First and Second Stage Risk Factors Associated with Perineal Lacerations.

OBJECTIVE: To determine intrapartum factors associated with perineal laceration at delivery. METHODS: This was a planned secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized clinical trial of delayed versus immediate pushing among term nulliparous women in labor with neuraxial analgesia conducted in the United States. Intrapartum characteristics were extracted from the medical charts. The primary outcome was perineal laceration, defined as second degree or above, characterized at delivery in women participating in longer term pelvic floor assessments post-delivery. Multivariable logistic regression was used to refine risk estimates while adjusting for randomization group, birth weight, and maternal age. RESULTS: Among the 941 women participating in the pelvic floor follow-up, 40.6% experienced a perineal laceration. No first stage labor characteristics were associated with perineal laceration, including type of labor or length of first stage. Receiving an amnioinfusion appeared protective of perineal laceration (adjusted odds ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval 0.26-0.91; P = 0.01). Second stage labor characteristics associated with injury were length of stage (2.01 h vs. 1.50 h; adjusted odds ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval 1.18-1.57; P < 0.01) and a prolonged second stage (adjusted odds ratio, 1.64; 95% confidence interval 1.06-2.56; P < 0.01). Operative vaginal delivery was strongly associated with perineal laceration (adjusted odds ratio, 3.57; 95% confidence interval 1.85-6.90; P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Operative vaginal delivery is a modifiable risk factor associated with an increased risk of perineal laceration. Amnioinfusion appeared protective against injury, which could reflect a spurious finding, but may also represent true risk reduction similar to the mechanism of warm perineal compress.

Quantification of Cervical Elasticity During Pregnancy Based on Transvaginal Ultrasound Imaging and Stress Measurement.

Strain elastography and shear wave elastography are two commonly used methods to quantify cervical elasticity. However, the absence of stress information in strain elastography causes difficulty in comparing elasticities acquired in different sessions, and the robustness of shear wave elastography tends to be compromised by the high inhomogeneity of cervical tissue. OBJECTIVE: To overcome these limitations, we develop a quantitative cervical elastography system by adding a stress sensor to a clinically used transvaginal ultrasound imaging system. METHODS: In an imaging session, we use the ultrasound system to record the cervical deformation in B-mode images and use the stress sensor to record the probe-surface stress simultaneously. We develop a feature-tracking algorithm to quantify the deformation automatically and calculate the strain. Then we estimate the cervical Young's modulus through stress-strain linear regression. RESULTS: In phantom experiments, we demonstrate the elastography system's high accuracy (alignment with the quasi-static compression method, p-value = 0.369 > 0.05), robustness (alignment between 60°- and 90°-contact measurements, p-value = 0.638 > 0.05), repeatability (consistency of single sonographers' measurements, coefficient of variation < 0.06), and reproducibility (alignment between two sonographers' measurements, Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.981). Applying it to pregnant participants, we observe significant softening of the cervix during pregnancy (p-value < 0.001) with the cervical Young's modulus decreasing 3.95% per week. We estimate that geometric mean values of cervical Young's moduli during the first (11 to 13 weeks), second, and third trimesters are 13.07 kPa, 7.59 kPa, and 4.40 kPa, respectively. CONCLUSION: The proposed system is accurate, robust, and safe, and enables longitudinal measurements and comparisons between examiners. SIGNIFICANCE: The system applies to different ultrasound machines with minor software updates, which allows for studies of cervical softening patterns in pregnancy for larger populations, facilitating insights into conditions such as preterm birth.

