RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Placental growth factor (PlGF)-based testing has high diagnostic accuracy for predicting pre-eclampsia needing delivery, significantly reducing time to diagnosis and severe maternal adverse outcomes. The clinical benefit of repeat PlGF-based testing is unclear. We aimed to determine whether repeat PlGF-based testing (using a clinical management algorithm and nationally recommended thresholds) reduces adverse perinatal outcomes in pregnant individuals with suspected preterm pre-eclampsia. METHODS: In this multicentre, parallel-group, superiority, randomised controlled trial, done in 22 maternity units across England, Scotland, and Wales, we recruited women aged 18 years or older with suspected pre-eclampsia between 22 weeks and 0 days of gestation and 35 weeks and 6 days of gestation. Women were randomly assigned (1:1) to revealed repeat PlGF-based testing or concealed repeat testing with usual care. The intervention was not masked to women or partners, or clinicians or data collectors, due to the nature of the trial. The trial statistician was masked to intervention allocation. The primary outcome was a perinatal composite of stillbirth, early neonatal death, or neonatal unit admission. The primary analysis was by the intention-to-treat principle, with a per-protocol analysis restricted to women managed according to their allocation group. The trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN 85912420. FINDINGS: Between Dec 17, 2019, and Sept 30, 2022, 1253 pregnant women were recruited and randomly assigned treatment; one patient was excluded due to randomisation error. 625 women were allocated to revealed repeat PlGF-based testing and 627 women were allocated to usual care with concealed repeat PlGF-based testing (mean age 32·3 [SD 5·7] years; 879 [70%] white). One woman in the concealed repeat PlGF-based testing group was lost to follow-up. There was no significant difference in the primary perinatal composite outcome between the revealed repeat PlGF-based testing group (195 [31·2%]) of 625 women) compared with the concealed repeat PlGF-based testing group (174 [27·8%] of 626 women; relative risk 1·21 [95% CI 0·95-1·33]; p=0·18). The results from the per-protocol analysis were similar. There were four serious adverse events in the revealed repeat PlGF-based testing group and six in the concealed repeat PlGF-based testing group; all serious adverse events were deemed unrelated to the intervention by the site principal investigators and chief investigator. INTERPRETATION: Repeat PlGF-based testing in pregnant women with suspected pre-eclampsia was not associated with improved perinatal outcomes. In a high-income setting with a low prevalence of adverse outcomes, universal, routine repeat PlGF-based testing of all individuals with suspected pre-eclampsia is not recommended. FUNDING: Tommy's Charity, Jon Moulton Charitable Trust, and National Institute for Health and Care Research Guy's and St Thomas' Biomedical Research Centre.
Assuntos
Pré-Eclâmpsia , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Gravidez , Parto , Fator de Crescimento Placentário , Pré-Eclâmpsia/diagnóstico , Natimorto/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Cervical cerclage, cervical pessary, and vaginal progesterone have each been shown to reduce preterm birth (PTB) in high-risk women, but to our knowledge, there has been no randomised comparison of the 3 interventions. The SuPPoRT "Stitch, Pessary, or Progesterone Randomised Trial" was designed to compare the rate of PTB <37 weeks between each intervention in women who develop a short cervix in pregnancy. METHODS AND FINDINGS: SuPPoRT was a multicentre, open label 3-arm randomised controlled trial designed to demonstrate equivalence (equivalence margin 20%) conducted from 1 July 2015 to 1 July 2021 in 19 obstetric units in the United Kingdom. Asymptomatic women with singleton pregnancies with transvaginal ultrasound cervical lengths measuring <25 mm between 14+0 and 23+6 weeks' gestation were eligible for randomisation (1:1:1) to receive either vaginal cervical cerclage (n = 128), cervical pessary (n = 126), or vaginal progesterone (n = 132). Minimisation variables were gestation at recruitment, body mass index (BMI), and risk factor for PTB. The primary outcome was PTB <37 weeks' gestation. Secondary outcomes included PTB <34 weeks', <30 weeks', and adverse perinatal outcome. Analysis was by intention to treat. A total of 386 pregnant women between 14+0 and 23+6 weeks' gestation with a cervical length <25 mm were randomised to one of the 3 interventions. Of these women, 67% were of white ethnicity, 18% black ethnicity, and 7.5% Asian ethnicity. Mean BMI was 25.6. Over 85% of women had prior risk factors for PTB; 39.1% had experienced a spontaneous PTB or midtrimester loss (>14 weeks gestation); and 45.8% had prior cervical surgery. Data from 381 women were available for outcome analysis. Using binary regression, randomised therapies (cerclage versus pessary versus vaginal progesterone) were found to have similar effects on the primary outcome PTB <37 weeks (39/127 versus 38/122 versus 32/132, p = 0.4, cerclage versus pessary risk difference (RD) -0.7% [-12.1 to 10.7], cerclage versus progesterone RD 6.2% [-5.0 to 17.0], and progesterone versus pessary RD -6.9% [-17.9 to 4.1]). Similarly, no difference was seen for PTB <34 and 30 weeks, nor adverse perinatal outcome. There were some differences in the mild side effect profile between interventions (vaginal discharge and bleeding) and women randomised to progesterone reported more severe abdominal pain. A small proportion of women did not receive the intervention as per protocol; however, per-protocol and as-treated analyses showed similar results. The main study limitation was that the trial was underpowered for neonatal outcomes and was stopped early due to the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that for women who develop a short cervix, cerclage, pessary, and vaginal progesterone were equally efficacious at preventing PTB, as judged with a 20% equivalence margin. Commencing with any of the therapies would be reasonable clinical management. These results can be used as a counselling tool for clinicians when managing women with a short cervix. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EU Clinical Trials register. EudraCT Number: 2015-000456-15, clinicaltrialsregister.eu., ISRCTN Registry: ISRCTN13364447, isrctn.com.
