Sonographic Predictors of Antepartum Bleeding in Placenta Previa.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between sonographic features of placenta previa and vaginal bleeding (VB). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of women with placenta previa identified on ultrasound between 160/7 and 276/7 weeks gestation. Placental distance past the cervical os (DPO), placental thickness, edge angle, and cervical length (CL) were measured. The primary outcome was any VB and the secondary outcome was VB requiring delivery. Median values of the sonographic features were compared for each of the outcomes using the Mann-Whitney U test. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to compare the predictive value of sonographic variables markers and to determine optimal cut points for each measurement. Logistic regression was used to estimate the association between each measure and the outcomes while controlling for confounders. RESULTS: Of 149 women with placenta previa, 37% had VB and 15% had VB requiring delivery. Women with VB requiring delivery had significantly more episodes of VB than those who did not require delivery for VB (1.5, interquartile range [IQR] [1-3] vs 1.0 [1-5]; p = 0.001). In univariate analysis, women with VB had decreased CL (3.9 vs. 4.2 cm; p < 0.01) compared with those without. Women with VB requiring delivery had increased DPO (2.6 cm IQR [1.7-3.3] vs. 1.5 cm [1.1-2.4], p = 0.01) compared with those without. After adjusting for confounders, only CL < 4 cm remained independently associated with increased risk of VB (adjusted odds ratio: 2.27, 95% confidence interval [1.12-4.58], p = 0.01). None of the measures were predictive of either outcome (area under the curve < 0.65). CONCLUSION: Decreased CL may be associated with risk of VB in placenta previa. KEY POINTS: · Placenta previa is associated with VB.. · Sonographic markers of placenta previa are associated with VB.. · CL is associated with VB in placenta previa, whereas placental DPO is associated with higher rates of bleeding leading to delivery..

Interrupted versus continuous magnesium sulfate and blood loss at cesarean delivery.

OBJECTIVE: Magnesium sulfate is standard of care for prevention of eclampsia in women with preeclampsia with severe features. The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology endorses its use throughout labor, delivery and the immediate postpartum period. Some providers pause magnesium sulfate infusion preoperatively due to concern for increased risk of uterine atony and postpartum hemorrhage. Using a non-inferiority analysis, we investigated the effect of interrupted versus continuous infusion of magnesium sulfate on postpartum hemorrhage in women with preeclampsia with severe features undergoing cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective non-inferiority cohort study of women with preeclampsia with severe features treated with magnesium sulfate undergoing cesarean delivery with singleton pregnancies at tertiary care hospital from 2013 to 2018. The primary outcome was postpartum hemorrhage. Secondary outcomes included estimated blood loss, change in hematocrit and a composite of postpartum hemorrhage severity, including transfusion of blood products, use of more than one uterotonic and additional surgical interventions. RESULTS: Of 249 women, magnesium sulfate infusion was interrupted in 171 (69%) and continued in 78 (31%). Women with interrupted magnesium sulfate infusion were more likely to be Caucasian (73% vs 67%, p = .024), have chronic hypertension (23% vs 1%, p < .001), labor prior to cesarean delivery (84% vs 55%, p < .001), undergo primary cesarean delivery (86% vs 67%, p = .005), and experience shorter surgical time (50 vs 55 min, p = .026). The rate of postpartum hemorrhage for those receiving interrupted magnesium sulfate infusion (9.9%) and continuous magnesium sulfate infusion (10.2%) was similar, falling within the non-inferiority margin (absolute difference 0.3%, 95% CI -7.8 to 8.4%, p = .88). There were no significant differences in the secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: Interrupted magnesium sulfate infusion is non-inferior to continued magnesium sulfate infusion for rates of postpartum hemorrhage in women with preeclampsia with severe features undergoing cesarean delivery.

Exclusion of Pregnant Women from Clinical Trials during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Review of International Registries.

OBJECTIVE: Pregnant women have been historically excluded from clinical trials for nonobstetric conditions, even during prior epidemics. The objective of this review is to describe the current state of research for pregnant women during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a search of international trial registries for trials relating to the novel coronavirus. The eligibility criteria for each trial were reviewed for inclusion/exclusion of pregnant women. Relevant data were extracted and descriptive statistics were calculated for individual and combined data. The total number of trials from each registry were compared, as well as the proportions of pregnancy-related trials within each. RESULTS: Among 621,370 trials in the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, 927 (0.15%) were COVID-19 related. Of those, the majority (52%) explicitly excluded pregnancy or failed to address pregnancy at all (46%) and only 16 (1.7%) were pregnancy specific. When categorized by region, 688 (74.2%) of COVID-19 trials were in Asia, followed by 128 (13.8%) in Europe, and 66 (7.2%) in North America. Of the COVID-19 trials which included pregnant women, only three were randomized-controlled drug trials. CONCLUSION: Approximately 1.7% of current COVID-19 research is pregnancy related and the majority of trials either explicitly exclude or fail to address pregnancy. Only three interventional trials worldwide involved pregnant women. The knowledge gap concerning the safety and efficacy of interventions for COVID-19 created by the exclusion of pregnant women may ultimately harm them. While "ethical" concerns about fetal exposure are often cited, it is in fact unethical to habitually exclude pregnant women from research. KEY POINTS: · Pregnancy was excluded from past pandemic research.. · Pregnancy is being excluded from COVID-19 research.. · Exclusion of pregnant women is potentially harmful..