Association Between Hispanic Ethnicity and Engagement in a Remote Postpartum Blood Pressure Monitoring Programs: Secondary Analysis of a Pilot Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Remote self-measured blood pressure (SMBP) programs improve racial health equity among postpartum people with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) who receive recommended blood pressure ascertainment after hospital discharge.1-3 However, as prior studies have been conducted within racially diverse but ethnically homogeneous populations,1-3 the effect of SMBP programs on ethnicity-based inequities is less understood.4 We examined whether SMBP rates differed among Hispanic versus non-Hispanic participants in remote SMBP programs. STUDY DESIGN: This is a planned secondary analysis of a RCT conducted among postpartum patients with HDP who were enrolled into our remote SMBP program, in which they obtain SMBP and then manually enter the SMBP value into a patient portal for individual provider response. In the parent trial, consenting patients were randomized to continued manual blood pressure entry of SMBP or use of a Bluetooth-enabled blood pressure cuff synched to a smartphone application utilizing artificial intelligence to respond to each obtained blood pressure or symptom for six weeks and to flag abnormalities for providers. Both SMBP programs were available in Spanish and English. For this study, women who self-reported their ethnicity were stratified into two ethnic groups - Hispanic and non-Hispanic - regardless of randomization group. Those who did not self-report ethnicity but completed all study procedures in Spanish were also categorized as Hispanic. Outcomes were the same in the parent study and this secondary analysis. The primary outcome was ≥1 SMBP assessment within 10 days postpartum. Secondary outcomes included number of blood pressure assessments and healthcare utilization outcomes (remote antihypertensive medication initiation or dose-increase and presentation to the Emergency Department or readmission for hypertension within 30 days of discharge). Participants rated their experience with SMBP via a scale from 0 (worst possible) to 10 (best possible) and the Decision Regret Scale, which assessed their regret in SMBP program participation (0=no regret; 100=high regret)).5 Outcomes were compared between groups. Risk differences (RD) were calculated for categorical and regression coefficients for continuous outcomes. The parent RCT was IRB-approved and published on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05595629) before enrollment. RESULTS: Among 119 women in the parent study, 83 (70%) self-reported ethnicity and the proportion of Hispanic people was similar in both treatment groups. This study compared 23 Hispanic (19% monolingual in Spanish) to 62 non-Hispanic women. Rates of SMBP assessment within 10 days postpartum was similar (Hispanic 64% vs non-Hispanic 79%; RD -0.1 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) -0.4, 0.1). There were no differences in mean number of remote SMBP assessments or rates of remote antihypertensive medication initiation or dose titration. The rates of hypertension-related presentations to the Emergency Department or hospital readmission were also similar between groups. Lastly, regardless of ethnicity, participants had low scores on the Decision Regret Scale and rated their experience with their remote SMBP program highly favorably. (See Table 1.) Conclusion: Hispanic and non-Hispanic postpartum patients with HDP had similar outcomes and favorable patient perceptions. The small sample size in this study may have produced inadequate power to detect a difference between study groups, thereby leading to Type II error. Thus, more research on Hispanic participants in remote SMBP programs is needed. However, the effect of remote SMBP programs on perinatal equity may not be limited to race-based disparities.

Intensive glycaemic targets in overweight and obese individuals with gestational diabetes mellitus: clinical trial protocol for the iGDM study.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of both obesity and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) has increased, and each is associated with adverse perinatal outcomes including fetal overgrowth, neonatal morbidity, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and caesarean delivery. Women with GDM who are also overweight or obese have higher rates of pregnancy complications when compared with normal-weight women with GDM, which may occur in part due to suboptimal glycaemic control. The current recommendations for glycaemic targets in pregnant women with diabetes are based on limited evidence and exceed the mean fasting (70.9±7.8 mg/dL) and 1-hour postprandial (108.9±12.9 mg/dL) glucose values in pregnant individuals without diabetes. Our prior work demonstrated that the use of intensive (fasting <90 mg/dL and 1-hour postprandial <120 mg/dL) compared with standard (fasting <95 mg/dL and 1-hour postprandial <140 mg/dL) glycaemic targets resulted in improved glycaemic control without increasing the risk for hypoglycaemia in pregnant individuals with GDM, but the impact of intensive glycaemic targets on perinatal outcomes is unknown. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Intensive Glycemic Targets in Overweight and Obese Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Multicenter Randomized Trial (iGDM Trial) is a large, pragmatic randomised clinical trial designed to investigate the impact of intensive versus standard glycaemic targets on perinatal outcomes in women with GDM who are overweight and obese. During the 5-year project period, a multidisciplinary team of investigators from five medical centres representing regions of the USA with high rates of obesity will randomise 828 overweight and obese women with GDM to either intensive or standard glycaemic targets. We will test the central hypothesis that intensive glycaemic targets will result in lower rates of neonatal composite morbidity including large for gestational age birth weight, neonatal hypoglycaemia, respiratory distress syndrome and need for phototherapy when compared with standard glycaemic targets using the intention-to-treat approach to analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Indiana University School of Medicine approved this study (IRB# 11435; initial approval date 25 August 2021). We will submit the results of the trial for publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at international scientific meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05124808.

