Identifying Targets to Improve the Management of Severe Hypertension in Pregnancy and Postpartum.

OBJECTIVES: To (1) define quality indicators, (2) describe care gaps, and (3) identify process issues in severe hypertension (sustained systolic blood pressure [BP] ≥160 mm Hg or diastolic BP ≥110 mm Hg) management at our tertiary care centre. METHODS: Pregnant and postpartum persons diagnosed with a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy from 2018 to 2019 were identified. A retrospective cohort of patients with severe hypertension was constructed, and data were collected through chart review. Severe hypertension management was assessed according to defined quality indicators. Clinical characteristics were compared between participants with and without time-to-target BP within 60 minutes. Process issues were examined for each severe hypertension occurrence. RESULTS: Of 608 participants with a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy, 90 (15%) experienced severe hypertension. Median time-to-target BP was 76 minutes (interquartile range 47-123 minutes), and target BP (<155/105 mm Hg) was achieved within 60 minutes in 31/90 (34%) participants. Appropriate antihypertensives for severe hypertension were used in 55/90 (61%), and time-to-treatment initiation was within 30 minutes in 42/54 (78%). Chronic hypertension and oral labetalol use were associated with delays in achieving target BP. Process issues related to severe hypertension management included inappropriate treatment (n = 35/90; 39%), failure to recognize severe hypertension as an emergency (n = 21/90; 23%), and delayed treatment initiation (n = 12/54; 22%). CONCLUSION: We defined quality indicators for severe hypertension management. Time-to-target BP within 60 minutes was achieved in a minority of patients, and chronic hypertension was associated with delayed severe hypertension resolution. Process issues in severe hypertension management were described.

Obstetrical and neonatal outcomes among pregnancies complicated by hyperparathyroidism.

PURPOSE: Severe hypercalcemia resulting from hyperparathyroidism may result in adverse perinatal outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate maternal and neonatal outcomes among pregnant women with hyperparathyroidism using a population database. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 1999-2015. ICD-9 codes were used to identify women diagnosed with hyperparathyroidism during pregnancy. Perinatal outcomes between pregnant women with and without hyperparathyroidism were compared. Multivariate logistic regression, controlling for age, race, income, insurance type, hospital location, and comorbidities, evaluated the effect of hyperparathyroidism on perinatal outcomes. RESULTS: Of 13,792,544 deliveries included over the study period, 368 were to women with hyperparathyroidism. The overall incidence of hyperparathyroidism was 2.7/100,000 births, increasing from 1.6 to 5.2/100,000 births over the study period (p < 0.0001). Women with hyperparathyroidism were older and had more comorbidities, such as obesity, and pre-gestational hypertension and diabetes. Relative to the comparison group, women with hyperparathyroidism were more likely to deliver preterm, OR 1.69 (95% CI 1.24-2.29), to develop preeclampsia, 3.14 (2.30-4.28), and to deliver by cesarean, 1.69 (1.36-2.09). Infants born to mothers with hyperparathyroidism were more likely to be growth restricted, 1.83 (1.08-3.07), and to be diagnosed with a congenital anomaly, 4.21 (2.09-8.48). CONCLUSION: Hyperparathyroidism during pregnancy is associated with a significant increase in adverse perinatal outcomes, including preeclampsia, preterm delivery, fetal growth restriction, and congenital anomalies. As such, pregnancies among women with hyperparathyroidism should be considered high-risk, and specialized care is recommended in order to minimize maternal and neonatal morbidity.

Cesarean delivery on maternal request in the United States from 1999 to 2015.

