Maternal and neonatal complications in pregnancies with and without pre-gestational diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVES: To compare pregnancy complications in pregnancies with and without pre-gestational diabetes mellitus (DM) managed in a multidisciplinary high-risk diabetes antenatal clinic. METHODS: This screening cohort study was undertaken at a large maternity unit in the United Kingdom between January 2010 and December 2022. We included singleton pregnancies that booked at our unit at 11-13 weeks' gestation. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was carried out to determine risks of complications in pregnancies with type 1 and type 2 DM after adjusting for maternal and pregnancy characteristics. Effect sizes were expressed as absolute risks (AR) and odds ratio (OR) (95 % confidence intervals [CI]). RESULTS: The study population included 53,649 singleton pregnancies, including 509 (1.0 %) with pre-existing DM and 49,122 (99.0 %) without diabetes. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that there was a significant contribution from pre-existing DM in prediction of adverse outcomes, including antenatal complications such as fetal defects, stillbirth, preterm delivery, polyhydramnios, preeclampsia and delivery of large for gestational age (LGA) neonates; intrapartum complications such as caesarean delivery (CS) and post-partum haemorrhage; and neonatal complications including admission to neonatal intensive care unit, hypoglycaemia, jaundice and hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy (HIE). In particular, there was a 5-fold increased risk of stillbirth and HIE. CONCLUSIONS: The maternal and neonatal complications in pregnancies with pre-existing DM are significantly increased compared to those without DM despite a decade of intensive multidisciplinary antenatal care. Further research is required to investigate strategies and interventions to prevent morbidity and mortality in pregnancies with pre-gestational DM.

Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Association with Maternal and Neonatal Complications.

Background and objectives: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is known to be associated with pregnancy complications but there is limited evidence about the strength of these associations in recent clinical practice, especially after the introduction of strict guidelines for the management of pregnancies with GDM in a multidisciplinary team setting. The objectives of our study were to first compare the rates of complications in pregnancies with GDM with those that had pre-existing diabetes mellitus and those without diabetes; and second, to derive measures of effect size expressed as odds ratios after adjustment for confounding factors to assess the independent association of GDM in prediction of these pregnancy complications. Materials and Methods: This was a prospective cohort study undertaken at a large maternity unit in the United Kingdom between January 2010 and June 2022. We included singleton pregnancies that were booked at our unit at 11-13 weeks' gestation. Multivariate regression analysis was carried out to determine the risks of complications in pregnancies with GDM after adjusting for pregnancy characteristics. Risks were expressed as odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence intervals [CI]) and expressed graphically in forest plots. Results: The study population included 53,649 singleton pregnancies including 509 (1%) with pre-existing DM, 2089 (4%) with GDM and 49,122 (95%) pregnancies without diabetes. Multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that there was a significant independent contribution from GDM in the prediction of adverse outcomes, including maternal complications such as preterm delivery, polyhydramnios, preeclampsia and delivery of large for gestational age neonates and elective caesarean section (CS); and neonatal complications including admission to neonatal intensive care unit, hypoglycaemia, jaundice and respiratory distress syndrome. Conclusions: GDM is associated with an increased rate of pregnancy complications compared to those without diabetes, even after adjustment for maternal and pregnancy characteristics. GDM does not increase the risk of stillbirth, hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy or neonatal death.

Efficiency of the Cerebroplacental Ratio in Identifying High-Risk Late-Term Pregnancies.

Background and Objectives: Over the last few years, great interest has arisen in the role of the cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) to identify low-risk pregnancies at higher risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. This study aimed to assess the predictive capacity of the CPR for adverse perinatal outcomes in all uncomplicated singleton pregnancies attending an appointment at 40-42 weeks. Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study including all consecutive singleton pregnancies undergoing a routine prenatal care appointment after 40 weeks in three maternity units in Spain and the United Kingdom from January 2017 to December 2019. The primary outcome was adverse perinatal outcomes defined as stillbirth or neonatal death, cesarean section or instrumental delivery due to fetal distress during labor, umbilical arterial cord blood pH < 7.0, umbilical venous cord blood pH < 7.1, Apgar score at 5 min < 7, and admission to the neonatal unit. Logistic mixed models and ROC curve analyses were used to analyze the data. Results: A total of 3143 pregnancies were analyzed, including 537 (17.1%) with an adverse perinatal outcome. Maternal age (odds ratio (OR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 1.04), body mass index (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.06), racial origin (OR 2.80, 95% CI 1.90 to 4.12), parity (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.45), and labor induction (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.35) were significant predictors of adverse perinatal outcomes with an area under the ROC curve of 0.743 (95% CI 0.720 to 0.766). The addition of the CPR to the previous model did not improve performance. Additionally, the CPR alone achieved a detection rate of only 11.9% (95% CI 9.3 to 15) when using the 10th centile as the screen-positive cutoff. Conclusions: Our data on late-term unselected pregnancies suggest that the CPR is a poor predictor of adverse perinatal outcomes.