Assuntos
Cerclagem Cervical , Colo do Útero , Pessários , Nascimento Prematuro , Progesterona , Humanos , Feminino , Nascimento Prematuro/prevenção & controle , Progesterona/administração & dosagem , Progesterona/uso terapêutico , Gravidez , Cerclagem Cervical/métodos , Adulto , Administração Intravaginal , Colo do Útero/diagnóstico por imagem , Resultado do Tratamento , Medida do Comprimento CervicalRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Pre-eclampsia is a leading cause of maternal and perinatal mortality. Evidence regarding interventions in a low-income or middle-income setting is scarce. We aimed to evaluate whether planned delivery between 34+â0 and 36+â6 weeks' gestation can reduce maternal mortality and morbidity without increasing perinatal complications in India and Zambia. METHODS: In this parallel-group, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial, we compared planned delivery versus expectant management in women with pre-eclampsia from 34+â0 to 36+â6 weeks' gestation. Participants were recruited from nine hospitals and referral facilities in India and Zambia and randomly assigned to planned delivery or expectant management in a 1:1 ratio by a secure web-based randomisation facility hosted by MedSciNet. Randomisation was stratified by centre and minimised by parity, single-fetus pregnancy or multi-fetal pregnancy, and gestational age. The primary maternal outcome was a composite of maternal mortality or morbidity with a superiority hypothesis. The primary perinatal outcome was a composite of one or more of: stillbirth, neonatal death, or neonatal unit admission of more than 48 h with a non-inferiority hypothesis (margin of 10% difference). Analyses were by intention to treat, with an additional per-protocol analysis for the perinatal outcome. The trial was prospectively registered with ISRCTN, 10672137. The trial is closed to recruitment and all follow-up has been completed. FINDINGS: Between Dec 19, 2019, and March 31, 2022, 565 women were enrolled. 284 women (282 women and 301 babies analysed) were allocated to planned delivery and 281 women (280 women and 300 babies analysed) were allocated to expectant management. The incidence of the primary maternal outcome was not significantly different in the planned delivery group (154 [55%]) compared with the expectant management group (168 [60%]; adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0·91, 95% CI 0·79 to 1·05). The incidence of the primary perinatal outcome by intention to treat was non-inferior in the planned delivery group (58 [19%]) compared with the expectant management group (67 [22%]; adjusted risk difference -3·39%, 90% CI -8·67 to 1·90; non-inferiority p<0·0001). The results from the per-protocol analysis were similar. There was a significant reduction in severe maternal hypertension (adjusted RR 0·83, 95% CI 0·70 to 0·99) and stillbirth (0·25, 0·07 to 0·87) associated with planned delivery. There were 12 serious adverse events in the planned delivery group and 21 in the expectant management group. INTERPRETATION: Clinicians can safely offer planned delivery to women with late preterm pre-eclampsia, in a low-income or middle-income country. Planned delivery reduces stillbirth, with no increase in neonatal unit admissions or neonatal morbidity and reduces the risk of severe maternal hypertension. Planned delivery from 34 weeks' gestation should therefore be considered as an intervention to reduce pre-eclampsia associated mortality and morbidity in these settings. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council and Indian Department of Biotechnology.
Assuntos
Hipertensão , Morte Perinatal , Pré-Eclâmpsia , Nascimento Prematuro , Gravidez , Recém-Nascido , Feminino , Humanos , Pré-Eclâmpsia/epidemiologia , Pré-Eclâmpsia/prevenção & controle , Natimorto/epidemiologia , Conduta Expectante , Países em Desenvolvimento , Nascimento Prematuro/epidemiologia , Morte Perinatal/prevenção & controleRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Treatment with vaginal progesterone reduces the risk of miscarriage and preterm birth in selected high-risk women. The hypothesis that vaginal progesterone can reduce the risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) is unexplored. OBJECTIVES: To summarise the evidence on the effectiveness of vaginal progesterone to reduce the risk of HDP. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched Embase (OVID), MEDLINE (OVID), PubMed, CENTRAL and clinicaltrials.gov from inception until 20 June 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included placebo-controlled randomised trials (RCTs) of vaginal progesterone for the prevention or treatment of any pregnancy complications. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted absolute event numbers for HDP and pre-eclampsia in women receiving vaginal progesterone or placebo, and meta-analysed the data with a random effects model. We appraised the certainty of the evidence using GRADE methodology. MAIN RESULTS: The quantitative synthesis included 11 RCTs, of which three initiated vaginal progesterone in the first trimester, and eight in the second or third trimesters. Vaginal progesterone started in the first trimester of pregnancy lowered the risk of any HDP (risk ratio [RR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-0.93, 2 RCTs, n = 4431 women, I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) and pre-eclampsia (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41-0.92, 3 RCTs, n = 5267 women, I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) when compared with placebo. Vaginal progesterone started in the second or third trimesters was not associated with a reduction in HDP (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.67-2.12, 3 RCTs, n = 1602 women, I2 = 9%; low-certainty evidence) or pre-eclampsia (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.71-1.31, 5 RCTs, n = 4274 women, I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence). CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review found first-trimester initiated vaginal micronised progesterone may reduce the risk of HDP and pre-eclampsia.
Assuntos
Hipertensão Induzida pela Gravidez , Pré-Eclâmpsia , Complicações na Gravidez , Nascimento Prematuro , Gravidez , Recém-Nascido , Feminino , Humanos , Progesterona/uso terapêutico , Pré-Eclâmpsia/prevenção & controle , Hipertensão Induzida pela Gravidez/prevenção & controle , Nascimento Prematuro/prevenção & controleRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women globally and there is a need to establish whether there are differences in effectiveness between midwife continuity of care models and other models of care. This is an update of a review published in 2016. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of midwife continuity of care models with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (17 August 2022), as well as the reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife continuity of care models or other models of care during pregnancy and birth. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion criteria, scientific integrity, and risk of bias, and carried out data extraction and entry. Primary outcomes were spontaneous vaginal birth, caesarean section, regional anaesthesia, intact perineum, fetal loss after 24 weeks gestation, preterm birth, and neonatal death. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 17 studies involving 18,533 randomised women. We assessed all studies as being at low risk of scientific integrity/trustworthiness concerns. Studies were conducted in Australia, Canada, China, Ireland, and the United Kingdom. The majority of the included studies did not include women at high risk of complications. There are three ongoing studies targeting disadvantaged women. Primary outcomes Based on control group risks observed in the studies, midwife continuity of care models, as compared to other models of care, likely increase spontaneous vaginal birth from 66% to 70% (risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.07; 15 studies, 17,864 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), likelyreduce caesarean sections from 16% to 15% (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.99; 16 studies, 18,037 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and likely result in little to no difference in intact perineum (29% in other care models and 31% in midwife continuity of care models, average RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.12; 12 studies, 14,268 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may belittle or no difference in preterm birth (< 37 weeks) (6% under both care models, average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.16; 10 studies, 13,850 participants; low-certainty evidence). We arevery uncertain about the effect of midwife continuity of care models on regional analgesia (average RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.92; 15 studies, 17,754 participants, very low-certainty evidence), fetal loss at or after 24 weeks gestation (average RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.13; 12 studies, 16,122 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and neonatal death (average RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.71; 10 studies, 14,718 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes When compared to other models of care, midwife continuity of care models likely reduce instrumental vaginal birth (forceps/vacuum) from 14% to 13% (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.96; 14 studies, 17,769 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and may reduceepisiotomy 23% to 19% (average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.91; 15 studies, 17,839 participants; low-certainty evidence). When compared to other models of care, midwife continuity of care models likelyresult in little to no difference inpostpartum haemorrhage (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.03; 11 studies, 14,407 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and admission to special care nursery/neonatal intensive care unit (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.03; 13 studies, 16,260 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in induction of labour (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.00; 14 studies, 17,666 participants; low-certainty evidence), breastfeeding initiation (average RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.12; 8 studies, 8575 participants; low-certainty evidence), and birth weight less than 2500 g (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.08; 9 studies, 12,420 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about the effect of midwife continuity of care models compared to other models of care onthird or fourth-degree tear (average RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.49; 7 studies, 9437 participants; very low-certainty evidence), maternal readmission within 28 days (average RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.96; 1 study, 1195 participants; very low-certainty evidence), attendance at birth by a known midwife (average RR 9.13, 95% CI 5.87 to 14.21; 11 studies, 9273 participants; very low-certainty evidence), Apgar score less than or equal to seven at five minutes (average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.24; 13 studies, 12,806 participants; very low-certainty evidence) andfetal loss before 24 weeks gestation (average RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.01; 12 studies, 15,913 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No maternal deaths were reported across three studies. Although the observed risk of adverse events was similar between midwifery continuity of care models and other models, our confidence in the findings was limited. Our confidence in the findings was lowered by possible risks of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision of some estimates. There were no available data for the outcomes: maternal health status, neonatal readmission within 28 days, infant health status, and birth weight of 4000 g or more. Maternal experiences and cost implications are described narratively. Women receiving care from midwife continuity of care models, as opposed to other care models, generally reported more positive experiences during pregnancy, labour, and postpartum. Cost savings were noted in the antenatal and intrapartum periods in midwife continuity of care models. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Women receiving midwife continuity of care models were less likely to experience a caesarean section and instrumental birth, and may be less likely to experience episiotomy. They were more likely to experience spontaneous vaginal birth and report a positive experience. The certainty of some findings varies due to possible risks of bias, inconsistencies, and imprecision of some estimates. Future research should focus on the impact on women with social risk factors, and those at higher risk of complications, and implementation and scaling up of midwife continuity of care models, with emphasis on low- and middle-income countries.
