Indication Creep of Antenatal Late Preterm Steroids

Nonsevere hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and oral antihypertensive medications: an argument against use

Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, including gestational hypertension and preeclampsia, affect approximately 13% of all pregnancies and are a major cause of maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality worldwide. Although the treatment of preeclampsia with severe features has been well established on the basis of randomized controlled data, international society guidelines vary on the treatment of gestational hypertension and preeclampsia without severe features. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends against the use of antihypertensive agents for nonsevere hypertension (blood pressure of <160/110 mm Hg) in both gestational hypertension and preeclampsia without severe features given a lack of level 1 evidence in support of treatment and the theoretical risk of masking of disease progression or causing adverse fetal effects, such as growth restriction. However, with the publication of the Chronic Hypertension in Pregnancy trial, (CHAP) which demonstrated the benefit of treatment of nonsevere chronic hypertension, "indication creep" or the application of a treatment outside the population of proven benefit is being observed with the use of antihypertensive medication for the treatment of nonsevere hypertension in gestational hypertension and preeclampsia without severe features. The use of antihypertensive treatment in this population without a definitive trial and no clearly defined safety protocols is potentially dangerous and could, at worst, lead to maternal and fetal harm or, at best, provide benefit in ways that are hard to assess and, thus, interfere with efforts to generate definitive evidence to change practice guidelines, denying many pregnant patients optimal care. It is imperative that a definitive trial be performed performed prior to the widespread use of antihypertensive treatment for gestational hypertension or preeclampsia without severe features.

Late preterm antenatal steroid use and infant outcomes in a single center

OBJECTIVE

To characterize late preterm antenatal steroids (AS) use and associated neonatal outcomes in a single academic center.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study of 503 singleton, mother-infant dyads delivered between 34 0/7 and 36 6/7 weeks gestation between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020.

RESULTS

Forty-three percent did not receive AS (No AS) prior to delivery. Among AS treated, 50% were sub-optimal dosing. No AS had higher preterm premature rupture of membranes and maternal diabetes. AS group had lower mean gestational age, birthweight, longer time from admission to delivery and longer NICU stay. There was no difference in neonatal hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Sub-optimal AS dosing in late preterms remains high in our center. AS did not improve neonatal outcomes. Studies are needed to evaluate the impact of AS in diabetics delivering late preterm, to optimize the timing of AS dosing, and evaluate the longer term impact on late preterm infants.

Randomized controlled trials: not always the "gold standard" for evidence in obstetrics and gynecology

Randomized controlled trials are considered the "gold standard" for therapeutic interventions, and it is not uncommon for sweeping changes in medical practice to follow positive results from such trials. However, randomized controlled trials are not without their limitations. Physicians frequently view randomized controlled trials as infallible, whereas they tend to dismiss evidence derived from sources other than randomized controlled trials as less credible or reliable. In several situations in obstetrics and gynecology, there are no randomized controlled trials to help guide the clinician. In these circumstances, it is important to evaluate the entire body of evidence including observational studies, rather than dismiss interventions altogether simply because no randomized controlled trials exist. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies should be viewed as complementary rather than at odds with each other. Some reversals in widely adopted clinical practice have recently been implemented following subsequent studies that contradicted the outcomes of major randomized controlled trials. The most notable of these was the withdrawal from the market of 17-hydroxyprogesterone caproate for preterm birth prevention. Such reversals could potentially have been averted if the inherent limitations of randomized controlled trials were carefully considered before implementing these universal practice changes. This Clinical Opinion underscores the limitations of an exclusive reliance on randomized controlled trials while disregarding other evidence in determining how best to care for patients. Solutions are proposed that advocate that clinicians adopt a more balanced perspective that considers the entirety of the available medical evidence and the individual patient characteristics, needs, and wishes.

Late Preterm Antenatal Steroid Use and Infant Outcomes in a Single Center

Objective

To characterize late preterm antenatal steroids (AS) use and associated neonatal outcomes in a single academic center.

Study Design

Retrospective study of 503 singleton, mother-infant dyads delivered between 34 0/7 to 36 6/7 weeks gestation between January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020.

Results

43% did not receive AS (No AS) prior to delivery. Among AS treated, 50% were sub-optimal dosing. No AS had higher preterm premature rupture of membranes and maternal diabetes. AS group had lower mean gestational age and birthweight and longer time from admission to delivery and longer NICU study. There was no difference in neonatal hypoglycemia.

