The Risk of Neonatal Morbidity in Umbilical Artery Hypercarbia and Respiratory Acidosis.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that elevated umbilical artery (UA) partial pressure of carbon dioxide (pCO2) is associated with neonatal morbidity and to compare the risk of neonatal morbidity with different patterns of UA acidosis. STUDY DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort of term, singleton, nonanomalous deliveries with universal cord gas collection. The primary outcome was composite neonatal morbidity. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the relative risk (RR) for neonatal morbidity in patients with and without UA hypercarbia. A receiver operating characteristic curve determined the predictive value of pCO2 for neonatal morbidity. An additional multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the risk of neonatal morbidity in different patterns of UA acidosis. RESULTS: UA hypercarbia was associated with an increased risk of neonatal morbidity (RR: 2.56, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [2.07, 3.17]). After adjusting for UA acidemia, this association remained significant (adjusted RR: 1.39, 95% CI: [1.05, 1.83]). UA pCO2 was less predictive of neonatal morbidity than UA pH (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.65, 95% CI: [0.62, 0.68] vs. AUC: 0.72, 95% CI: [0.69, 0.75], p < 0.01). The odds ratios for neonatal morbidity for respiratory, mixed, and metabolic acidosis compared with normal cord gases were 1.48 (95% CI: [0.88, 2.49]), 6.41 (95% CI: [3.68, 11.17]), and 7.49 (95% CI: [5.76, 9.72]), respectively, p-trend < 0.01. CONCLUSION: UA hypercarbia is an independent predictor of neonatal morbidity, even in the setting of concomitant UA acidemia. UA mixed and metabolic acidosis carry significantly greater risk of neonatal morbidity compared with respiratory acidosis. KEY POINTS: · UA pCO2 is associated with neonatal morbidity.. · UA respiratory acidosis is the UA cord gas pattern least associated with neonatal morbidity.. · UA pH is a superior predictor of neonatal morbidity compared with UA pCO2..

One-Step Compared With Two-Step Gestational Diabetes Screening and Pregnancy Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate short-term maternal and neonatal outcomes with one-compared with two-step testing for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). DATA SOURCES: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing one-step and two-step GDM testing strategies before September 2021 was conducted. We searched Ovid Medline (1946-), EMBASE (1947-), Scopus (1960-), Cochrane Central, and ClinicalTrials.gov . The primary outcome was rate of large-for-gestational age (LGA) neonates. Secondary outcomes were clinically relevant outcomes for GDM that were selected a priori. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Titles, abstracts, and manuscripts were screened, selected, and reviewed by the first two authors. Four RCTs (24,966 patients) and 13 observational studies (710,677 patients) were analyzed. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Pooled relative risks (RRs) were calculated with 95% CIs using random-effects models and were plotted graphically with forest plots. Study heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran Q and Higgins I 2 tests. The quality of studies that met the inclusion criteria was evaluated with the Downs and Black checklist. Publication bias was assessed by using asymmetry of funnel plots and Harbord's test. There was no difference in the rate of LGA neonates (pooled RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.88-1.04) by testing strategy among RCTs, but patients who underwent one-step testing were more likely to be diagnosed with GDM (pooled RR 2.13; 95% CI 1.61-2.82) and treated with diabetes medications (pooled RR 2.24; 95% CI 1.21-4.15). One-step testing was associated with higher rates of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission (pooled RR 1.12; 95% CI 1.00-1.26) and neonatal hypoglycemia (pooled RR 1.23; 95% CI 1.13-1.34). In analysis of high-quality RCTs and observational studies, one-step testing was associated with a lower rate of LGA neonates (pooled RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.95-0.98), but higher rates of GDM diagnosis, treatment, NICU admission, and neonatal hypoglycemia. CONCLUSION: Despite a significant increase in GDM diagnosis and treatment with one-step testing, there is no difference in rate of LGA neonates compared with two-step testing among RCTs. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42021252703.

The Impact of a Multidisciplinary Opioid Use Disorder Prenatal Clinic on Breastfeeding Rates and Postpartum Care.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the hypothesis that patients with opioid use disorder (OUD), who receive prenatal care in a multidisciplinary, prenatal OUD clinic, have comparable postpartum breastfeeding rates, prenatal and postpartum visit compliance, and postpartum contraceptive use when compared with matched controls without a diagnosis of OUD. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective, matched, cohort study that included all patients who received prenatal care in a multidisciplinary, prenatal OUD clinic-Clinic for Acceptance Recovery and Empowerment (CARE)-between September 2018 and August 2020. These patients were maintained on opioid agonist therapy (OAT) throughout their pregnancy. CARE patients were matched to controls without OUD in a 1:4 ratio for mode of delivery, race, gestational age ± 1 week, and delivery date ± 6 months. The primary outcome was rate of exclusive breastfeeding at maternal discharge. Secondary outcomes included adherence with prenatal care (≥4 prenatal visits), adherence with postpartum care (≥1 postpartum visit), postpartum contraception plan prior to delivery, and type of postpartum contraceptive use. Conditional multivariate logistic regression was used to account for possible confounders in adjusted calculations. RESULTS: A total of 210 patients were included (42 CARE and 168 matched controls). Despite having lower rates of adequate prenatal care, 40 CARE patients (95%) were exclusively breastfeeding at discharge resulting in CARE patients being significantly more likely to be breastfeeding at discharge (adjusted relative risk (aRR): 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-1.55). CARE patients and controls demonstrated no difference in postpartum visit compliance (86 vs. 81%, aRR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.76-1.40) or effective, long-term contraception use (48 vs. 48%; aRR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.36-1.84). CONCLUSION: In the setting of multidisciplinary OUD prenatal care during pregnancy, patients with OUD were more likely to be breastfeeding at the time of discharge than matched controls, with no difference in postpartum visit compliance or effective, long-term contraception. KEY POINTS: · Women with OUD are more likely to breastfeed when engaged in a multidisciplinary prenatal clinic.. · Women with OUD had no difference in LARC use when engaged in a multidisciplinary prenatal clinic.. · Women with OUD had no difference in postpartum visit rate in a multidisciplinary prenatal clinic..

