Association Between Influenza Vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Recent data in nonpregnant individuals suggest a protective effect of influenza vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and its severity. OBJECTIVES: Our primary objective was to evaluate whether influenza vaccination was associated with COVID-19 severity and pregnancy and neonatal outcomes among those infected with SARS-CoV-2. The secondary objective was to examine the association between influenza vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection. STUDY DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a multicenter retrospective cohort of pregnant people who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between March and August 2020, and a cohort of random deliveries during the same time period. The associations between 2019 influenza vaccination and the primary outcome of moderate-to-critical COVID-19 as well as maternal and perinatal outcomes were examined among all people who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between March and August 2020. The association between 2019 influenza vaccination and having a positive SARS-CoV-2 test was examined among a cohort of individuals who delivered on randomly selected dates between March and August 2020. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of 2325 people who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, 1068 (45.9%) were vaccinated against influenza in 2019. Those who received the influenza vaccine were older, leaner, more likely to have private insurance, and identify as White or Hispanic. They were less likely to smoke tobacco and identify as Black. Overall, 419 (18.0%) had moderate, 193 (8.3%) severe, and 52 (2.2%) critical COVID-19. There was no association between influenza vaccination and moderate-to-critical COVID-19 (29.2% vs. 28.0%, adjusted OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.90-1.34) or adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes among those who tested positive. Of 8152 people who delivered in 2020, 4658 (57.1%) received the influenza vaccine. Prior vaccination was not associated with a difference in the odds of SARS-CoV-2 infection (3.8% vs. 4.2%, adjusted OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.74-1.19). CONCLUSION: Prior influenza vaccination was not associated with decreased severity of COVID-19 or lower odds of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy.

Optimizing Opioid Prescription Quantity After Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To test whether an individualized opioid-prescription protocol (IOPP) with a shared decision-making component can be used without compromising postcesarean pain management. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized controlled noninferiority trial, we compared IOPP with shared decision making with a fixed quantity of opioid tablets at hospital discharge. We recruited at 31 centers participating in the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Study participants had uncomplicated cesarean births. Follow-up occurred through 12 weeks postdischarge. Individuals with complicated cesarean births or history of opioid use in the pregnancy were excluded. Participants were randomized 1:1 to IOPP with shared decision making or fixed quantity (20 tablets of 5 mg oxycodone). In the IOPP group, we calculated recommended tablet quantity based on opioid use in the 24 hours before discharge. After an educational module and shared decision making, participants selected a quantity of discharge tablets (up to 20). The primary outcome was moderate to severe pain (score 4 or higher [possible range 0-10]) on the BPI (Brief Pain Inventory) at 1 week after discharge. A total sample size of 5,500 participants was planned to assess whether IOPP with shared decision making was not inferior to the fixed quantity of 20 tablets. RESULTS: From September 2020 to March 2022, 18,990 individuals were screened and 5,521 were enrolled (n=2,748 IOPP group, n=2,773 fixed-quantity group). For the primary outcome, IOPP with shared decision making was not inferior to fixed quantity (59.5% vs 60.1%, risk difference 0.67%; 95% CI, -2.03% to 3.37%, noninferiority margin -5.0) and resulted in significantly fewer tablets received (median 14 [interquartile range 4-20] vs 20, P <.001) through 90 days postpartum. CONCLUSION: Compared with fixed quantity, IOPP with shared decision making was noninferior for outpatient postcesarean analgesia at 1 week postdischarge and resulted in fewer prescribed opioid tablets at discharge. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04296396.