Assuntos
Tocologia , Morte Perinatal , Nascimento Prematuro , Lactente , Gravidez , Recém-Nascido , Feminino , Humanos , Cesárea , Peso ao Nascer , Nascimento Prematuro/epidemiologia , Continuidade da Assistência ao Paciente , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como AssuntoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: National guidance (Saving Babies Lives Care Bundle Version 2 (SBLCBv2) Element 5) was published in 2019, with the aim to standardise preterm care in England. We plan to identify how many preterm birth surveillance clinics there are in England, and to define current national management in caring for women who are both asymptomatic and high-risk of preterm birth, and who arrive symptomatically in threatened preterm labour, to assist preterm management both nationally and internationally. METHODS: An online survey comprising of 27 questions was sent to all maternity units in England between February 2021 to July 2021. RESULTS: Data was obtained from 96 units. Quantitative analysis and free text analysis was then undertaken. We identified 78 preterm birth surveillance clinics in England, an increase from 30 preterm clinics in 2017. This is a staggering 160% increase in 4 years. SBLCBv2 has had a considerable impact in increasing preterm birth surveillance clinic services, with the majority (61%) of sites reporting that the NHS England publication influenced their unit in setting up their clinic. Variations exist at every step of the preterm pathway, such as deciding which risk factors warrant referral, distinguishing within particular risk factors, and offering screening tests and treatment options. CONCLUSIONS: While variations in care still do persist, hospitals have done well to increase preterm surveillance clinics, under the difficult circumstances of the COVID pandemic and many without specific additional funding.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Nascimento Prematuro , Recém-Nascido , Gravidez , Feminino , Humanos , Nascimento Prematuro/epidemiologia , Nascimento Prematuro/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Inglaterra/epidemiologia , Inquéritos e Questionários , HospitaisRESUMO
Accurate assessment of blood pressure is fundamental to the provision of safe obstetrical care. It is simple, cost effective, and life-saving. Treatments for preeclampsia, including antihypertensive drugs, magnesium sulfate, and delivery, are available in many settings. However, the instigation of appropriate treatment relies on prompt and accurate recognition of hypertension. There are a number of different techniques for blood pressure assessment, including the auscultatory method, automated oscillometric devices, home blood pressure monitoring, ambulatory monitoring, and invasive monitoring. The auscultatory method with a mercury sphygmomanometer and the use of Korotkoff sounds was previously recommended as the gold standard technique. Mercury sphygmomanometers have been withdrawn owing to safety concerns and replaced with aneroid devices, but these are particularly prone to calibration errors and regular calibration is imperative to ensure accuracy. Automated oscillometric devices are straightforward to use, but the physiological changes in healthy pregnancy and pathologic changes in preeclampsia may affect the accuracy of a device and monitors must be validated. Validation protocols classify pregnant women as a "special population," and protocols must include 15 women in each category of normotensive pregnancy, hypertensive pregnancy, and preeclampsia. In addition to a scarcity of devices validated for pregnancy and preeclampsia, other pitfalls that cause inaccuracy include the lack of training and poor technique. Blood pressure assessment can be affected by maternal position, inappropriate cuff size, conversation, caffeine, smoking, and irregular heart rate. For home blood pressure monitoring, appropriate instruction should be given on how to use the device. The classification of hypertension and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy has recently been revised. These are classified as preeclampsia, transient gestational hypertension, gestational hypertension, white-coat hypertension, masked hypertension, chronic hypertension, and chronic hypertension with superimposed preeclampsia. Blood pressure varies across gestation and by ethnicity, but gestation-specific thresholds have not been adopted. Hypertension is defined as a sustained systolic blood pressure of ≥140 mm Hg or a sustained diastolic blood pressure of ≥90 mm Hg. In some guidelines, the threshold of diagnosis depends on the setting in which blood pressure measurement is taken, with a threshold of 140/90 mm Hg in a healthcare setting, 135/85 mm Hg at home, or a 24-hour average blood pressure on ambulatory monitoring of >126/76 mm Hg. Some differences exist among organizations with respect to the criteria for the diagnosis of preeclampsia and the correct threshold for intervention and target blood pressure once treatment has been instigated. Home blood pressure monitoring is currently a focus for research. Novel technologies, including early warning devices (such as the CRADLE Vital Signs Alert device) and telemedicine, may provide strategies that prompt earlier recognition of abnormal blood pressure and therefore improve management. The purpose of this review is to provide an update on methods to assess blood pressure in pregnancy and appropriate technique to optimize accuracy. The importance of accurate blood pressure assessment is emphasized with a discussion of preeclampsia prediction and treatment of severe hypertension. Classification of hypertensive disorders and thresholds for treatment will be discussed, including novel developments in the field.