Impact of the Duration of the Second Stage of Labor on Postpartum Pelvic Floor Symptoms.

IMPORTANCE: The associated effect of duration of the second stage of labor (SSL) on pelvic floor symptoms development is not well studied. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the association between duration of SSL and pelvic floor symptoms at 6 months postpartum among primiparous women. STUDY DESIGN: A planned secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized trial evaluating the impact of immediate versus delayed pushing on vaginal delivery rates, maternal morbidity, and neonatal outcomes was conducted between 2014 and 2018. For pelvic floor arm participants, demographic, pelvic examination, and validated questionnaire data were collected postpartum. Primary outcome was change in Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 (PFDI-20) score from immediate to 6 months postpartum. Secondary outcomes included changes in the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire, Fecal Incontinence Severity Index, Modified Manchester Health Questionnaire scores, and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification measurements at 6 months postpartum. Participants were analyzed by SSL duration ≤60 minutes or >60 minutes. RESULTS: Of the 2,414 trial participants, 767 (32%) completed pelvic floor assessments at 6 months. Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 scores significantly improved at 6 months in the ≤60 minutes SSL group compared with >60 minutes SSL (-14.3 ± 48.0 and -3.2 ± 45.3, respectively; P = 0.04). Changes from immediate postpartum in total and subscale scores for other questionnaires at 6 months did not differ between groups. Prolapse stage did not differ between groups. Perineal body was significantly shorter in the >60 minutes SSL group (3.7 ± 0.7, 3.5 ± 0.8; P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Women with SSL >60 minutes experience less improvement in PFDI-20 scores at 6 months. Greater tissue and innervation trauma in those with SSL >60 minutes may explain persistently less improvement in PFDI-20 scores.

Pregnancy Outcomes of Nifedipine Compared With Labetalol for Oral Treatment of Mild Chronic Hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate maternal and neonatal outcomes by type of antihypertensive used in participants of the CHAP (Chronic Hypertension in Pregnancy) trial. METHODS: We conducted a planned secondary analysis of CHAP, an open-label, multicenter, randomized trial of antihypertensive treatment compared with standard care (no treatment unless severe hypertension developed) in pregnant patients with mild chronic hypertension (blood pressure 140-159/90-104 mm Hg before 20 weeks of gestation) and singleton pregnancies. We performed three comparisons based on medications prescribed at enrollment: labetalol compared with standard care, nifedipine compared with standard care, and labetalol compared with nifedipine. Although active compared with standard care groups were randomized, medication assignment within the active treatment group was not random but based on clinician or patient preference. The primary outcome was the occurrence of superimposed preeclampsia with severe features, preterm birth before 35 weeks of gestation, placental abruption, or fetal or neonatal death. The key secondary outcome was small for gestational age (SGA) neonates. We also compared medication adverse effects between groups. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs were estimated with log binomial regression to adjust for confounding. RESULTS: Of 2,292 participants analyzed, 720 (31.4%) received labetalol, 417 (18.2%) received nifedipine, and 1,155 (50.4%) received no treatment. The mean gestational age at enrollment was 10.5±3.7 weeks; nearly half of participants (47.5%) identified as non-Hispanic Black; and 44.5% used aspirin. The primary outcome occurred in 217 (30.1%), 130 (31.2%), and 427 (37.0%) in the labetalol, nifedipine, and standard care groups, respectively. Risk of the primary outcome was lower among those receiving treatment (labetalol use vs standard adjusted RR 0.82, 95% CI, 0.72-0.94; nifedipine use vs standard adjusted RR 0.84, 95% CI, 0.71-0.99), but there was no significant difference in risk when labetalol was compared with nifedipine (adjusted RR 0.98, 95% CI, 0.82-1.18). There were no significant differences in SGA or serious adverse events between participants receiving labetalol and those receiving nifedipine. CONCLUSION: No significant differences in predetermined maternal or neonatal outcomes were detected on the basis of the use of labetalol or nifedipine for treatment of chronic hypertension in pregnancy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02299414.