Gestational Weight Gain and Neonatal Biometry during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multicenter Observational Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to test the hypothesis that being pregnant and delivering during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was associated with changes in gestational weight gain (GWG) or frequency of small- (SGA) or large-for-gestational-age (LGA) neonates. STUDY DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a multicenter observational cohort comparing pregnant people who delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic (June-December 2020) to people who delivered prior to the pandemic (March-December 2019). Those with multiple gestations, fetuses with major congenital anomalies, implausible GWG values, unavailable body mass index (BMI), or who were severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2-positive were excluded. The primary outcome was frequency of optimal recommended GWG based on prepregnancy BMI. Neonatal outcomes included birth weight, ponderal index, and frequency of SGA, LGA, and small head circumference for live births. Multivariable regression analysis was used to assess associations between exposure to the pandemic and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 10,717 pregnant people were included in our analysis. A total of 4,225 pregnant people were exposed to the pandemic and 6,492 pregnant people delivered prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Pregnant people exposed to the pandemic were older and more likely to have gestational diabetes. The frequency of appropriate GWG was 28.0% during the pandemic and 27.6% before the pandemic (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.93-1.11). Excessive GWG was more likely (54.9 vs. 53.1%; aOR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.001-1.17), and inadequate GWG was less likely during the pandemic (17.0 vs. 19.3%; aOR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.77-0.95). The frequency of SGA was 5.4% during the pandemic and 6.1% before the pandemic (aOR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.76-1.06), and the frequency of LGA was 16.0% during the pandemic versus 15.0% before the pandemic (aOR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.95-1.18). Other neonatal outcomes including birth weight percentile (62.1 [35.8-83.2] vs. 60.2 [34.4-82.2]; adjusted mean difference (aMD) = 1.50, 95% CI: -0.28 to 3.29), ponderal index (2.6 g/cm3 [2.4-2.8] in both groups; aMD = 0.01, 95% CI: 0.00-0.02), and small head circumference for livebirths (<10th percentile [8.2 vs. 8.1%; aOR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.89-1.19], <3rd percentile [3.5 vs. 3.1%; aOR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.93-1.44]) were similar between groups as well. CONCLUSION: Being pregnant and delivering during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a higher likelihood of excessive GWG and a lower likelihood of inadequate GWG. KEY POINTS: · Delivering during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with higher likelihood of excessive GWG.. · Delivering during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with lower likelihood of inadequate GWG.. · COVID-19 pandemic was not associated with changes in frequency of SGA or LGA..

Prediction of COVID-19 Severity at Delivery after Asymptomatic or Mild COVID-19 during Pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a prediction model that estimates the probability that a pregnant person who has had asymptomatic or mild coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prior to delivery admission will progress in severity to moderate, severe, or critical COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-positive patients who delivered from March through December 2020 at hospitals across the United States. Those eligible for this analysis presented for delivery with a current or previous asymptomatic or mild SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome was moderate, severe, or critical COVID-19 during the delivery admission through 42 days postpartum. The prediction model was developed and internally validated using stratified cross-validation with stepwise backward elimination, incorporating only variables that were known on the day of hospital admission. RESULTS: Of the 2,818 patients included, 26 (0.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-1.3%) developed moderate-severe-critical COVID-19 during the study period. Variables in the prediction model were gestational age at delivery admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.15; 95% CI, 1.08-1.22 per 1-week decrease), a hypertensive disorder in a prior pregnancy (aOR 3.05; 95% CI, 1.25-7.46), and systolic blood pressure at admission (aOR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.05 per mm Hg increase). This model yielded an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.72-0.91). CONCLUSION: Among individuals presenting for delivery who had asymptomatic-mild COVID-19, gestational age at delivery admission, a hypertensive disorder in a prior pregnancy, and systolic blood pressure at admission were predictive of delivering with moderate, severe, or critical COVID-19. This prediction model may be a useful tool to optimize resources for SARS-CoV-2-infected pregnant individuals admitted for delivery. KEY POINTS: · Three factors were associated with delivery with more severe COVID-19.. · The developed model yielded an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.82 and model fit was good.. · The model may be useful tool for SARS-CoV-2 infected pregnancies admitted for delivery..

Neurodevelopmental Outcomes After Late Preterm Antenatal Corticosteroids: The ALPS Follow-Up Study.

Importance: The Antenatal Late Preterm Steroids (ALPS) trial changed clinical practice in the United States by finding that antenatal betamethasone at 34 to 36 weeks decreased short-term neonatal respiratory morbidity. However, the trial also found increased risk of neonatal hypoglycemia after betamethasone. This follow-up study focused on long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes after late preterm steroids. Objective: To evaluate whether administration of late preterm (34-36 completed weeks) corticosteroids affected childhood neurodevelopmental outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective follow-up study of children aged 6 years or older whose birthing parent had enrolled in the multicenter randomized clinical trial, conducted at 13 centers that participated in the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) Network cycle from 2011-2016. Follow-up was from 2017-2022. Exposure: Twelve milligrams of intramuscular betamethasone administered twice 24 hours apart. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome of this follow-up study was a General Conceptual Ability score less than 85 (-1 SD) on the Differential Ability Scales, 2nd Edition (DAS-II). Secondary outcomes included the Gross Motor Function Classification System level and Social Responsiveness Scale and Child Behavior Checklist scores. Multivariable analyses adjusted for prespecified variables known to be associated with the primary outcome. Sensitivity analyses used inverse probability weighting and also modeled the outcome for those lost to follow-up. Results: Of 2831 children, 1026 enrolled and 949 (479 betamethasone, 470 placebo) completed the DAS-II at a median age of 7 years (IQR, 6.6-7.6 years). Maternal, neonatal, and childhood characteristics were similar between groups except that neonatal hypoglycemia was more common in the betamethasone group. There were no differences in the primary outcome, a general conceptual ability score less than 85, which occurred in 82 (17.1%) of the betamethasone vs 87 (18.5%) of the placebo group (adjusted relative risk, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.73-1.22). No differences in secondary outcomes were observed. Sensitivity analyses using inverse probability weighting or assigning outcomes to children lost to follow-up also found no differences between groups. Conclusion and Relevance: In this follow-up study of a randomized clinical trial, administration of antenatal corticosteroids to persons at risk of late preterm delivery, originally shown to improve short-term neonatal respiratory outcomes but with an increased rate of hypoglycemia, was not associated with adverse childhood neurodevelopmental outcomes at age 6 years or older.