Assuntos
Determinação da Pressão Arterial/métodos , Hipertensão Induzida pela Gravidez/diagnóstico , Determinação da Pressão Arterial/instrumentação , Feminino , Humanos , Hipertensão Induzida pela Gravidez/classificação , Cuidado Pós-Natal , Gravidez , Choque/diagnósticoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Pregnancy hypertension is a leading cause of maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity. Between 34+0 and 36+6 weeks gestation, it is uncertain whether planned delivery could reduce maternal complications without serious neonatal consequences. In this individual participant data meta-analysis, we aimed to compare planned delivery to expectant management, focusing specifically on women with preeclampsia. DATA SOURCES: We performed an electronic database search using a prespecified search strategy, including trials published between January 1, 2000 and December 18, 2021. We sought individual participant-level data from all eligible trials. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included women with singleton or multifetal pregnancies with preeclampsia from 34 weeks gestation onward. METHODS: The primary maternal outcome was a composite of maternal mortality or morbidity. The primary perinatal outcome was a composite of perinatal mortality or morbidity. We analyzed all the available data for each prespecified outcome on an intention-to-treat basis. For primary individual patient data analyses, we used a 1-stage fixed effects model. RESULTS: We included 1790 participants from 6 trials in our analysis. Planned delivery from 34 weeks gestation onward significantly reduced the risk of maternal morbidity (2.6% vs 4.4%; adjusted risk ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.98) compared with expectant management. The primary composite perinatal outcome was increased by planned delivery (20.9% vs 17.1%; adjusted risk ratio, 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.47), driven by short-term neonatal respiratory morbidity. However, infants in the expectant management group were more likely to be born small for gestational age (7.8% vs 10.6%; risk ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.99). CONCLUSION: Planned early delivery in women with late preterm preeclampsia provides clear maternal benefits and may reduce the risk of the infant being born small for gestational age, with a possible increase in short-term neonatal respiratory morbidity. The potential benefits and risks of prolonging a pregnancy complicated by preeclampsia should be discussed with women as part of a shared decision-making process.
Assuntos
Morte Perinatal , Pré-Eclâmpsia , Cesárea , Análise de Dados , Feminino , Retardo do Crescimento Fetal , Idade Gestacional , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Trabalho de Parto Induzido , Pré-Eclâmpsia/epidemiologia , Pré-Eclâmpsia/terapia , Gravidez , Conduta ExpectanteRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Spontaneous preterm birth remains the main driver of childhood morbidity and mortality. Because of an incomplete understanding of the molecular pathways that result in spontaneous preterm birth, accurate predictive markers and target therapeutics remain elusive. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to determine if a cell-free RNA profile could reveal a molecular signature in maternal blood months before the onset of spontaneous preterm birth. STUDY DESIGN: Maternal samples (n=242) were obtained from a prospective cohort of individuals with a singleton pregnancy across 4 clinical sites at 12-24 weeks (nested case-control; n=46 spontaneous preterm birth <35 weeks and n=194 term controls). Plasma was processed via a next-generation sequencing pipeline for cell-free RNA using the Mirvie RNA platform. Transcripts that were differentially expressed in next-generation sequencing cases and controls were identified. Enriched pathways were identified in the Reactome database using overrepresentation analysis. RESULTS: Twenty five transcripts associated with an increased risk of spontaneous preterm birth were identified. A logistic regression model was developed using these transcripts to predict spontaneous preterm birth with an area under the curve =0.80 (95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.87) (sensitivity=0.76, specificity=0.72). The gene discovery and model were validated through leave-one-out cross-validation. A unique set of 39 genes was identified from cases of very early spontaneous preterm birth (<25 weeks, n=14 cases with time to delivery of 2.5±1.8 weeks); a logistic regression classifier on the basis of these genes yielded an area under the curve=0.76 (95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.87) in leave-one-out cross validation. Pathway analysis for the transcripts associated with spontaneous preterm birth revealed enrichment of genes related to collagen or the extracellular matrix in those who ultimately had a spontaneous preterm birth at <35 weeks. Enrichment for genes in insulin-like growth factor transport and amino acid metabolism pathways were associated with spontaneous preterm birth at <25 weeks. CONCLUSION: Second trimester cell-free RNA profiles in maternal blood provide a noninvasive window to future occurrence of spontaneous preterm birth. The systemic finding of changes in collagen and extracellular matrix pathways may serve to identify individuals at risk for premature cervical remodeling, with growth factor and metabolic pathways implicated more often in very early spontaneous preterm birth. The use of cell-free RNA profiles has the potential to accurately identify those at risk for spontaneous preterm birth by revealing the underlying pathophysiology, creating an opportunity for more targeted therapeutics and effective interventions.
Assuntos
Ácidos Nucleicos Livres , Nascimento Prematuro , Ácidos Nucleicos Livres/genética , Colo do Útero , Feminino , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Gravidez , Nascimento Prematuro/genética , Estudos Prospectivos , RNARESUMO
BACKGROUND: Preterm delivery (before 37 weeks of gestation) is the single most important contributor to neonatal death and morbidity, with lifelong repercussions. However, the majority of women who present with preterm labour (PTL) symptoms do not deliver imminently. Accurate prediction of PTL is needed in order ensure correct management of those most at risk of preterm birth (PTB) and to prevent the maternal and fetal risks incurred by unnecessary interventions given to the majority. The QUantitative Innovation in Predicting Preterm birth (QUIPP) app aims to support clinical decision-making about women in threatened preterm labour (TPTL) by combining quantitative fetal fibronectin (qfFN) values, cervical length (CL), and significant PTB risk factors to create an individualised percentage risk of delivery. METHODS AND FINDINGS: EQUIPTT was a multi-centre cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) involving 13 maternity units in South and Eastern England (United Kingdom) between March 2018 and February 2019. Pregnant women (n = 1,872) between 23+0 and 34+6 weeks' gestation with symptoms of PTL in the analysis period were assigned to either the intervention (762) or control (1,111). The mean age of the study population was 30.2 (+/- SD 5.93). A total of 56.0% were white, 19.6% were black, 14.2% were Asian, and 10.2% were of other ethnicities. The intervention was the use of the QUiPP app with admission, antenatal corticosteroids (ACSs), and transfer advised for women with a QUiPP risk of delivery >5% within 7 days. Control sites continued with their conventional management of TPTL. Unnecessary management for TPTL was a composite primary outcome defined by the sum of unnecessary admission decisions (admitted and delivery interval >7 days or not admitted and delivery interval ≤7 days) and the number of unnecessary in utero transfer (IUT) decisions/actions (IUT that occurred or were attempted >7 days prior to delivery) and ex utero transfers (EUTs) that should have been in utero (attempted and not attempted). Unnecessary management of TPTL was 11.3% (84/741) at the intervention sites versus 11.5% (126/1094) at control sites (odds ratio [OR] 0.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-1.42, p = 0.883). Control sites frequently used qfFN and did not follow UK national guidance, which recommends routine treatment below 30 weeks without testing. Unnecessary management largely consisted of unnecessary admissions which were similar at intervention and control sites (10.7% versus 10.8% of all visits). In terms of adverse outcomes for women in TPTL <36 weeks, 4 women from the intervention sites and 12 from the control sites did not receive recommended management. If the QUiPP percentage risk was used as per protocol, unnecessary management would have been 7.4% (43/578) versus 9.9% (134/1,351) (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.45-1.16). Our external validation of the QUiPP app confirmed that it was highly predictive of delivery in 7 days; receiver operating curve area was 0.90 (95% CI 0.85-0.95) for symptomatic women. Study limitations included a lack of compliance with national guidance at the control sites and difficulties in implementation of the QUiPP app. CONCLUSIONS: This cluster randomised trial did not demonstrate that the use of the QUiPP app reduced unnecessary management of TPTL compared to current management but would safely improve the management recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Interpretation of qfFN, with or without the QUiPP app, is a safe and accurate method for identifying women most likely to benefit from PTL interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN17846337.