Simplifying the prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: role of the cervical exam.

OBJECTIVE: Predicting likelihood of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) is a cornerstone in counseling patients considering a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). Yet, the simplified Bishop score (SBS), a score comprised cervical dilation, station, and effacement assessment used to predict successful vaginal delivery, has not been applied to the TOLAC population. We evaluated the relationship between admission SBS and likelihood of successful VBAC. We also determined the predictive characteristics of SBS, compared to cervical dilation alone, for successful VBAC. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study of patients with a singleton gestation, ≥37 0/7 weeks gestation, and prior cesarean admitted to Labor & Delivery between 2010 and 2014. The primary outcome of successful VBAC was compared between those with a favorable (score >5) and unfavorable (score ≤5) admission SBS. Secondary outcomes were select maternal and neonatal outcomes. Adjusted risk ratios were estimated using multivariable logistic regression analyses. Receiver-operating characteristic curves compared predictive capabilities of cervical dilation alone to SBS for successful VBAC. RESULTS: Of the 656 patients who underwent a TOLAC during the study period, 421 (64%) had a successful VBAC. 203 (31%) and 453 (69%) had a favorable and an unfavorable admission SBS, respectively. After adjusting for body mass index and prior vaginal delivery, patients with a favorable admission SBS had a 30% greater likelihood of successful VBAC compared to those with an unfavorable SBS (aRR 1.30, 95% CI 1.16-1.40). Admission cervical dilation alone performed similarly to SBS as a predictor of successful VBAC, with a receiver-operator characteristic curve area under the curve (AUC) of 0.68 (95% CI 0.64-0.72) versus an AUC 0.66 (95% CI 0.62-0.70), respectively (p = .07). There were no differences in adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes between those with an unfavorable and favorable SBS. CONCLUSIONS: A favorable admission SBS is associated with an increased likelihood of VBAC. Although both admission SBS and cervical dilation alone are only modest predictors of VBAC, admission cervical dilation performs overall similarly to current models for VBAC prediction and is an objective, reproducible, and generalizable measure. Our study highlights the value of waiting until end of pregnancy (rather than the first prenatal visit) to conclude patient counseling on the decision to TOLAC in order to consider admission cervical assessment, particularly cervical dilation.

Severity of intrapartum fever and neonatal outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The few studies that have addressed the relationship between severity of intrapartum fever and neonatal and maternal morbidity have had mixed results. The impact of the duration between reaching maximum intrapartum temperature and delivery on neonatal outcomes remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: To test the association of severity of intrapartum fever and duration from reaching maximum temperature to delivery with neonatal and maternal morbidity. STUDY DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort of term, singleton patients admitted for induction of labor or spontaneous labor who had intrapartum fever (≥38°C). Patients were divided into 3 groups according to maximum temperature during labor: afebrile (<38°C), mild fever (38°C-39°C), and severe fever (>39°C). The primary outcome was composite neonatal morbidity (umbilical artery pH <7.1, mechanical ventilation, respiratory distress, meconium aspiration with pulmonary hypertension, hypoglycemia, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and Apgar <7 at 5 minutes). Secondary outcomes were composite neonatal neurologic morbidity (hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, hypothermia treatment, and seizures) and composite maternal morbidity (postpartum hemorrhage, endometritis, and maternal packed red blood cell transfusion). Outcomes were compared between the maximum temperature groups using multivariable logistic regression. Cox proportional-hazards regression modeling accounted for the duration between reaching maximum intrapartum temperature and delivery. RESULTS: Of the 8132 patients included, 278 (3.4%) had a mild fever and 74 (0.9%) had a severe fever. The incidence of composite neonatal morbidity increased with intrapartum fever severity (afebrile 5.4% vs mild 18.0% vs severe 29.7%; P<.01). After adjusting for confounders, there were increased odds of composite neonatal morbidity with severe fever compared with mild fever (adjusted odds ratio, 1.93 [95% confidence interval, 1.07-3.48]). Severe fevers remained associated with composite neonatal morbidity compared with mild fevers after accounting for the duration between reaching maximum intrapartum temperature and delivery (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.05 [95% confidence interval, 1.23-3.43]). Composite neonatal neurologic morbidity and composite maternal morbidity were not different between patients with mild and patients with severe fevers. CONCLUSION: Composite neonatal morbidity correlated with intrapartum fever severity in a potentially dose-dependent fashion. This correlation was independent of the duration from reaching maximum intrapartum temperature to delivery, suggesting that clinical management of intrapartum fever, in terms of timing or mode of delivery, should not be affected by this duration.