Postpartum pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis and complications in a US cohort.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism accounts for approximately 9% of pregnancy-related deaths in the United States. National guidelines recommend postpartum risk stratification and pharmacologic prophylaxis in at-risk individuals. Knowledge on modern rates of postpartum pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis and its associated risks is limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the rate of, and factors associated with, initiation of postpartum pharmacologic prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism, and to assess associated adverse outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter cohort of individuals delivering on randomly selected days at 17 US hospitals (2019-2020). Medical records were reviewed by trained and certified personnel. Those with an antepartum diagnosis of venous thromboembolism, receiving antepartum anticoagulation, or known SARS-CoV-2 infection were excluded. The primary outcome was use of postpartum pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. Secondary outcomes included bleeding complications, surgical site infection, hospital readmission, and venous thromboembolism through 6 weeks postpartum. The rate of thromboprophylaxis administration was assessed by mode of delivery, institution, and continuance to the outpatient setting. Multivariable regression models were developed using k-fold cross-validation with stepwise backward elimination to evaluate factors associated with thromboprophylaxis administration. Univariable and multivariable logistic models with propensity score covariate adjustment were performed to assess the association between thromboprophylaxis administration and adverse outcomes. RESULTS: Of 21,114 individuals in the analytical cohort, 11.9% (95% confidence interval, 11.4%-12.3%) received postpartum pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis; the frequency of receipt was 29.8% (95% confidence interval, 28.7%-30.9%) following cesarean and 3.5% (95% confidence interval, 3.2%-3.8%) following vaginal delivery. Institutional rates of prophylaxis varied from 0.21% to 34.8%. Most individuals (83.3%) received thromboprophylaxis only as inpatients. In adjusted analysis, cesarean delivery (adjusted odds ratio, 19.17; 95% confidence interval, 16.70-22.00), hysterectomy (adjusted odds ratio, 15.70; 95% confidence interval, 4.35-56.65), and obesity (adjusted odds ratio, 3.45; 95% confidence interval, 3.02-3.95) were the strongest factors associated with thromboprophylaxis administration. Thromboprophylaxis administration was not associated with surgical site infection (0.9% vs 0.6%; odds ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-2.74), bleeding complications (0.2% vs 0.1%; odds ratio, 2.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-6.80), or postpartum readmission (0.9% vs 0.3%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-2.81). The overall rate of venous thromboembolism was 0.06% (95% confidence interval, 0.03%-0.10%) and was higher in those receiving prophylaxis (0.2%) compared with those not receiving prophylaxis (0.04%). CONCLUSION: Approximately 1 in 10 patients received postpartum pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in this US cohort. Rates of prophylaxis varied widely by institution. Cesarean delivery, hysterectomy, and obesity were predominant factors associated with postpartum thromboprophylaxis administration.

Desirability of outcome ranking for obstetrical trials: illustration and application to the ARRIVE trial.