Assuntos
Aplicativos Móveis , Trabalho de Parto Prematuro/diagnóstico , Trabalho de Parto Prematuro/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , GravidezRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Pre-eclampsia is a leading cause of preventable maternal and perinatal deaths globally. While health inequities remain stark, removing financial or structural barriers to care does not necessarily improve uptake of life-saving treatment. Building on existing literature elaborating the sociocultural contexts that shape behaviours around pregnancy and childbirth can identify nuanced influences relating to pre-eclampsia care. METHODS: We conducted a cross-cultural comparative study exploring lived experiences and understanding of pre-eclampsia in Ethiopia, Haiti and Zimbabwe. Our primary objective was to examine what local understandings of pre-eclampsia might be shared between these three under-resourced settings despite their considerable sociocultural differences. Between August 2018 and January 2020, we conducted 89 in-depth interviews with individuals and 17 focus group discussions (n = 106). We purposively sampled perinatal women, survivors of pre-eclampsia, families of deceased women, partners, older male and female decision-makers, traditional birth attendants, religious and traditional healers, community health workers and facility-based health professionals. Template analysis was conducted to facilitate cross-country comparison drawing on Social Learning Theory and the Health Belief Model. RESULTS: Survivors of pre-eclampsia spoke of their uncertainty regarding symptoms and diagnosis. A lack of shared language challenged coherence in interpretations of illness related to pre-eclampsia. Across settings, raised blood pressure in pregnancy was often attributed to psychosocial distress and dietary factors, and eclampsia linked to spiritual manifestations. Pluralistic care was driven by attribution of causes, social norms and expectations relating to alternative care and trust in biomedicine across all three settings. Divergence across the contexts centred around nuances in religious or traditional practices relating to maternal health and pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Engaging faith and traditional caregivers and the wider community offers opportunities to move towards coherent conceptualisations of pre-eclampsia, and hence greater access to potentially life-saving care.
Assuntos
Comparação Transcultural , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde/etnologia , Pré-Eclâmpsia/etnologia , Condicionamento Psicológico , Etiópia/etnologia , Feminino , Haiti/etnologia , Modelo de Crenças de Saúde , Humanos , Gravidez , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Características de Residência , Zimbábue/etnologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Obstetric haemorrhage is the leading cause of maternal death worldwide, 99% of which occur in low and middle income countries. The majority of deaths and adverse events are associated with delays in identifying compromise and escalating care. Management of severely compromised pregnant women may require transfer to tertiary centres for specialised treatment, therefore early recognition is vital for efficient management. The CRADLE vital signs alert device accurately measures blood pressure and heart rate, calculates the shock index (heart rate divided by systolic blood pressure) and alerts the user to compromise through a traffic light system reflecting previously validated shock index thresholds. METHODS: This is a planned secondary analysis of data from the CRADLE-3 trial from ten clusters across Africa, India and Haiti where the device and training package were randomly introduced. Referral data were prospectively collected for a 4-week period before, and a 4-week period 3 months after implementation. Referrals from primary or secondary care facilities to higher level care for any cause were recorded. The denominator was the number of women seen for maternity care in these facilities. RESULTS: Between April 1 2016 and Nov 30th, 2017 536,223 women attended maternity care facilities. Overall, 3.7% (n = 2784/74,828) of women seen in peripheral maternity facilities were referred to higher level care in the control period compared to 4.4% (n = 3212/73,371) in the intervention period (OR 0.89; 0.39-2.05) (data for nine sites that were able to collect denominator). Of these 0.29% (n = 212) pre-intervention and 0.16% (n = 120) post-intervention were referred to higher-level facilities for maternal haemorrhage. Although overall referrals did not significantly reduce there was a significant reduction in referrals for obstetric haemorrhage (OR 0.56 (0.39-0.65) following introduction of the device with homogeneity (i-squared 26.1) between sites. There was no increase in any bleeding-related morbidity (maternal death or emergency hysterectomy). CONCLUSIONS: Referrals for obstetric haemorrhage reduced following implementation of the CRADLE Vital Signs Alert Device, occurring without an increase in maternal death or emergency hysterectomy. This demonstrates the potential benefit of shock index in management pathways for obstetric haemorrhage and targeting limited resources in low- middle- income settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN41244132 (02/02/2016).
Assuntos
Procedimentos Clínicos/organização & administração , Serviços de Saúde Materna , Sistemas de Registro de Ordens Médicas/estatística & dados numéricos , Hemorragia Pós-Parto , Encaminhamento e Consulta/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Países em Desenvolvimento , Diagnóstico Precoce , Feminino , Humanos , Serviços de Saúde Materna/normas , Serviços de Saúde Materna/estatística & dados numéricos , Mortalidade Materna , Avaliação de Processos e Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Hemorragia Pós-Parto/diagnóstico , Hemorragia Pós-Parto/mortalidade , Hemorragia Pós-Parto/prevenção & controle , Gravidez , Tempo para o Tratamento/normas , Tempo para o Tratamento/estatística & dados numéricos , Sinais VitaisRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (PPROM) complicates 3% of pregnancies in the UK. Where delivery does not occur spontaneously, expectant management until 37 weeks of gestation is advocated, unless signs of maternal infection develop. However, clinical presentation of maternal infection can be a late sign and injurious fetal inflammatory responses may already have been activated. There is therefore a need for more sensitive markers to aid optimal timing of interventions. At present there is no non-invasive test in clinical practice to assess for infection in the fetal compartment and definitive diagnosis of chorioamnionitis is by histological assessment of the placenta after delivery. This study presents comprehensive functional placental magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) quantification, already used in other organ systems, to assess for infection/inflammation, in women with and without PPROM aiming to explore its use as a biomarker for inflammation within the feto-placental compartment in vivo. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Placental MRI scans were performed in a cohort of 12 women (with one having two scans) with PPROM before 34 weeks of gestation (selected because of their high risk of infection), and in a control group of 87 women. Functional placental assessment was performed with magnetic resonance techniques sensitive to changes in the microstructure (diffusion) and tissue composition (relaxometry), with quantification performed both over the entire organ and in regions of interest between the basal and chorionic plate. Placental histology was analyzed after delivery where available. RESULTS: Normative evolution of functional magnetic resonance biomarkers over gestation was studied. Cases of inflammation, as assessed by histological presence of chorioamnionitis, and umbilical cord vasculitis with or without funisitis, were associated with lower T2* (mean T2* at 30 weeks 50 ms compared with 58 ms in controls) and higher fractional anisotropy (mean at 30 weeks 0.55 compared with 0.45 in controls). These differences did not reach significance and there was substantial heterogeneity both in T2* and Apparent Diffusivitiy across the cohort. CONCLUSIONS: This first exploration of functional placental assessment in a cohort of women with PPROM demonstrates that functional placental MRI can reveal a range of placental changes associated with inflammatory processes. It is a promising tool to gain information and in the future to identify inflammation in vivo, and could therefore assist in improving optimal timing for interventions designed to prevent fetal injury.