Incidence of vasa praevia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To derive accurate estimates of the incidence of vasa praevia (VP) in a routine population of unselected pregnancies. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane database was performed to review relevant citations reporting outcomes in pregnancies with VP from January 2000 until 5 April 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF STUDIES: Prospective or retrospective cohort or population studies that provided data regarding VP cases in routine unselected pregnancies during the study period. We included studies published in the English language after the year 2000 to reflect contemporary obstetric and neonatal practice. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently screened the retrieved citations and extracted data. The methodological quality of studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses was used to ensure standardised reporting of studies. RESULTS: A total of 3847 citations were screened and 82 full-text manuscripts were retrieved for analysis. There were 24 studies that met the inclusion criteria, of which 12 studies reported prenatal diagnosis with a systematic protocol of screening. There were 1320 pregnancies with VP in a total population of 2 278 561 pregnancies; the weighted pooled incidence of VP was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.59 to 1.01) per 1000 pregnancies, corresponding to 1 case of VP per 1271 (95% CI: 990 to 1692) pregnancies. Nested subanalysis of studies reporting screening for VP based on a specific protocol identified 395 pregnancies with VP in a population of 732 654 pregnancies with weighted pooled incidence of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.53 to 1.18) per 1000 pregnancies (1 case of VP per 1218 (95% CI: 847 to 1901) pregnancies). CONCLUSION: The incidence of VP in unselected pregnancies is 1 in 1218 pregnancies. This is higher than is previously reported and can be used as a basis to assess whether screening for this condition should be part of routine clinical practice. Incorporation of strategies to screen for VP in routine clinical practice is likely to prevent 5% of stillbirths. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020125495.

Maternal and neonatal complications following Kielland's rotational forceps delivery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is conflicting evidence regarding the safety of Kielland's rotational forceps delivery (KRFD) in comparison with other modes of delivery for the management of persistent fetal malposition in the second stage of labour. OBJECTIVES: To derive estimates of risks of maternal and neonatal complications following KRFD, compared with rotational ventouse delivery (RVD), non-rotational forceps delivery (NRFD) or a second-stage caesarean section (CS), from a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. SEARCH STRATEGY: Standard search methodology, as recommended by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Case series, prospective or retrospective cohort studies and population-based studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: A meta-analysis using a random-effects model was used to derive weighted pooled estimates of maternal and neonatal complications. MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included. For postpartum haemorrhage there was no significant difference between Kielland's and ventouse delivery; the rate was lower in Kielland's delivery compared with non-rotational forceps (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65-0.95) and second-stage CS (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.36-0.58). There were no differences in the rates of anal sphincter injuries or admission to neonatal intensive care. Rates of shoulder dystocia were higher with Kielland's delivery compared with ventouse delivery (RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.08-2.98), but rates of neonatal birth trauma were lower (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26-0.91). There were no differences seen in the rates of 5-min APGAR score < 7 between Kielland's delivery and other instrumental births, but they were lower when compared with second-stage CS (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.23-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Kielland's rotational forceps delivery is a safe option for the management of fetal malposition in the second stage of labour.

Kielland's rotational forceps delivery: comparison of maternal and neonatal outcomes with pregnancies delivering by non-rotational forceps.

We compared complications in pregnancies that had Kielland's rotational forceps delivery (KRFD) with non-rotational forceps delivery (NRFD). Maternal outcomes included post-partum haemorrhage (PPH) and obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASIS); neonatal outcomes included admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), 5-minute Apgar scores <7, hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy (HIE), jaundice, shoulder dystocia and birth trauma. The study population included 491 (2.1%) requiring KRFD, 1,257 (5.3%) requiring NRFD and 22,111 (93.0%) that had SVD. In pregnancies with NRFD compared to KRFD, there was higher incidence of OASIS (8.5% vs. 4.7%; p = .006) and a non-significant increased trend for PPH (15.0% vs. 12.4%; p = .173). There was no significant difference in rates of admission to NICU (p = .628), 5-minute Apgar score <7 (p = .375), HIE (p = .532), jaundice (p = .809), severe shoulder dystocia (p = .507) or birth trauma (p = .514). Our study demonstrates that KRFD has lower rates of maternal complications compared to NRFD whilst the rates of neonatal complications are similar.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known on this subject? Kielland's rotational forceps is used for achieving vaginal delivery in pregnancies with failure to progress in second stage of labour secondary to fetal malposition. The use of Kielland's forceps has significantly declined in the last few decades due to concerns about an increased risk of maternal and neonatal complications, despite the absence of any major studies demonstrating this increased risk.What do the results of this study add? There are some studies which compare the risks in pregnancies delivering by Kiellands forceps with rotational ventouse deliveries but there is limited evidence comparing the risks of rotational with non-rotational forceps deliveries. Our study compares the major maternal and neonatal complications in a large cohort of pregnancies undergoing rotational vs. non-rotational forceps deliveries.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? The results of our study demonstrate that maternal and neonatal complications in pregnancies delivering by Kielland's rotational forceps undertaken by appropriately trained obstetricians are either lower or similar to those delivering by non-rotational forceps. Consideration should be given to ensure that there is appropriate training provided to obstetricians to acquire skills in using Kielland's forceps.