BACKGROUND: The rate of cesarean delivery has increased in the United States over the last several decades. However, the rate of cesarean delivery on maternal request remains undetermined, and recent data on cesarean delivery on maternal request are lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the prevalence and temporal trends of cesarean delivery on maternal request in the United States and characterize the population of women who elect to undergo a cesarean delivery in the absence of fetal or maternal indications. Maternal outcomes between women who delivered by cesarean delivery on maternal request and those who did not were compared. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 1999 to 2015. An algorithm based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes was created to identify patients who underwent a primary elective cesarean delivery in the absence of fetal or maternal indications. Maternal characteristics and outcomes between women who delivered by cesarean delivery on maternal request and those who did not were compared using descriptive and logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Of the 13,698,835 deliveries included throughout the study period, 228,586 were identified as cesarean delivery on maternal request. Rates of cesarean delivery on maternal request among all live births increased throughout the study period, from 1% in 1999 to 1.62% in 2015 (P<.0001). Women who delivered by cesarean delivery on maternal request were more likely to be >35 years of age, were in the highest income quartile, and have private insurance. Cesarean delivery on maternal request was associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (odds ratio, 1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-2.0), myocardial infarction (odds ratio, 6.3; 95% confidence interval, 3.8-10.4), sepsis (odds ratio, 5.6; 95% confidence interval, 4.7-6.6), disseminated intravascular coagulation (odds ratio, 2.9; 95% confidence interval, 2.3-3.7), death (odds ratio, 14.5; 95% confidence interval, 11.4-18.6), and prolonged hospital stay (odds ratio, 4.9; 95% confidence interval, 4.8-5.1) and a lower risk of postpartum hemorrhage (odds ratio, 0.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.7-0.7). CONCLUSION: Our findings indicated that cesarean delivery on maternal request accounts for a small but increasing proportion of all cesarean deliveries in the United States. Cesarean delivery on maternal request was more prevalent among women with certain demographic characteristics, indicating that the option of cesarean delivery on maternal request may be more appealing or more frequently offered to a certain population of women. Although the overall risk of adverse events is low for individual births, population effects can result in increased morbidity and mortality. Therefore, the rates of cesarean delivery on maternal request should be monitored on a national level. Study findings were limited by the absence of a specific diagnostic code for cesarean delivery on maternal request.

Severe and critical COVID-19 in pregnancy: A case series from Montreal.

BACKGROUND: Optimal obstetric management for women with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is not known. We describe the management of six pregnant women requiring in-hospital care for severe COVID-19. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify pregnant women who tested positive for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) between 15 March and 30 June 2020. A subset of women meeting criteria for severe COVID-19 was included. RESULTS: Four women required non-invasive supplemental oxygen therapy and two required mechanical ventilation. Four women were discharged from hospital undelivered and two required preterm delivery. One woman had a pulmonary embolism, and two required re-admission for worsening symptoms. CONCLUSION: Management of pregnant women with severe COVID-19 is complex and should involve multidisciplinary expertise. Avoiding early delivery may be a safe option. We recommend an individualized approach to care, including careful consideration of the expected risks and benefits of expectant obstetric management versus delivery.

Physician Perspectives on Including Pregnant Women in Covid-19 Clinical Trials: Time for a Paradigm Change.

Excluding pregnant people from Covid-19 clinical trials may lead to unintended harmful consequences. For this study, an online questionnaire was sent to physicians belonging to Canadian professional medical associations in order to evaluate their perspectives on the participation of pregnant women in Covid-19 clinical trials. The majority of respondents expressed support for including pregnant women in Covid-19 trials (119/165; 72%), especially those investigating therapies with a prior safety record in pregnancy (139/164; 85%). The main perceived barriers to inclusion identified were unwillingness of pregnant patients to participate and of treating teams to offer participation, the burden of regulatory approval, and a general "culture of exclusion" of pregnant women from trials. We describe why some physicians may be reluctant to include pregnant individuals in trials, and we identify barriers to the appropriate participation of pregnant people in clinical research.

Obstetrical and Newborn Outcomes Among Patients With SARS-CoV-2 During Pregnancy.

We report on the perinatal outcomes of pregnant patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) from 2 hospitals in Montréal, Québec. Outcomes of 45 patients with SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy were compared with those of 225 patients without infection. Sixteen percent of patients with SARS-CoV-2 delivered preterm, compared with 9% of patients without (P = 0.28). Median gestational age at delivery (39.3 (interquartile range [IQR] 37.7-40.4) wk vs. 39.1 [IQR 38.3-40.1] wk) and median birth weight (3250 [IQR 2780-3530] g vs. 3340 [IQR 3025-3665] g) were similar between groups. The rate of cesarean delivery was 29% for patients with SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, we did not find important differences in outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2. Our findings may be limited to women with mild COVID-19 diagnosed in the third trimester.

Screening and Testing Pregnant Patients for SARS-CoV-2: First-Wave Experience of a Designated COVID-19 Hospitalization Centre in Montréal.