Assuntos
Ruptura Prematura de Membranas Fetais/diagnóstico por imagem , Diagnóstico Pré-Natal , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Londres , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Projetos Piloto , Gravidez , Estudos Prospectivos , Centros de Atenção TerciáriaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Infection and inflammation have been implicated in the etiology and subsequent morbidity associated with preterm birth. At present, there are no tests to assess for fetal compartment infection. The thymus, a gland integral in the fetal immune system, has been shown to involute in animal models of antenatal infection, but its response in human fetuses has not been studied. This study aims: (a) to generate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) -derived fetal thymus volumes standardized for fetal weight; (b) to compare standardized thymus volumes from fetuses that delivered before 32 weeks of gestation with fetuses that subsequently deliver at term; (c) to assess thymus size as a predictor of preterm birth; and (d) to correlate the presence of chorioamnionitis and funisitis at delivery with thymic volumes in utero in fetuses that subsequently deliver preterm. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Women at high-risk of preterm birth at 20-32 weeks of gestation were recruited. A control group was obtained from existing data sets acquired as part of three research studies. A fetal MRI was performed on a 1.5T or 3T MRI scanner: T2 weighted images were obtained of the entire uterine content and specifically the fetal thorax. A slice-to-volume registration method was used for reconstruction of three-dimensional images of the thorax. Thymus segmentations were performed manually. Body volumes were calculated by manual segmentation and thymus:body volume ratios were generated. Comparison of groups was performed using multiple regression analysis. Normal ranges were created for thymus volume and thymus:body volume ratios using the control data. Receiver operating curves (ROC) curves were generated for thymus:body volume ratio and gestation-adjusted thymus volume centiles as predictors of preterm birth. Placental histology was analyzed where available from pregnancies that delivered very preterm and the presence of chorioamnionitis/funisitis was noted. RESULTS: Normative ranges were created for thymus volume, and thymus volume was standardized for fetal size from fetuses that subsequently delivered at term, but were imaged at 20-32 weeks of gestation. Image data sets from 16 women that delivered <32 weeks of gestation (ten with ruptured membranes and six with intact membranes) and 80 control women that delivered >37 weeks were included. Mean gestation at MRI of the study group was 28+4 weeks (SD 3.2) and for the control group was 25+5 weeks (SD 2.4). Both absolute fetal thymus volumes and thymus:body volume ratios were smaller in fetuses that delivered preterm (P < .001). Of the 16 fetuses that delivered preterm, 13 had placental histology, 11 had chorioamnionitis, and 9 had funisitis. The strongest predictors of prematurity were the thymus volume Z-score and thymus:body volume ratio Z-score (ROC areas 0.915 and 0.870, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We have produced MRI-derived normal ranges for fetal thymus and thymus:body volume ratios between 20 and 32 weeks of gestation. Fetuses that deliver very preterm had reduced thymus volumes when standardized for fetal size. A reduced thymus volume was also a predictor of spontaneous preterm delivery. Thymus volume may be a suitable marker of the fetal inflammatory response, although further work is needed to assess this, increasing the sample size to correlate the extent of chorioamnionitis with thymus size.
Assuntos
Nascimento Prematuro/diagnóstico por imagem , Timo/diagnóstico por imagem , Timo/fisiologia , Ultrassonografia Pré-Natal/métodos , Adulto , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Feminino , Ruptura Prematura de Membranas Fetais/diagnóstico por imagem , Idade Gestacional , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Tamanho do Órgão/fisiologia , Projetos Piloto , Gravidez , Gravidez de Alto Risco , Timo/embriologia , Timo/patologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Midwifery continuity of care models are the only health system intervention associated with both a reduction in preterm birth (PTB) and an improvement in perinatal survival; however, questions remain about the mechanisms by which such positive outcomes are achieved. We aimed to uncover theories of change by which we can postulate how and why continuity of midwifery care models might affect PTB. METHODS: We followed Pawson's guidance for conducting a realist review and performed a comprehensive search to identify existing literature exploring the impact of continuity models on PTB in all pregnant women. A realist methodology was used to uncover the context (C), mechanisms (M), and outcomes (O) and to develop a group of CMO configurations to illuminate middle-range theories. RESULTS: Eleven papers were included from a wide variety of settings in the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States. The majority of study participants had low socioeconomic status or social risk factors and received diverse models of midwifery continuity of care. Three themes-woman-midwife partnership, maternity pathways and processes, and system resources-encompassed ten CMO configurations. Building relationships, trust, confidence, and advocacy resulted in women feeling safer, less stressed, and more secure and respected, and encouraged them to access and engage in antenatal care with more opportunities for early prevention and diagnosis of complications, which facilitated effective management when compliance to guidelines was ensured. Organizational infrastructure, innovative partnerships, and robust community systems are crucial to overcome barriers, address women's complex needs, ensure quality of care, and reduce PTB risk. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women living in different contexts in the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States at low and mixed risk of complications and with low socioeconomic status or social risk factors experienced continuity models in similar ways, and similar underlying mechanisms may have influenced PTB outcomes. Further research is required to understand how continuity models may influence behavioral change, physiological stress levels, ethnic disparities in PTB and care coordination, and navigation of health services.