BACKGROUND: In randomized trials, 1 primary outcome is typically chosen to evaluate the consequences of an intervention, whereas other important outcomes are relegated to secondary outcomes. This issue is amplified for many obstetrical trials in which an intervention may have consequences for both the pregnant person and the child. In contrast, desirability of outcome ranking, a paradigm shift for the design and analysis of clinical trials based on patient-centric evaluation, allows multiple outcomes-including from >1 individual-to be considered concurrently. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe desirability of outcome ranking methodology tailored to obstetrical trials and to apply the methodology to maternal-perinatal paired (dyadic) outcomes in which both individuals may be affected by an intervention but may experience discordant outcomes (eg, an obstetrical intervention may improve perinatal but worsen maternal outcomes). STUDY DESIGN: This secondary analysis applies the desirability of outcome ranking methodology to data from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network ARRIVE trial. The original analysis found no substantial difference in the primary (perinatal composite) outcome, but a decreased risk of the secondary outcome of cesarean delivery with elective induction at 39 weeks. In the present desirability-of-outcome-ranking analysis, dyadic outcomes ranging from spontaneous vaginal delivery without severe neonatal complication (most desirable) to cesarean delivery with perinatal death (least desirable) were classified into 8 categories ranked by overall desirability by experienced investigators. Distributions of the desirability of outcome ranking were compared by estimating the probability of having a more desirable dyadic outcome with elective induction at 39 weeks of gestation than with expectant management. To account for various perspectives on these outcomes, a complementary analysis, called the partial credit strategy, was used to grade outcomes on a 100-point scale and estimate the difference in overall treatment scores between groups using a t test. RESULTS: All 6096 participants from the trial were included. The probability of a better dyadic outcome for a randomly selected patient who was randomized to elective induction was 53% (95% confidence interval, 51-54), implying that elective induction led to a better overall outcome for the dyad when taking multiple outcomes into account concurrently. Furthermore, the desirability-of-outcome-ranking probability of averting cesarean delivery with elective induction was 52% (95% confidence interval, 51-53), which was not at the expense of an operative vaginal delivery or a poorer outcome for the perinate (ie, survival with a severe neonatal complication or perinatal death). Randomization to elective induction was also advantageous in most of the partial credit score scenarios. CONCLUSION: Desirability-of-outcome-ranking methodology is a useful tool for obstetrical trials because it provides a concurrent view of the effect of an intervention on multiple dyadic outcomes, potentially allowing for better translation of data for decision-making and person-centered care.

Validation of Three Models for Prediction of Blood Transfusion during Cesarean Delivery Admission.

OBJECTIVE: Prediction of blood transfusion during delivery admission allows for clinical preparedness and risk mitigation. Although prediction models have been developed and adopted into practice, their external validation is limited. We aimed to evaluate the performance of three blood transfusion prediction models in a U.S. cohort of individuals undergoing cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized trial of tranexamic acid for prevention of hemorrhage at time of cesarean delivery. Three models were considered: a categorical risk tool (California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative [CMQCC]) and two regression models (Ahmadzia et al and Albright et al). The primary outcome was intrapartum or postpartum red blood cell transfusion. The CMQCC algorithm was applied to the cohort with frequency of risk category (low, medium, high) and associated transfusion rates reported. For the regression models, the area under the receiver-operating curve (AUC) was calculated and a calibration curve plotted to evaluate each model's capacity to predict receipt of transfusion. The regression model outputs were statistically compared. RESULTS: Of 10,785 analyzed individuals, 3.9% received a red blood cell transfusion during delivery admission. The CMQCC risk tool categorized 1,970 (18.3%) individuals as low risk, 5,259 (48.8%) as medium risk, and 3,556 (33.0%) as high risk with corresponding transfusion rates of 2.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5-2.9%), 2.2% (95% CI: 1.8-2.6%), and 7.5% (95% CI: 6.6-8.4%), respectively. The AUC for prediction of blood transfusion using the Ahmadzia and Albright models was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.76-0.81) and 0.79 (95% CI: 0.77-0.82), respectively (p = 0.38 for difference). Calibration curves demonstrated overall agreement between the predicted probability and observed likelihood of blood transfusion. CONCLUSION: Three models were externally validated for prediction of blood transfusion during cesarean delivery admission in this U.S. COHORT: Overall, performance was moderate; model selection should be based on ease of application until a specific model with superior predictive ability is developed. KEY POINTS: · A total of 3.9% of individuals received a blood transfusion during cesarean delivery admission.. · Three models used in clinical practice are externally valid for blood transfusion prediction.. · Institutional model selection should be based on ease of application until further research identifies the optimal approach..

Social determinants of health in pregnant individuals from underrepresented, understudied, and underreported populations in the United States.

Women represent the cornerstone of a family's overall health. Therefore, supporting women's health, particularly in pregnancy, is important to promote public health. Emerging data highlight the contribution of social determinants of health (SDOH) on pregnancy outcomes in understudied, underrepresented, and underreported (U3) populations. Importantly, women are uniquely affected by and more vulnerable to adverse outcomes associated with SDOH. The maternal mortality rate has also increased significantly in the United States, especially among U3 individuals. Factors such as access to safe food, housing and environment, access to education and emergency/health services, and stressors such as interpersonal racism, poverty, unemployment, residential segregation, and domestic violence may make women from U3 populations more vulnerable to adverse reproductive health outcomes. Despite progress in promoting women's health, eliminating social and health disparities in pregnant individuals remains an elusive goal in U3 populations. Moreover, chronic exposure to excessive social/cultural stressors may have a physiologic cost leading to pregnancy complications such as miscarriages, preterm birth, and preeclampsia. Thus, the identification of SDOH-related factors that drive differences in pregnancy-related complications and deaths and the implementation of prevention strategies to address them could reduce disparities in pregnancy-related mortality in U3 populations.