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may present asymptomatically in a large proportion of cases in endemic areas. Accordingly, universal testing has been suggested as a potential strategy for reducing transmission in the obstetrical setting. We describe the clinical characteristics of patients who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during pregnancy at a designated COVID-19 hospitalization centre in Montréal, Québec. METHODS: A single-centre retrospective cohort was constructed to include all pregnant patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between March 22 and July 31, 2020, and received care at the Jewish General Hospital. Initially, testing was restricted to at-risk patients, identified through the use of a screening questionnaire. Beginning on May 15, 2020, universal testing was implemented, and all pregnant patients admitted to the hospital were tested. Data were collected through chart review. RESULTS: Of 803 patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 during the study period, 41 (5%) tested positive. Among those patients who were symptomatic, the most commonly reported symptoms were cough (53%), fever (37%), dyspnea (30%), and anosmia and/or ageusia (20%). Before the implementation of universal testing, 13% (3 of 24) of patients with SARS-CoV-2 were asymptomatic. After implementation of universal testing, 80% (8 of 10) of patients with SARS-CoV-2 were asymptomatic. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that most pregnant patients with SARS-CoV-2 are asymptomatic or have mild symptoms of COVID-19. Particularly in endemic areas, universal testing of pregnant patients presenting to the hospital should be strongly considered as an important measure to prevent in-hospital and community transmission of COVID-19.

Ludwig's Angina in Pregnancy: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Physiologic changes in pregnancy may predispose pregnant women to oral health problems. However, most women are not counselled on oral health during pregnancy. Lack of proper oral health care predisposes pregnant women to odontogenic infections, which can lead to severe complications. CASE: A 34-year-old multiparous woman presented at 400 weeks gestation with a 3-day history of severe, progressive neck swelling, jaw pain, and trismus. She was diagnosed with Ludwig's angina secondary to an untreated dental cavity. She required emergency fiberoptic intubation to secure her airway, urgent delivery via cesarean section, and subsequent surgical drainage performed by otolaryngology. CONCLUSION: Ludwig's angina during pregnancy is associated with severe morbidity. Dental care should not be denied or postponed due to pregnancy, and dental infections should be treated promptly. Health care providers should counsel women on the importance of maintaining good oral health during pregnancy.

Pregnancies Among the First Generation of Survivors of Perinatal HIV Infection.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about pregnancy outcomes among women who have acquired human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) through perinatal infection and survived into adulthood. The objectives of this study were to describe pregnancy outcomes among women with perinatal HIV infection (PHIV) in Canada and to identify potential challenges in the prevention of perinatal HIV transmission in this population. METHODS: A retrospective review of all pregnancies among women with PHIV who were previously followed as children at two tertiary care centres in Montréal, Québec, was conducted. Data were extracted from pediatric and obstetrical records. RESULTS: There were 21 pregnancies among 11 women, and 18 of these pregnancies were unintentional. Mean age at first pregnancy was 19.5 years (range 15-29 years). At the first prenatal visit, 79% had a detectable viral load, 36% were immunosuppressed (CD4 T cell count <200 mm3), and only 36% were receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART). At the time of delivery, although all were prescribed ART, 50% of these women still had a detectable viral load, and 36% remained immunosuppressed. All of the women harboured mutations conferring drug resistance to zidovudine and lamivudine, and the majority (73%) were also resistant to nevirapine. None of the infants were HIV infected, although all received prophylaxis with agents to which their mother's virus was resistant. CONCLUSION: Unplanned pregnancies, difficulties with adherence to ART, and drug resistance were identified challenges in the management of pregnancies among women with PHIV. This study highlights a gap in the reproductive counselling of adolescents with PHIV and the need for close follow-up and adherence support during pregnancy in this population.

Management of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Pregnancy: When Should Early Delivery Be Considered?

BACKGROUND: The hemodynamic and physiological changes of pregnancy may predispose women to cardiac arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation (AF). Nevertheless, new-onset AF in pregnancy remains rare, and treatment is challenging. Current recommendations are to treat pregnant women with AF as non-pregnant adults, by using pharmacological or synchronized electrical cardioversion, without mention of gestational age or possibility of delivery. CASE: A 23-year-old nulliparous woman developed new-onset symptomatic AF at 362 weeks gestation, but presented to our hospital was delivered at 364 weeks gestation. Beta-blockers were administered for heart rate control. After 48 hours, the decision was made to proceed with delivery rather than cardioversion. The patient's arrhythmia resolved spontaneously postpartum without further treatment. CONCLUSION: In pregnant patients near or at term, delivery should be considered in the management of new-onset AF after consultation with cardiology, anaesthesiology, and maternal-fetal medicine.

Use of Triple Combination Antiretroviral Therapy With Raltegravir as Empiric HIV Therapy in the High-risk HIV-exposed Newborn.

The recent approval of raltegravir granules for suspension in the newborn population offers a new option for the antiretroviral prophylaxis of newborns for the prevention of perinatal transmission. However, there are little data on its use in preterm infants, nor on outcomes following its use as empiric HIV therapy for newborns subsequently found to be infected. We describe here the use of RAL granules for suspension in these cases.