Assuntos
Tocologia , Nascimento Prematuro , Continuidade da Assistência ao Paciente , Feminino , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Gravidez , Gestantes , Cuidado Pré-NatalRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Pre-eclampsia is a leading cause of maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity globally. Planned delivery between 34+0 and 36+6 weeks may reduce adverse pregnancy outcomes but is yet to be evaluated in a low and middle-income setting. Prior to designing a randomised controlled trial to evaluate this in India and Zambia, we carried out a 6-month feasibility study in order to better understand the proposed trial environment and guide development of our intervention. METHODS: We used mixed methods to understand the disease burden and current management of pre-eclampsia at our proposed trial sites and explore the acceptability of the intervention. We undertook a case notes review of women with pre-eclampsia who delivered at the proposed trial sites over a 3-month period, alongside facilitating focus group discussions with women and partners and conducting semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse audit data. A thematic framework analysis was used for qualitative data. RESULTS: Case notes data (n = 326) showed that in our settings, 19.5% (n = 44) of women with pre-eclampsia delivering beyond 34 weeks experienced an adverse outcome. In women delivering between 34+0 and 36+6 weeks, there were similar numbers of antenatal stillbirths [n = 3 (3.3%)] and neonatal deaths [n = 3 (3.4%)]; median infant birthweight was 2.2 kg and 1.9 kg in Zambia and India respectively. Lived experience of women and healthcare providers was an important facilitator to the proposed intervention, highlighting the serious consequences of pre-eclampsia. A preference for spontaneous labour and limited neonatal resources were identified as potential barriers. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated a clear need to evaluate the intervention and highlighted several challenges relating to trial context that enabled us to adapt our protocol and design an acceptable intervention. Our study demonstrates the importance of assessing feasibility when developing complex interventions, particularly in a low-resource setting. Additionally, it provides a unique insight into the management of pre-eclampsia at our trial settings and an understanding of the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs underpinning the acceptability of planned early delivery.
Pre-eclampsia is a complication of pregnancy and is one of the major causes of pregnancy-related death and serious illness for women and babies around the world. Most of these deaths occur in lower income countries in Africa and Asia. Signs of pre-eclampsia include high blood pressure and protein in the urine. It is unpredictable and may affect different organs within the woman, leading to seizures, stroke and even death if not well managed. It can also affect the baby's growth and in severe cases lead to stillbirth. We know that birth of the baby (and placenta) is the only cure for pre-eclampsia. Currently, it is recommended by the World Health Organisation that all women with pre-eclampsia are offered planned early birth once they reach 37 weeks of pregnancy, unless they develop severe complications needing intervention sooner than this. However, research from higher income countries has shown that planned early birth from 34 weeks of pregnancy may reduce serious complications in the woman, without causing harm to the baby. We are designing a clinical trial to find out whether, in women with pre-eclampsia between 34 and 37 weeks of pregnancy, it is better to offer planned early birth or to offer close monitoring until either they reach 37 weeks, or a complication develops requiring emergency intervention. Before designing this trial, we carried out a study in order to establish whether the main trial would be possible, and acceptable to the local community, at our potential trial sites in India and Zambia.
Assuntos
Parto Obstétrico , Pré-Eclâmpsia/epidemiologia , Nascimento Prematuro , Estudos de Viabilidade , Feminino , Grupos Focais , Humanos , Índia/epidemiologia , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Gravidez , Zâmbia/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Midwifery continuity of care is the only health system intervention shown to reduce preterm birth (PTB) and improve perinatal survival, but no trial evidence exists for women with identified risk factors for PTB. We aimed to assess feasibility, fidelity, and clinical outcomes of a model of midwifery continuity of care linked with a specialist obstetric clinic for women considered at increased risk for PTB. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a hybrid implementation-effectiveness, randomised, controlled, unblinded, parallel-group pilot trial at an inner-city maternity service in London (UK), in which pregnant women identified at increased risk of PTB were randomly assigned (1:1) to either midwifery continuity of antenatal, intrapartum, and postnatal care (Pilot study Of midwifery Practice in Preterm birth Including women's Experiences [POPPIE] group) or standard care group (maternity care by different midwives working in designated clinical areas). Pregnant women attending for antenatal care at less than 24 weeks' gestation were eligible if they fulfilled one or more of the following criteria: previous cervical surgery, cerclage, premature rupture of membranes, PTB, or late miscarriage; previous short cervix or short cervix this pregnancy; or uterine abnormality and/or current smoker of tobacco. Feasibility outcomes included eligibility, recruitment and attrition rates, and fidelity of the model. The primary outcome was a composite of appropriate and timely interventions for the prevention and/or management of preterm labour and birth. We analysed by intention to treat. Between 9 May 2017 and 30 September 2018, 334 women were recruited; 169 women were allocated to the POPPIE group and 165 to the standard group. Mean maternal age was 31 years; 32% of the women were from Black, Asian, and ethnic minority groups; 70% were in employment; and 46% had a university degree. Nearly 70% of women lived in areas of social deprivation. More than a quarter of women had at least one pre-existing medical condition and multiple risk factors for PTB. More than 75% of antenatal and postnatal visits were provided by a named/partner midwife, and a midwife from the POPPIE team was present at 80% of births. The incidence of the primary composite outcome showed no statistically significant difference between groups (POPPIE group 83.3% versus standard group 84.7%; risk ratio 0.98 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.08]; p = 0.742). Infants in the POPPIE group were significantly more likely to have skin-to-skin contact after birth, to have it for a longer time, and to breastfeed immediately after birth and at hospital discharge. There were no differences in other secondary outcomes. The number of serious adverse events was similar in both groups and unrelated to the intervention (POPPIE group 6 versus standard group 5). Limitations of this study included the limited power and the nonmasking of group allocation; however, study assignment was masked to the statistician and researchers who analysed the data. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that it is feasible to set up and achieve fidelity of a model of midwifery continuity of care linked with specialist obstetric care for women at increased risk of PTB in an inner-city maternity service in London (UK), but there is no impact on most outcomes for this population group. Larger appropriately powered trials are needed, including in other settings, to evaluate the impact of relational continuity and hypothesised mechanisms of effect based on increased trust and engagement, improved care coordination, and earlier referral on disadvantaged communities, including women with complex social factors and social vulnerability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: We prospectively registered the pilot trial on the UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio Database (ID number: 31951, 24 April 2017). We registered the trial on the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) (Number: 37733900, 21 August 2017) and before trial recruitment was completed (30 September 2018) when informed that prospective registration for a pilot trial was also required in a primary clinical trial registry recognised by WHO and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The protocol as registered and published has remained unchanged, and the analysis conforms to the original plan.