Cervical Pessary for Prevention of Preterm Birth in Individuals With a Short Cervix: The TOPS Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: A short cervix as assessed by transvaginal ultrasound is an established risk factor for preterm birth. Study findings for a cervical pessary to prevent preterm delivery in singleton pregnancies with transvaginal ultrasound evidence of a short cervix have been conflicting. Objective: To determine if cervical pessary placement decreases the risk of preterm birth or fetal death prior to 37 weeks among individuals with a short cervix. Design, Setting, and Participants: We performed a multicenter, randomized, unmasked trial comparing a cervical pessary vs usual care from February 2017 through November 5, 2021, at 12 centers in the US. Study participants were nonlaboring individuals with a singleton pregnancy and a transvaginal ultrasound cervical length of 20 mm or less at gestations of 16 weeks 0 days through 23 weeks 6 days. Individuals with a prior spontaneous preterm birth were excluded. Interventions: Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive either a cervical pessary placed by a trained clinician (n = 280) or usual care (n = 264). Use of vaginal progesterone was at the discretion of treating clinicians. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was delivery or fetal death prior to 37 weeks. Results: A total of 544 participants (64%) of a planned sample size of 850 were enrolled in the study (mean age, 29.5 years [SD, 6 years]). Following the third interim analysis, study recruitment was stopped due to concern for fetal or neonatal/infant death as well as for futility. Baseline characteristics were balanced between participants randomized to pessary and those randomized to usual care; 98.9% received vaginal progesterone. In an as-randomized analysis, the primary outcome occurred in 127 participants (45.5%) randomized to pessary and 127 (45.6%) randomized to usual care (relative risk, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83-1.20). Fetal or neonatal/infant death occurred in 13.3% of those randomized to receive a pessary and in 6.8% of those randomized to receive usual care (relative risk, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.13-3.32). Conclusions and Relevance: Cervical pessary in nonlaboring individuals with a singleton gestation and with a cervical length of 20 mm or less did not decrease the risk of preterm birth and was associated with a higher rate of fetal or neonatal/infant mortality. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02901626.

The Temporal Relationship Between the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic and Preterm Birth.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether preterm birth rates changed in relation to the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and whether any change depended on socioeconomic status. METHODS: This is an observational cohort study of pregnant individuals with a singleton gestation who delivered in the years 2019 and 2020 at 1 of 16 U.S. hospitals of the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. The frequency of preterm birth for those who delivered before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (ie, in 2019) was compared with that of those who delivered after its onset (ie, in 2020). Interaction analyses were performed for people of different individual- and community-level socioeconomic characteristics (ie, race and ethnicity, insurance status, Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) of a person's residence). RESULTS: During 2019 and 2020, 18,526 individuals met inclusion criteria. The chance of preterm birth before the COVID-19 pandemic was similar to that after the onset of the pandemic (11.7% vs 12.5%, adjusted relative risk 0.94, 95% CI 0.86-1.03). In interaction analyses, race and ethnicity, insurance status, and the SVI did not modify the association between the epoch and the chance of preterm birth before 37 weeks of gestation (all interaction P >.05). CONCLUSION: There was no statistically significant difference in preterm birth rates in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic onset. This lack of association was largely independent of socioeconomic indicators such as race and ethnicity, insurance status, or SVI of the residential community in which an individual lived.

Tranexamic Acid to Prevent Obstetrical Hemorrhage after Cesarean Delivery.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic use of tranexamic acid at the time of cesarean delivery has been shown to decrease the calculated blood loss, but the effect on the need for blood transfusions is unclear. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients undergoing cesarean delivery at 31 U.S. hospitals to receive either tranexamic acid or placebo after umbilical-cord clamping. The primary outcome was a composite of maternal death or blood transfusion by hospital discharge or 7 days post partum, whichever came first. Key secondary outcomes were estimated intraoperative blood loss of more than 1 liter (prespecified as a major secondary outcome), interventions for bleeding and related complications, the preoperative-to-postoperative change in the hemoglobin level, and postpartum infectious complications. Adverse events were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 11,000 participants underwent randomization (5529 to the tranexamic acid group and 5471 to the placebo group); scheduled cesarean delivery accounted for 50.1% and 49.2% of the deliveries in the respective groups. A primary-outcome event occurred in 201 of 5525 participants (3.6%) in the tranexamic acid group and in 233 of 5470 (4.3%) in the placebo group (adjusted relative risk, 0.89; 95.26% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 1.07; P = 0.19). Estimated intraoperative blood loss of more than 1 liter occurred in 7.3% of the participants in the tranexamic acid group and in 8.0% of those in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.05). Interventions for bleeding complications occurred in 16.1% of the participants in the tranexamic acid group and in 18.0% of those in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.97); the change in the hemoglobin level was -1.8 g per deciliter and -1.9 g per deciliter, respectively (mean difference, -0.1 g per deciliter; 95% CI, -0.2 to -0.1); and postpartum infectious complications occurred in 3.2% and 2.5% of the participants, respectively (relative risk, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.61). The frequencies of thromboembolic events and other adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic use of tranexamic acid during cesarean delivery did not lead to a significantly lower risk of a composite outcome of maternal death or blood transfusion than placebo. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03364491.).