Conclusions

Sub-optimal AS dosing in late preterms remains high in our center. AS did not improve neonatal outcomes. Studies are needed to evaluate the impact of AS in diabetics delivering late preterm, to optimize the timing of AS dosing, and evaluate the longer term impact on late preterm infants.

Use, misuse, and overuse of antenatal corticosteroids. A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the timing of antenatal corticosteroids (ACS) administration in relation to the delivery timing based on indications and risk factors for preterm delivery.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study to understand what factors predict the optimal timing of ACS administration (ACS administration within seven days). We reviewed consecutive charts of adult pregnant women receiving ACS from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2019. We excluded pregnancies under 23 weeks, incomplete and duplicate records, and patients delivered outside our health system. The timing of ACS administration was categorized as optimal or suboptimal. These groups were analyzed regarding demographics, indications for ACS administration, risk factors for preterm delivery, and signs and symptoms of preterm labor.

RESULTS

We identified 25,776 deliveries. ACS were administered to 531 pregnancies, of which 478 met the inclusion criteria. Of the 478 pregnancies included in the study, 266 (55.6 %) were delivered in the optimal timeframe. There was a higher proportion of patients receiving ACS for the indication of threatened preterm labor in the suboptimal group as compared to the optimal group (85.4 % vs. 63.5 %, p<0.001). In addition, patients who delivered in the suboptimal timeframe had a higher proportion of short cervix (33 % vs. 6.4 %, p<0.001) and positive fetal fibronectin (19.8 % vs. 1.1 %, p<0.001) compared to those who delivered in the optimal timeframe.

CONCLUSIONS

More emphasis should be placed on the judicious use of ACS. Emphasis should be placed on clinical assessment rather than relying solely on imaging and laboratory tests. Re-appraisal of institutional practices and thoughtful ACS administration based on the risk-benefit ratio is warranted.

Late preterm antenatal corticosteroids in singleton and twin gestations: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

In 2016, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommended antenatal corticosteroids in the late preterm period for women at risk for preterm delivery. Limited real-world evidence exists on neonatal outcomes, particularly for twin gestations, following the guideline change. The study objective is to determine the association of antenatal corticosteroids in late preterm singleton and twin pregnancies with respiratory complications and hypoglycemia in a real-world clinical setting.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study comprising late preterm deliveries (4,341 mother-child pairs) within the Mount Sinai Health System, 2012-2018. The exposure of interest is antenatal corticosteroid administration of betamethasone during pregnancy between 34 0/7 and 36 6/7 weeks. Our primary outcomes are neonatal respiratory complications and hypoglycemia. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the association between antenatal corticosteroid exposure and these two outcomes. We stratified the study population by singleton gestations and twins to minimize the potential confounding from different obstetric management between the two groups.

RESULTS

Among a total of 4,341 mother-child pairs (3,309 singleton and 1,032 twin mother-child pairs), 745 mothers received betamethasone, of which 40.94% (305/745) received the full course. Relative to no treatment, a full course of betamethasone was associated with reduced odds of respiratory complications (OR = 0.53, 95% CI:[0.31-0.85], p < 0.01) and increased odds of hypoglycemia (OR = 1.86, 95%CI:[1.34-2.56], p < 0.01) in singletons; however, the association with respiratory complications was not significant in twins (OR = 0.42, 95% CI:[0.11-1.23], p = 0.16), but was associated with increased odds of hypoglycemia (OR = 2.18, 95% CI:[1.12-4.10], p = 0.02). A partial course of betamethasone (relative to no treatment) was not significantly associated with any of the outcomes, other than respiratory complications in twins (OR = 0.34, 95% CI:[0.12-0.82], p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Exposure to antenatal corticosteroids in singletons and twins is associated with increased odds of hypoglycemia. Among singletons, exposure to the full dosage (i.e. two doses) was associated with decreased odds of respiratory complications but this was only the case for partial dose among twins. Twin gestations were not studied by the Antenatal Late Preterm Steroids trial. Therefore, our study findings will contribute to the paucity of evidence on the benefit of antenatal corticosteroids in this group. Health systems should systematically monitor guideline implementations to improve patient outcomes.