Assuntos
Continuidade da Assistência ao Paciente/organização & administração , Cuidado Pós-Natal/métodos , Cuidado Pré-Natal/métodos , Adulto , Cesárea , Etnicidade , Feminino , Idade Gestacional , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Idade Materna , Serviços de Saúde Materna/tendências , Tocologia/tendências , Grupos Minoritários , Trabalho de Parto Prematuro , Obstetrícia , Parto , Projetos Piloto , Gravidez , Nascimento Prematuro/prevenção & controle , Estudos Prospectivos , Distribuição Aleatória , Reino Unido/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Previous prospective cohort studies have shown that angiogenic factors have a high diagnostic accuracy in women with suspected pre-eclampsia, but we remain uncertain of the effectiveness of these tests in a real-world setting. We therefore aimed to determine whether knowledge of the circulating concentration of placental growth factor (PlGF), an angiogenic factor, integrated with a clinical management algorithm, decreased the time for clinicians to make a diagnosis in women with suspected pre-eclampsia, and whether this approach reduced subsequent maternal or perinatal adverse outcomes. METHODS: We did a multicentre, pragmatic, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial in 11 maternity units in the UK, which were each responsible for 3000-9000 deliveries per year. Women aged 18 years and older who presented with suspected pre-eclampsia between 20 weeks and 0 days of gestation and 36 weeks and 6 days of gestation, with a live, singleton fetus were invited to participate by the clinical research team. Suspected pre-eclampsia was defined as new-onset or worsening of existing hypertension, dipstick proteinuria, epigastric or right upper-quadrant pain, headache with visual disturbances, fetal growth restriction, or abnormal maternal blood tests that were suggestive of disease (such as thrombocytopenia or hepatic or renal dysfunction). Women were approached individually, they consented for study inclusion, and they were asked to give blood samples. We randomly allocated the maternity units, representing the clusters, to blocks. Blocks represented an intervention initiation time, which occurred at equally spaced 6-week intervals throughout the trial. At the start of the trial, all units had usual care (in which PlGF measurements were also taken but were concealed from clinicians and women). At the initiation time of each successive block, a site began to use the intervention (in which the circulating PlGF measurement was revealed and a clinical management algorithm was used). Enrolment of women continued for the duration of the blocks either to concealed PlGF testing, or after implementation, to revealed PlGF testing. The primary outcome was the time from presentation with suspected pre-eclampsia to documented pre-eclampsia in women enrolled in the trial who received a diagnosis of pre-eclampsia by their treating clinicians. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 16842031. FINDINGS: Between June 13, 2016, and Oct 27, 2017, we enrolled and assessed 1035 women with suspected pre-eclampsia. 12 (1%) women were found to be ineligible. Of the 1023 eligible women, 576 (56%) women were assigned to the intervention (revealed testing) group, and 447 (44%) women were assigned to receive usual care with additional concealed testing (concealed testing group). Three (1%) women in the revealed testing group were lost to follow-up, so 573 (99%) women in this group were included in the analyses. One (<1%) woman in the concealed testing group withdrew consent to follow-up data collection, so 446 (>99%) women in this group were included in the analyses. The median time to pre-eclampsia diagnosis was 4·1 days with concealed testing versus 1·9 days with revealed testing (time ratio 0·36, 95% CI 0·15-0·87; p=0·027). Maternal severe adverse outcomes were reported in 24 (5%) of 447 women in the concealed testing group versus 22 (4%) of 573 women in the revealed testing group (adjusted odds ratio 0·32, 95% CI 0·11-0·96; p=0·043), but there was no evidence of a difference in perinatal adverse outcomes (15% vs 14%, 1·45, 0·73-2·90) or gestation at delivery (36·6 weeks vs 36·8 weeks; mean difference -0·52, 95% CI -0·63 to 0·73). INTERPRETATION: We found that the availability of PlGF test results substantially reduced the time to clinical confirmation of pre-eclampsia. Where PlGF was implemented, we found a lower incidence of maternal adverse outcomes, consistent with adoption of targeted, enhanced surveillance, as recommended in the clinical management algorithm for clinicians. Adoption of PlGF testing in women with suspected pre-eclampsia is supported by the results of this study. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research.
Assuntos
Hipertensão/diagnóstico , Fator de Crescimento Placentário/sangue , Pré-Eclâmpsia/metabolismo , Proteinúria/diagnóstico , Adulto , Algoritmos , Feminino , Retardo do Crescimento Fetal/diagnóstico , Idade Gestacional , Humanos , Hipertensão/complicações , Hipertensão/epidemiologia , Recém-Nascido , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Morte Perinatal , Pré-Eclâmpsia/diagnóstico , Pré-Eclâmpsia/epidemiologia , Pré-Eclâmpsia/fisiopatologia , Gravidez , Complicações na Gravidez/epidemiologia , Resultado da Gravidez/epidemiologia , Proteinúria/complicações , Proteinúria/epidemiologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence and prognosis of proteinuria at enrolment in the 27 intervention clusters of the Community-Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia cluster randomized trials. METHODS: We identified pregnant women eligible for inclusion in the trials in their communities in four countries (2013-2017). We included women who delivered by trial end and received an intervention antenatal care visit. The intervention was a community health worker providing supplementary hypertension-oriented care, including proteinuria assessment by visual assessment of urinary dipstick at the first visit and all subsequent visits when hypertension was detected. In a multilevel regression model, we compared baseline prevalence of proteinuria (≥ 1+ or ≥ 2+) across countries. We compared the incidence of subsequent complications by baseline proteinuria. FINDINGS: Baseline proteinuria was detected in less than 5% of eligible pregnancies in each country (India: 234/6120; Mozambique: 94/4234; Nigeria: 286/7004; Pakistan: 315/10 885), almost always with normotension (India: 225/234; Mozambique: 93/94; Nigeria: 241/286; Pakistan: 264/315). There was no consistent relationship between baseline proteinuria (either ≥ 1+ or ≥ 2+) and progression to hypertension, maternal mortality or morbidity, birth at < 37 weeks, caesarean section delivery or perinatal mortality or morbidity. If proteinuria testing were restricted to women with hypertension, we projected annual cost savings of 153 223 981 United States dollars (US$) in India, US$ 9 055 286 in Mozambique, US$ 53 181 933 in Nigeria and US$ 38 828 746 in Pakistan. CONCLUSION: Our findings question the recommendations to routinely evaluate proteinuria at first assessment in pregnancy. Restricting proteinuria testing to pregnant women with hypertension has the potential to save resources.
Assuntos
Cesárea , Diagnóstico Pré-Natal , Feminino , Humanos , Índia , Moçambique/epidemiologia , Nigéria , Paquistão , Gravidez , Proteinúria/diagnóstico , Proteinúria/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Infants born preterm are at increased risk of pulmonary morbidity. The contribution of antenatal factors to impairments in lung structure/function has not been fully elucidated. This study aimed to compare standardized lung volumes from foetuses that were delivered <32 weeks' gestation with foetuses that were delivered >37 weeks. METHODS: Fourteen women who delivered <32 weeks gestation and 56 women who delivered >37 underwent a foetal MRI. Slice-volume reconstruction was then used and the foetal lungs were then segmented using multi-atlas approaches. Body volumes were calculated by manual segmentation and lung:body volume ratios generated. RESULTS: Mean gestation at MRI of the preterm group was 27+2 weeks (SD 2.9, range 20+6-31+3) and control group 25+3 weeks (SD 4.7 range 20+5-31+6). Mean gestation at delivery of the preterm group was 29+2 weeks (SD 2.6, range 22+0-32+0). Lung:body volume ratios and foetal lung volumes were smaller in foetuses that were delivered preterm both with and without preterm premature rupture of membranes compared to those born at term (p < 0.001 in all cases). CONCLUSIONS: Foetuses that were delivered very preterm had reduced lung volumes when standardized for foetal size, irrespective of ruptured membranes. These are novel findings and suggest an antenatal aetiology of insult and possible focus for future preventative therapies.