Long-term neurodevelopmental follow-up of children exposed to pravastatin in utero.

BACKGROUND: Preeclampsia, especially before term, increases the risk of child neurodevelopmental adverse outcomes. Biological plausibility, preclinical studies, and pilot clinical trials conducted by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the Obstetric-Fetal Pharmacology Research Centers Network support the safety and use of pravastatin to prevent preeclampsia. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the effect of antenatal pravastatin treatment in high-risk pregnant individuals on their child's health, growth, and neurodevelopment. STUDY DESIGN: This was an ancillary follow-up cohort study of children born to mothers who participated in the Obstetric-Fetal Pharmacology Research Centers Network pilot trials of pravastatin vs placebo in individuals at high risk of preeclampsia (ClinicalTrials.gov; identifier NCT01717586). After obtaining written informed consent (and assent as appropriate), the parent was instructed to complete the Child Behavior Checklist. To assess the child's motor, cognitive, and developmental outcomes, a certified and blinded study psychologist completed child motor, cognitive, emotional, and behavioral assessments using validated tools. Given the small number of individuals in the studies, the 10- and 20-mg pravastatin groups were combined into 1 group, and the results of the pravastatin group were compared with that of the placebo group. RESULTS: Of 40 children born to mothers in the original trial, 30 (15 exposed in utero to pravastatin and 15 to placebo) were enrolled in this follow-up study. The time of follow-up, which was 4.7 years (interquartile range, 2.5-6.9), was not different between children in the pravastatin group and children in the placebo group. There was no difference in the child's body mass index percentiles per sex and corrected age, the rates of extremes of body mass index percentiles, or the report of any other medical or developmental complications between the 2 groups. No child born in the pravastatin group had any limitation in motor assessment compared with 2 children (13.3%) who walked with difficulty and 4 children (26.7%) who had reduced manual abilities in the placebo group. Moreover, children born to mothers who received pravastatin had a higher general mean conceptual ability score (98.2±16.7 vs 89.7±11.0; P=.13) and a lower frequency (15.4% vs 35.7%; P=.38) of having a score of <85 (ie, 1 standard deviation lower than the mean) compared with those in the placebo group. Finally, there was no difference in the parents' report on the Child Behavior Checklist between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: This study reported on the long-term neuromotor, cognitive, and behavioral outcomes among children exposed to pravastatin in utero during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy. Although the data were limited by the original trial's sample size, no identifiable long-term neurodevelopmental safety signal was evident with the use of pravastatin during pregnancy. This favorable neonatal risk-benefit analysis justifies continued research using pravastatin in clinical trials.

Association Between Giving Birth During the Early Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic and Serious Maternal Morbidity.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether delivering during the early the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was associated with increased risk of maternal death or serious morbidity from common obstetric complications compared with a historical control period. METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study with manual medical-record abstraction performed by centrally trained and certified research personnel at 17 U.S. hospitals. Individuals who gave birth on randomly selected dates in 2019 (before the pandemic) and 2020 (during the pandemic) were compared. Hospital, health care system, and community risk-mitigation strategies for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in response to the early COVID-19 pandemic are described. The primary outcome was a composite of maternal death or serious morbidity from common obstetric complications, including hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (eclampsia, end organ dysfunction, or need for acute antihypertensive therapy), postpartum hemorrhage (operative intervention or receipt of 4 or more units blood products), and infections other than SARS-CoV-2 (sepsis, pelvic abscess, prolonged intravenous antibiotics, bacteremia, deep surgical site infection). The major secondary outcome was cesarean birth. RESULTS: Overall, 12,133 patients giving birth during and 9,709 before the pandemic were included. Hospital, health care system, and community SARS-CoV-2 mitigation strategies were employed at all sites for a portion of 2020, with a peak in modifications from March to June 2020. Of patients delivering during the pandemic, 3% had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result during pregnancy through 42 days postpartum. Giving birth during the pandemic was not associated with a change in the frequency of the primary composite outcome (9.3% vs 8.9%, adjusted relative risk [aRR] 1.02, 95% CI 0.93-1.11) or cesarean birth (32.4% vs 31.3%, aRR 1.02, 95% CI 0.97-1.07). No maternal deaths were observed. CONCLUSION: Despite substantial hospital, health care, and community modifications, giving birth during the early COVID-19 pandemic was not associated with higher rates of serious maternal morbidity from common obstetric complications. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04519502.

