lower costs when compared with treatment with atosiban. However, the safety of nifedipine warrants further investigation. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: In women with threatened preterm birth, tocolysis using nifedipine results in lower costs when compared with atosiban.

Comparing induction of labour with oral misoprostol or Foley catheter at term: cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomised controlled multi-centre non-inferiority trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the costs of labour induction with oral misoprostol versus Foley catheter. DESIGN: Economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Obstetric departments of six tertiary and 23 secondary care hospitals in the Netherlands. POPULATION: Women with a viable term singleton pregnancy in cephalic presentation, intact membranes, an unfavourable cervix (Bishop score <6) without a previous caesarean section, were randomised for labour induction with oral misoprostol (n = 924) or Foley catheter (n = 921). METHODS: We performed economic analysis from a hospital perspective. We estimated direct medical costs associated with healthcare utilisation from randomisation until discharge. The robustness of our findings was evaluated in sensitivity analyses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean costs and differences were calculated per women induced with oral misoprostol or Foley catheter. RESULTS: Mean costs per woman in the oral misoprostol group and Foley catheter group were €4470 versus €4158, respectively [mean difference €312, 95% confidence interval (CI) -€508 to €1063]. Multiple sensitivity analyses did not change these conclusions. However, if cervical ripening for low-risk pregnancies in the Foley catheter group was carried out in an outpatient setting, with admittance to labour ward only at start of active labour, the difference would be €4470 versus €3489, respectively (mean difference €981, 95% CI €225-1817). CONCLUSIONS: Oral misoprostol and Foley catheter generate comparable costs. Cervical ripening outside labour ward with a Foley catheter could potentially save almost €1000 per woman. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Oral misoprostol or Foley catheter for induction of labour generates comparable costs.

Maternal and neonatal outcomes in women with severe early onset pre-eclampsia before 26 weeks of gestation, a case series.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the maternal and neonatal outcomes and prolongation of pregnancies with severe early onset pre-eclampsia before 26 weeks of gestation. DESIGN: Nationwide case series. SETTING: All Dutch tertiary perinatal care centres. POPULATION: All women diagnosed with severe pre-eclampsia who delivered between 22 and 26 weeks of gestation in a tertiary perinatal care centre in the Netherlands, between 2008 and 2014. METHODS: Women were identified through computerised hospital databases. Data were collected from medical records. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Maternal complications [HELLP (haemolysis, elevated liver enzyme levels, and low platelet levels) syndrome, eclampsia, pulmonary oedema, cerebrovascular incidents, hepatic capsular rupture, placenta abruption, renal failure, and maternal death], neonatal survival and complications (intraventricular haemorrhage, retinopathy of prematurity, necrotising enterocolitis, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, and sepsis), and outcome of subsequent pregnancies (recurrent pre-eclampsia, premature delivery, and neonatal survival). RESULTS: We studied 133 women, delivering 140 children. Maternal complications occurred frequently (54%). Deterioration of HELLP syndrome during expectant care occurred in 48%, after 4 days. Median prolongation was 5 days (range: 0-25 days). Neonatal survival was poor (19%), and was worse (6.6%) if the mother was admitted before 24 weeks of gestation. Complications occurred frequently among survivors (84%). After active support, neonatal survival was comparable with the survival of spontaneous premature neonates (54%). Pre-eclampsia recurred in 31%, at a mean gestational age of 32 weeks and 6 days. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the limits of prolongation, women need to be counselled carefully, weighing the high risk for maternal complications versus limited neonatal survival and/or extreme prematurity and its sequelae. The positive prospects regarding maternal and neonatal outcome in future pregnancies can supplement counselling. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Severe early onset pre-eclampsia comes with high maternal complication rates and poor neonatal survival.

An economic analysis of immediate delivery and expectant monitoring in women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, between 34 and 37 weeks of gestation (HYPITAT-II).

