Use of antihistamines before or during pregnancy and risk of early-onset pre-eclampsia in allergic women: a population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: We have previously found that allergy is a risk factor for early-onset pre-eclampsia. The aim of this study was to assess the association between pregestational maternal use of antihistamines and early-onset pre-eclampsia. DESIGN: A population-based cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: All women giving birth in Norway 2004-2016, including 692 487 pregnancies. Data from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway were linked with data from the Norwegian Prescription Database. Prescriptions of antihistamines were divided into three groups: before pregnancy (<6 months), early pregnancy (<20 weeks) and late pregnancy (20-36 weeks). ORs with 95% CIs for pre-eclampsia <34 and <37 weeks by antihistamine use were estimated by logistic regression and stratified on multiple pregnancy and parity. Predicted proportions (%) with 95% CIs were estimated. INTERVENTIONS: Use of antihistamines in relation to pregnancy in allergic women. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Development of early-onset pre-eclampsia. RESULTS: 2997 (0.43%) and 5769 (0.83%) women had pre-eclampsia <34 and <37 weeks, respectively. Use of antihistamines before and in early pregnancy was associated with a risk of developing early-onset pre-eclampsia that was comparable to the background population (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.2 and OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.7 to 1.1, respectively). Antihistamine use only in late pregnancy was not treated as exposure, but as an indicator of allergy, and was associated with an increased risk of early-onset pre-eclampsia (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.5 to 2.2). Predicted proportions of pre-eclampsia <34 weeks were significantly lower in women using antihistamines before (0.41%, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.49) and in early pregnancy (0.37%, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.44), compared with women using antihistamines after placentation (0.69%, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.83). Results were similar for pre-eclampsia <37 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Antihistamine use before or during placentation was associated with reduced risk of developing early-onset pre-eclampsia in allergic women compared with women using antihistamines after placentation.

A validation of the diagnosis of obstetric sphincter tears in two Norwegian databases, the Medical Birth Registry and the Patient Administration System.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the present study was to validate the registration of obstetric sphincter tears in 2 registers, the Medical Birth Registry of Norway [MBRN] and Patient Administration System [PAS]. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all obstetric sphincter tears that occurred in our department in 1990-1992 and 2000-2002 was performed. The case records of all patients registered either in MBRN, PAS or the birth logs were compared with the information in the medical records, which constituted the 'golden standard'. RESULTS: The incidence of obstetric sphincter tears in 1990-1992 was 5.8% (774/13381), 5.6% (745/13381) had a perineal tear of third degree and 0.2% (29/13381) of fourth degree. In 2000-2002, the total incidence was 6.6% (813/12380), 5.9% (731/12380) was a third degree perineal tear and 0.7% (82/12380) fourth degree, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the MBRN database to detect obstetric sphincter tears was 85.3 and 99.5% in 1990-1992, and 91.8 and 99.7% in 2000-2002, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values of a MBRN-registered diagnosis of obstetric sphincter tears in 1990-1992 were 91.4 and 99.1%, while the corresponding percentages in 2000-2002 were 95.4 and 99.4%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the PAS database was correspondingly 52.1 and 99.0% in 1990-1992, and 84.6 and 98.5% in 2000-2002. The positive and negative predictive values of a PAS-diagnosis of obstetric sphincter tears were 75.8 and 97.1% in 1990-1992. In 2000-2002, they were 92.7 and 98.9%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The validity of a diagnosis of obstetric sphincter tears, based on the MBRN, is sufficiently high to justify future large-scale epidemiologic studies based on this database, while the validity of a PAS diagnosis is lower, but improves.