First- or second-trimester SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent pregnancy outcomes.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes, including fetal death and preterm birth. It is not known whether that risk occurs only during the time of acute infection or whether the risk persists later in pregnancy. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate whether the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy persists after an acute maternal illness. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of pregnant patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection delivering at 17 hospitals in the United States between March 2020 and December 2020. Patients experiencing a SARS-CoV-2-positive test at or before 28 weeks of gestation with a subsequent delivery hospitalization were compared with those without a positive SAR-CoV-2 test at the same hospitals with randomly selected delivery days during the same period. Deliveries occurring at <20 weeks of gestation in both groups were excluded. The study outcomes included fetal or neonatal death, preterm birth at <37 weeks of gestation and <34 weeks of gestation, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP), any major congenital malformation, and size for gestational age of <5th or <10th percentiles at birth based on published standards. HDP that were collected included HDP and preeclampsia with severe features, both overall and with delivery at <37 weeks of gestation. RESULTS: Of 2326 patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy and were at least 20 weeks of gestation at delivery from March 2020 to December 2020, 402 patients (delivering 414 fetuses or neonates) were SARS-CoV-2 positive before 28 weeks of gestation and before their admission for delivery; they were compared with 11,705 patients without a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. In adjusted analyses, those with SARS-CoV-2 before 28 weeks of gestation had a subsequent increased risk of fetal or neonatal death (2.9% vs 1.5%; adjusted relative risk, 1.97; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-3.85), preterm birth at <37 weeks of gestation (19.6% vs 13.8%; adjusted relative risk, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.63), and HDP with delivery at <37 weeks of gestation (7.2% vs 4.1%; adjusted relative risk, 1.74; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-2.55). There was no difference in the rates of preterm birth at <34 weeks of gestation, any major congenital malformation, and size for gestational age of <5th or <10th percentiles. In addition, there was no significant difference in the rate of gestational hypertension overall or preeclampsia with severe features. CONCLUSION: There was a modest increase in the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

RapidQ: A reader-free microfluidic platform for the quantitation of antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

We describe RapidQ, a fast, disposable, easy-to-use microfluidic assay for the quantitation of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein IgG in plasma samples. The assay utilizes antigen-coated paramagnetic microbeads, which are induced to aggregate inside the RapidQ microfluidic device in the presence of the target antibody. Aggregation occurs via interaction between the biotinylated detection antibody and polymeric streptavidin. The mobility of the beads inside the two microchannels of the device depends on their aggregation state, with larger clusters moving at higher velocities under a given liquid flow rate. One of the microchannels incorporates a permanent magnet that captures arriving beads and forms a localized constriction that retards liquid flow. Since the constriction grows faster when the beads are more aggregated, the length of the liquid column accumulated downstream from the constriction relative to that of the unconstricted control channel is proportional to the sample antibody concentration. The assay demonstrates a detection limit of 4 µg/ml of monoclonal anti-S protein antibody diluted in plasma with CV ≤ 13%, as well as negative and positive percent agreements of 100% (95% CI: 92.75%-100%) and 100% (95% CI: 80.5%-100%), respectively, when compared to a nucleic acid amplification test used to identify COVID-19 positive individuals, whose samples were collected ≥17 d from a positive PCR test. Finally, the RapidQ assay was used to monitor the kinetics of antibody responses to COVID-19 vaccination in a small study cohort.

Association of SARS-CoV-2 Infection With Serious Maternal Morbidity and Mortality From Obstetric Complications.