OBJECTIVE: To assess the economic consequences of immediate delivery compared with expectant monitoring in women with preterm non-severe hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. DESIGN: A cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial (HYPITAT-II). SETTING: Obstetric departments of seven academic hospitals and 44 non-academic hospitals in the Netherlands. POPULATION: Women diagnosed with non-severe hypertensive disorders of pregnancy between 340/7 and 370/7  weeks of gestation, randomly allocated to either immediate delivery or expectant monitoring. METHODS: A trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from a healthcare perspective until final maternal and neonatal discharge. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Health outcomes were expressed as the prevalence of respiratory distress syndrome, defined as the need for supplemental oxygen for >24 hours combined with radiographic findings typical for respiratory distress syndrome. Costs were estimated from a healthcare perspective until maternal and neonatal discharge. RESULTS: The average costs of immediate delivery (n = 352) were €10 245 versus €9563 for expectant monitoring (n = 351), with an average difference of €682 (95% confidence interval, 95% CI -€618 to €2126). This 7% difference predominantly originated from the neonatal admissions, which were €5672 in the immediate delivery arm and €3929 in the expectant monitoring arm. CONCLUSION: In women with mild hypertensive disorders between 340/7 and 370/7  weeks of gestation, immediate delivery is more costly than expectant monitoring as a result of differences in neonatal admissions. These findings support expectant monitoring, as the clinical outcomes of the trial demonstrated that expectant monitoring reduced respiratory distress syndrome for a slightly increased risk of maternal complications. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Expectant management in preterm hypertensive disorders is less costly compared with immediate delivery.

Maintenance tocolysis with nifedipine in threatened preterm labour: 2-year follow up of the offspring in the APOSTEL II trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term effects of maintenance tocolysis with nifedipine on neurodevelopmental outcome of the infant. DESIGN, SETTING AND POPULATION: Follow up of infants of women who participated in a multicentre randomised controlled trial on maintenance tocolysis with nifedipine versus placebo. METHODS: Two years after the APOSTEL II trial on maintenance tocolysis with nifedipine versus placebo, we asked participants to complete the Ages and Stages Questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Infant development was measured in five domains. Developmental delay was defined as a score of ≤1 SD in one or more developmental domains. We performed exploratory subgroup analysis in women with preterm prolonged rupture of the membranes, and in women with a cervical length <10 mm at study entry. RESULTS: Of the 276 women eligible for follow up, 135 (52.5%) returned the questionnaire, encompassing data of 170 infants. At 2 years of age, infants of women with nifedipine maintenance tocolysis compared with placebo had a higher overall incidence of fine motor problems (22.2 versus 7.6%, OR 3.43, 95% CI 1.29-9.14, P = 0.01), and a lower incidence of poor problem-solving (21.1 versus 29.1%, OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.08-0.95, P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: This follow-up study revealed no clear benefit of nifedipine maintenance tocolysis at 2 years of age. As short-term adverse perinatal outcome was not reduced in the original APOSTEL II trial, we conclude that maintenance tocolysis does not appear to be beneficial at this time. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: No clear benefit of nifedipine maintenance tocolysis in preterm labour on 2-year infant outcome.

Quantitative fetal fibronectin testing in combination with cervical length measurement in the prediction of spontaneous preterm delivery in symptomatic women.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether in symptomatic women, the combination of quantitative fetal fibronectin (fFN) testing and cervical length (CL) improves the prediction of preterm delivery (PTD) within 7 days compared with qualitative fFN and CL. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of frozen fFN samples of a nationwide cohort study. SETTING: Ten perinatal centres in the Netherlands. POPULATION: Symptomatic women between 24 and 34 weeks of gestation. METHODS: The risk of PTD <7 days was estimated in predefined CL and fFN strata. We used logistic regression to develop a model including quantitative fFN and CL, and one including qualitative fFN (threshold 50 ng/ml) and CL. We compared the models' capacity to identify women at low risk (<5%) for delivery within 7 days using a reclassification table. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Spontaneous delivery within 7 days after study entry. RESULTS: We studied 350 women, of whom 69 (20%) delivered within 7 days. The risk of PTD in <7 days ranged from 2% in the lowest fFN group (<10 ng/ml) to 71% in the highest group (>500 ng/ml). Multivariable logistic regression showed an increasing risk of PTD in <7 days with rising fFN concentration [10-49 ng/ml: odds ratio (OR) 1.3, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.23-7.0; 50-199 ng/ml: OR 3.2, 95% CI 0.79-13; 200-499 ng/ml: OR 9.0, 95% CI 2.3-35; >500 ng/ml: OR 39, 95% CI 9.4-164] and shortening of the CL (OR 0.86 per mm, 95% CI 0.82-0.90). Use of quantitative fFN instead of qualitative fFN resulted in reclassification of 18 (5%) women from high to low risk, of whom one (6%) woman delivered within 7 days. CONCLUSION: In symptomatic women, quantitative fFN testing does not improve the prediction of PTD within 7 days compared with qualitative fFN testing in combination with CL measurement in terms of reclassification from high to low (<5%) risk, but it adds value across the risk range. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Quantitative fFN testing adds value to qualitative fFN testing with CL measurement in the prediction of PTD.