Mean Arterial Pressure and Neonatal Outcomes in Pregnancies Complicated by Mild Chronic Hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the association between mean arterial pressure during pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in participants with chronic hypertension using data from the CHAP (Chronic Hypertension and Pregnancy) trial. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the CHAP trial, an open-label, multicenter randomized trial of antihypertensive treatment in pregnancy, was conducted. The CHAP trial enrolled participants with mild chronic hypertension (blood pressure [BP] 140-159/90-104 mm Hg) and singleton pregnancies less than 23 weeks of gestation, randomizing them to active treatment (maintained on antihypertensive therapy with a goal BP below 140/90 mm Hg) or standard treatment (control; antihypertensives withheld unless BP reached 160 mm Hg systolic BP or higher or 105 mm Hg diastolic BP or higher). We used logistic regression to measure the strength of association between mean arterial pressure (average and highest across study visits) and to select neonatal outcomes. Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (per 1-unit increase in millimeters of mercury) of the primary neonatal composite outcome (bronchopulmonary dysplasia, retinopathy of prematurity, necrotizing enterocolitis, or intraventricular hemorrhage grade 3 or 4) and individual secondary outcomes (neonatal intensive care unit admission [NICU], low birth weight [LBW] below 2,500 g, and small for gestational age [SGA]) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 2,284 participants were included: 1,155 active and 1,129 control. Adjusted models controlling for randomization group demonstrated that increasing average mean arterial pressure per millimeter of mercury was associated with an increase in each neonatal outcome examined except NEC, specifically neonatal composite (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.12, 95% CI, 1.09-1.16), NICU admission (aOR 1.07, 95% CI, 1.06-1.08), LBW (aOR 1.12, 95% CI, 1.11-1.14), SGA below the fifth percentile (aOR 1.03, 95% CI, 1.01-1.06), and SGA below the 10th percentile (aOR 1.02, 95% CI, 1.01-1.04). Models using the highest mean arterial pressure as opposed to average mean arterial pressure also demonstrated consistent associations. CONCLUSION: Increasing mean arterial pressure was positively associated with most adverse neonatal outcomes except NEC. Given that the relationship between mean arterial pressure and adverse pregnancy outcomes may not be consistent at all mean arterial pressure levels, future work should attempt to further elucidate whether there is an absolute threshold or relative change in mean arterial pressure at which fetal benefits are optimized along with maternal benefits. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02299414.

Optimal Timing of Delivery for Pregnant Individuals With Mild Chronic Hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the optimal gestational age to deliver pregnant people with chronic hypertension to improve perinatal outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a planned secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of chronic hypertension treatment to different blood pressure goals. Participants with term, singleton gestations were included. Those with fetal anomalies and those with a diagnosis of preeclampsia before 37 weeks of gestation were excluded. The primary maternal composite outcome included death, serious morbidity (heart failure, stroke, encephalopathy, myocardial infarction, pulmonary edema, intensive care unit admission, intubation, renal failure), preeclampsia with severe features, hemorrhage requiring blood transfusion, or abruption. The primary neonatal outcome included fetal or neonatal death, respiratory support beyond oxygen mask, Apgar score less than 3 at 5 minutes, neonatal seizures, or suspected sepsis. Secondary outcomes included intrapartum cesarean birth, length of stay, neonatal intensive care unit admission, respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), transient tachypnea of the newborn, and hypoglycemia. Those with a planned delivery were compared with those expectantly managed at each gestational week. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% CIs are reported. RESULTS: We included 1,417 participants with mild chronic hypertension; 305 (21.5%) with a new diagnosis in pregnancy and 1,112 (78.5%) with known preexisting hypertension. Groups differed by body mass index (BMI) and preexisting diabetes. In adjusted models, there was no association between planned delivery and the primary maternal or neonatal composite outcome in any gestational age week compared with expectant management. Planned delivery at 37 weeks of gestation was associated with RDS (7.9% vs 3.0%, aOR 2.70, 95% CI, 1.40-5.22), and planned delivery at 37 and 38 weeks was associated with neonatal hypoglycemia (19.4% vs 10.7%, aOR 1.97, 95% CI, 1.27-3.08 in week 37; 14.4% vs 7.7%, aOR 1.82, 95% CI, 1.06-3.10 in week 38). CONCLUSION: Planned delivery in the early-term period compared with expectant management was not associated with a reduction in adverse maternal outcomes. However, it was associated with increased odds of some neonatal complications. Delivery timing for individuals with mild chronic hypertension should weigh maternal and neonatal outcomes in each gestational week but may be optimized by delivery at 39 weeks.