Kielland's rotational forceps delivery: A comparison of maternal and neonatal outcomes with rotational ventouse or second stage caesarean section deliveries.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of our study was to derive accurate estimates of risks of maternal and neonatal complications associated with Kielland's rotational forceps delivery (KRFD) compared to rotational ventouse delivery (RVD) or 2nd stage caesarean section (CS). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study undertaken at a large tertiary maternity and neonatal unit in the United Kingdom between January 2010 and June 2018. Pregnancies with fetal demise, major fetal defects, those lost to follow-up, those delivering by elective or emergency CS in the first stage of labour and non-rotational instrumental deliveries were excluded. The study population included singleton pregnancies delivering by Kielland's forceps, rotational ventouse, 2nd stage CS or spontaneous unassisted cephalic vaginal delivery; the latter forming the control group. The maternal outcomes examined included post-partum haemorrhage (PPH) and obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASIS). The neonatal outcomes included admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), 5-minute Apgar scores <7, hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy (HIE), jaundice, shoulder dystocia and birth trauma. Absolute risks with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were calculated in the study groups. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was carried out to estimate crude and adjusted odds ratio (OR) with 95 % CI. RESULTS: The study population of 23,786 pregnancies included: 491 (2.1 %) requiring KRFD, 344 (1.4 %) requiring RVD, 840 (3.5 %) that had a 2nd stage CS and 22,111 (93.0 %) spontaneous cephalic vaginal deliveries. With regard to maternal adverse outcomes, in pregnancies that had a KRFD compared to RVD, there was no significant difference in the incidence of OASIS (p = 0.599) or PPH (p = 0.982). In contrast, the risk of PPH was significantly higher in those delivering by a 2nd stage CS compared to KRFD (27.5 % vs. 12.4 %; p < 0.0001). With regard to neonatal adverse outcomes, in those delivering by KRFD compared to RVD and 2nd stage CS, there was no significant difference in the incidence of admission to NICU (p = 0.912; p = 0.746, respectively), 5-minute Apgar score<7 (p = 0.335; p = 0.150, respectively), jaundice (p = 0.810; p = 0.332, respectively), mild shoulder dystocia (p = 0.077), severe shoulder dystocia (p = 0.603) or birth trauma (p = 0.265; p = 0.323, respectively). The risk of maternal composite adverse outcome was highest after 2nd stage CS (OR 7.68; 95 %CI: 6.52-9.04) and lowest after KRFD (OR 3.82; 95 %CI: 2.98-4.91). The risk of composite neonatal adverse outcome was higher in those delivering by RVD (OR 2.87; 95 %CI: 2.10-3.91), compared to KRFD (OR 2.23; 95 %CI: 1.67-2.97) or 2nd stage CS (OR 2.02; 95 %CI: 1.60-2.54). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that KRFD is a safer management option when compared to RVD or 2nd stage CS for the management of persistent fetal malposition in labour.

Hysterectomy and Adenextomy via transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES): A UK perspective with a case series of 33 patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate operative outcomes of hysterectomy +/- adnexectomy by Trans-vaginal Natural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery (vNOTES) in a case series of 33 patients. STUDY DESIGN: It was a prospective case series study carried out in Darent Valley and Benenden Hospital, to our knowledge, the first units in the United Kingdom to have undertaken VNOTE Hysterectomy. We collected data on a private shared drive noting patient demographics, indications for surgery, operation outcomes and patient follow-up details. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Between January and December 2018, 33 patients underwent surgery between two units. Indications for surgery included dysfunctional uterine bleeding, endometrial hyperplasia, pelvic pain, post-menopausal bleeding, prophylactic surgery in BRCA positive patients and one grade 1 stage 1 endometrial cancer in whom laparoscopic hysterectomy was technically difficult and complicated by previous midline laparotomy. Ages ranged from 35 to 75 and BMI from 20-53. Mean operation time was 68.5 min and mean blood loss intraoperatively was 269mls. 15.2% (n = 5) had a blood loss equal or more than 500 mls. There were no intraoperative complications and no conversions to open surgery. The median visual analogue pain score at 6 h post operatively and at discharge was 0. All patients received regular Paracetamol and Ibuprofen and opiate based analgesics were only used on an as required basis. Postoperative complication which included failed trial without catheter, urinary tract infection and urinary dysfunction were reported by four women (12.4%). Only 2 patients re-presented to hospital over a 30-day period and neither required inpatient management. Hysterectomy by vNOTES has advantages over traditional laparoscopic and vaginal hysterectomy that include reduced requirement for intra-abdominal insufflation and head down, absence of trocar related injuries and easier operative access in patients with morbid obesity, or previous abdominal surgery such as midline laparotomy or mesh hernia repair. In addition, both tubes and ovaries can be removed easily due to easier access and visibility and there is no requirement for vaginal descent in order to do so. Plans for a comparative study between laparoscopic hysterectomy and vNOTES hysterectomy are underway.