Importance: It remains unknown whether SARS-CoV-2 infection specifically increases the risk of serious obstetric morbidity. Objective: To evaluate the association of SARS-CoV-2 infection with serious maternal morbidity or mortality from common obstetric complications. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of 14 104 pregnant and postpartum patients delivered between March 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020 (with final follow-up to February 11, 2021), at 17 US hospitals participating in the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development's Gestational Research Assessments of COVID-19 (GRAVID) Study. All patients with SARS-CoV-2 were included and compared with those without a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result who delivered on randomly selected dates over the same period. Exposures: SARS-CoV-2 infection was based on a positive nucleic acid or antigen test result. Secondary analyses further stratified those with SARS-CoV-2 infection by disease severity. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of maternal death or serious morbidity related to hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, postpartum hemorrhage, or infection other than SARS-CoV-2. The main secondary outcome was cesarean birth. Results: Of the 14 104 included patients (mean age, 29.7 years), 2352 patients had SARS-CoV-2 infection and 11 752 did not have a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result. Compared with those without a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, SARS-CoV-2 infection was significantly associated with the primary outcome (13.4% vs 9.2%; difference, 4.2% [95% CI, 2.8%-5.6%]; adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.41 [95% CI, 1.23-1.61]). All 5 maternal deaths were in the SARS-CoV-2 group. SARS-CoV-2 infection was not significantly associated with cesarean birth (34.7% vs 32.4%; aRR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.99-1.11]). Compared with those without a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, moderate or higher COVID-19 severity (n = 586) was significantly associated with the primary outcome (26.1% vs 9.2%; difference, 16.9% [95% CI, 13.3%-20.4%]; aRR, 2.06 [95% CI, 1.73-2.46]) and the major secondary outcome of cesarean birth (45.4% vs 32.4%; difference, 12.8% [95% CI, 8.7%-16.8%]; aRR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.07-1.28]), but mild or asymptomatic infection (n = 1766) was not significantly associated with the primary outcome (9.2% vs 9.2%; difference, 0% [95% CI, -1.4% to 1.4%]; aRR, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.94-1.32]) or cesarean birth (31.2% vs 32.4%; difference, -1.4% [95% CI, -3.6% to 0.8%]; aRR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.93-1.07]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among pregnant and postpartum individuals at 17 US hospitals, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an increased risk for a composite outcome of maternal mortality or serious morbidity from obstetric complications.

Prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in term gestations: a calculator without race and ethnicity.

BACKGROUND: Investigators have attempted to derive tools that could provide clinicians with an easily obtainable estimate of the chance of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery for those who undertake trial of labor after cesarean delivery. One tool that has been validated externally was derived from data from the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Cesarean Registry. However, concern has been raised that this tool includes the socially constructed variables of race and ethnicity. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop an accurate tool to predict vaginal birth after cesarean delivery, using data easily obtainable early in pregnancy, without the inclusion of race and ethnicity. STUDY DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of the Cesarean Registry of the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. The approach to the current analysis is similar to that of the analysis in which the previous vaginal birth after cesarean delivery prediction tool was derived. Specifically, individuals were included in this analysis if they were delivered on or after 37 0/7 weeks' gestation with a live singleton cephalic fetus at the time of labor and delivery admission, had a trial of labor after cesarean delivery, and had a history of 1 previous low-transverse cesarean delivery. Information was only considered for inclusion in the model if it was ascertainable at an initial prenatal visit. Model selection and internal validation were performed using a cross-validation procedure, with the dataset randomly and equally divided into a training set and a test set. The training set was used to identify factors associated with vaginal birth after cesarean delivery and build the logistic regression predictive model using stepwise backward elimination. A final model was generated that included all variables found to be significant (P<.05). The accuracy of the model to predict vaginal birth after cesarean delivery was assessed using the concordance index. The independent test set was used to estimate classification errors and validate the model that had been developed from the training set, and calibration was assessed. The final model was then applied to the overall analytical population. RESULTS: Of the 11,687 individuals who met the inclusion criteria for this secondary analysis, 8636 (74%) experienced vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. The backward elimination variable selection yielded a model from the training set that included maternal age, prepregnancy weight, height, indication for previous cesarean delivery, obstetrical history, and chronic hypertension. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery was significantly more likely for women who were taller and had a previous vaginal birth, particularly if that vaginal birth had occurred after a previous cesarean delivery. Conversely, vaginal birth after cesarean delivery was significantly less likely for women whose age was older, whose weight was heavier, whose indication for previous cesarean delivery was arrest of dilation or descent, and who had a history of medication-treated chronic hypertension. The model had excellent calibration between predicted and empirical probabilities and, when applied to the overall analytical population, an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.75 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.77), which is similar to the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the previous model (0.75) that included race and ethnicity. CONCLUSION: We successfully derived an accurate model (available at https://mfmunetwork.bsc.gwu.edu/web/mfmunetwork/vaginal-birth-after-cesarean-calculator), which did not include race or ethnicity, for the estimation of the probability of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery.