Management of subsequent pregnancy after antepartum stillbirth. A review

Stillbirth and subsequent pregnancy outcome - a cohort from a large tertiary referral hospital

Objectives This study aimed to assess pregnancy and delivery outcomes in women with a history of stillbirth in a large tertiary referral hospital. Methods This was a retrospective study from Helsinki University Hospital, Finland. The cohort comprised 214 antepartum singleton stillbirths in the period 2003-2015 (case group). Of these, 154 delivered by the end of 2017. Adverse pregnancy outcomes were compared to those in singleton pregnancies of parous women in Finland from the Finnish Medical Birth Register (reference group). Results The rates of adverse pregnancy outcomes were higher among case women for preeclampsia (3.3 vs. 0.9%, P = 0.002), preterm birth (8.5 vs. 3.9%, P = 0.004), small-for-gestational-age (SGA) children (7.8 vs. 2.2%, P < 0.001) and stillbirth (2.7 vs. 0.3%, P < 0.001). There were four preterm recurrent stillbirths. Induction of labor was more common among case women than parous women in the reference group (49.4 vs. 18.3%, P < 0.001). Duration of pregnancy was shorter among case women (38.29 ± 3.20 vs. 39.27 ± 2.52, P < 0.001), and mean birth weight was lower among newborns of the case women (3274 ± 770 vs. 3491 ± 674 g, P < 0.001). Conclusion Although the rates for adverse pregnancy outcomes were higher compared to the parous background population, the overall probability of a favorable outcome was high. The risk of recurrent premature stillbirth in our cohort was higher than that for parous women in general during the study period. No recurrent term stillbirths occurred, however.

Pregnancy decisions after fetal or perinatal death: systematic review of qualitative research

OBJECTIVES

To synthesise the findings of qualitative research exploring parents' experiences, views and decisions about becoming pregnant following a perinatal death or fetal loss.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative research.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ASSIA, Embase, PUBMED, Scopus and Google Scholar.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Nine electronic databases were searched using predefined search terms. Articles published in English, in peer-reviewed journals, using qualitative methods to explore the experiences and attitudes of bereaved parents following perinatal or fetal loss, were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Qualitative data relating to first-order and second-order constructs were extracted and synthesised across studies using a thematic analysis.

RESULTS

15 studies were included. Four descriptive themes and 10 subthemes were identified. The descriptive themes were: deciding about subsequent pregnancy, diversity of reactions to the event, social network influences, and planning or timing of subsequent pregnancy. The decision to become pregnant after death is complex and varies between individuals and sometimes within couples. Decisions are often made quickly, in the immediate aftermath of a pregnancy loss, but may evolve over time. Bereaved parents may feel isolated from social networks.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an opportunity to support parents to prepare for a pregnancy after a fetal or perinatal loss, and conversations may be welcomed at an early stage. Health professionals may play an important role providing support lacking from usual social networks.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018112839.

Research priorities and potential methodologies to inform care in subsequent pregnancies following stillbirth: a web-based survey of healthcare professionals, researchers and advocates

OBJECTIVES

To identify research priorities and explore potential methodologies to inform care in subsequent pregnancies following a stillbirth.

DESIGN

Web-based survey by invitation.

PARTICIPANTS

Multidisciplinary panel of 79 individuals involved in stillbirth research, clinical practice and/or advocacy from the international stillbirth research community (response rate=64%).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Importance of 16 candidate research topics and perceived utility and appropriateness of randomised controlled trial (RCT) methodology for the evaluation of four pertinent interventions: (1) medical therapies for placental dysfunction (eg, antiplatelet agents); (2) additional antepartum fetal surveillance (eg, ultrasound scans); (3) early planned birth from 37 weeks' gestation and (4) different forms of psychosocial support for parents and families.

RESULTS

Candidate research topics that were rated as 'important and urgent' by the greatest proportion of participants were: medical therapies for placental dysfunction (81%); additional antepartum fetal surveillance (80%); the development of a core outcomes dataset for stillbirth research (79%); targeted antenatal interventions for women who have risk factors (79%) and calculating the risk of recurrent stillbirth according to specific causes of index stillbirth (79%). Whether RCT methodologies were considered appropriate for the four selected interventions varied depending on the criterion being assessed. For example, while 72% of respondents felt that RCTs were 'the best way' to evaluate medical therapies for placental dysfunction, fewer respondents (63%) deemed RCTs ethical in this context, and approximately only half (52%) felt that such RCTs were feasible. There was considerably less support for RCT methodology for the evaluation of different forms of psychosocial support, which was reinforced by free-text comments.

CONCLUSIONS

Five priority research topics to inform care in pregnancies after stillbirth were identified. There was support for RCTs in this area, but the panel remained divided on the ethics and feasibility of such trials. Engagement with parents and families is a critical next step.

Results of a Dutch national and subsequent international expert meeting on interconception care

Introduction: The potential value of preconception care and interconception care is increasingly acknowledged, but delivery is generally uncommon. Reaching women for interconception care is potentially easier than for preconception care, however the concept is still unfamiliar. Expert consensus could facilitate guidelines, policies and subsequent implementation. A national and subsequent international expert meeting were organized to discuss the term, definition, content, relevant target groups, and ways to reach target groups for interconception care.Methods: We performed a literature study to develop propositions for discussion in a national expert meeting in the Netherlands in October 2015. The outcomes of this meeting were discussed during an international congress on preconception care in Sweden in February 2016. Both meetings were recorded, transcribed and subsequently reviewed by participants.Results: The experts argued that the term, definition, and content for interconception care should be in line with preconception care. They discussed that the target group for interconception care should be "all women who have been pregnant and could be pregnant in the future and their (possible) partners". In addition, they opted that any healthcare provider having contact with the target group should reach out and make every encounter a potential opportunity to promote interconception care.Discussion: Expert discussions led to a description of the term, definition, content, and relevant target groups for interconception care. Opportunities to reach the target group were identified, but should be further developed and evaluated in policies and guidelines to determine the optimal way to deliver interconception care.

Care prior to and during subsequent pregnancies following stillbirth for improving outcomes

BACKGROUND

Stillbirth affects at least 2.6 million families worldwide every year and has enduring consequences for parents and health services. Parents entering a subsequent pregnancy following stillbirth face a risk of stillbirth recurrence, alongside increased risks of other adverse pregnancy outcomes and psychosocial challenges. These parents may benefit from a range of interventions to optimise their short- and longer-term medical health and psychosocial well-being.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different interventions or models of care prior to and during subsequent pregnancies following stillbirth on maternal, fetal, neonatal and family health outcomes, and health service utilisation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (6 June 2018), along with ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (18 June 2018).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised controlled trials (qRCTs). Trials using a cluster-randomised design were eligible for inclusion, but we found no such reports. We included trials published as abstract only, provided sufficient information was available to allow assessment of trial eligibility and risk of bias. We excluded cross-over trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and undertook data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessments. We extracted data from published reports, or sourced data directly from trialists. We checked the data for accuracy and resolved discrepancies by discussion or correspondence with trialists, or both. We conducted an assessment of the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs and one qRCT, and judged them to be at low to moderate risk of bias. Trials were carried out between the years 1964 and 2015 and took place predominantly in high-income countries in Europe. All trials assessed medical interventions; no trials assessed psychosocial interventions or incorporated psychosocial aspects of care. Trials evaluated the use of antiplatelet agents (low-dose aspirin (LDA) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), or both), third-party leukocyte immunisation, intravenous immunoglobulin, and progestogen. Trial participants were women who were either pregnant or attempting to conceive following a pregnancy loss, fetal death, or adverse outcome in a previous pregnancy.We extracted data for 222 women who had experienced a previous stillbirth of 20 weeks' gestation or more from the broader trial data sets, and included them in this review. Our GRADE assessments of the quality of evidence ranged from very low to low, due largely to serious imprecision in effect estimates as a result of small sample sizes, low numbers of events, and wide confidence intervals (CIs) crossing the line of no effect. Most of the analyses in this review were not sufficiently powered to detect differences in the outcomes assessed. The results presented are therefore largely uncertain.Main comparisonsLMWH versus no treatment/standard care (three RCTs, 123 women, depending on the outcome)It was uncertain whether LMWH reduced the risk of stillbirth (risk ratio (RR) 2.58, 95% CI 0.40 to 16.62; 3 trials; 122 participants; low-quality evidence), adverse perinatal outcome (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.20 to 3.32; 2 trials; 77 participants; low-quality evidence), adverse maternal psychological effects (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 14.90; 1 trial; 40 participants; very low-quality evidence), perinatal mortality (RR 2.58, 95% CI 0.40 to 16.62; 3 trials; 122 participants; low-quality evidence), or any preterm birth (< 37 weeks) (RR 1.01, 0.58 to 1.74; 3 trials; 114 participants; low-quality evidence). No neonatal deaths were reported in the trials assessed and no data were available for maternal-infant attachment. There was no clear evidence of a difference between the groups among the remaining secondary outcomes.LDA versus placebo (one RCT, 24 women)It was uncertain whether LDA reduced the risk of stillbirth (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.06 to 12.01), neonatal death (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.01 to 6.38), adverse perinatal outcome (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.34), perinatal mortality, or any preterm birth (< 37 weeks) (both of the latter RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.06; all very low-quality evidence). No data were available for adverse maternal psychological effects or maternal-infant attachment. LDA appeared to be associated with an increase in birthweight (mean difference (MD) 790.00 g, 95% CI 295.03 to 1284.97 g) when compared to placebo, but this result was very unstable due to the extremely small sample size. Whether LDA has any effect on the remaining secondary outcomes was also uncertain.Other comparisonsLDA appeared to be associated with an increase in birthweight when compared to LDA + LMWH (MD -650.00 g, 95% CI -1210.33 to -89.67 g; 1 trial; 29 infants), as did third-party leukocyte immunisation when compared to placebo (MD 1195.00 g, 95% CI 273.35 to 2116.65 g; 1 trial, 4 infants), but these results were again very unstable due to extremely small sample sizes. The effects of the interventions on the remaining outcomes were also uncertain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence in this review to inform clinical practice about the effectiveness of interventions to improve care prior to and during subsequent pregnancies following a stillbirth. There is a clear and urgent need for well-designed trials addressing this research question. The evaluation of medical interventions such as LDA, in the specific context of stillbirth prevention (and recurrent stillbirth prevention), is warranted. However, appropriate methodologies to evaluate such therapies need to be determined, particularly where clinical equipoise may be lacking. Careful trial design and multicentre collaboration is necessary to carry out trials that would be sufficiently large to detect differences in statistically rare outcomes such as stillbirth and neonatal death. The evaluation of psychosocial interventions addressing maternal-fetal attachment and parental anxiety and depression is also an urgent priority. In a randomised-trial context, such trials may allocate parents to different forms of support, to determine which have the greatest benefit with the least financial cost. Importantly, consistency in nomenclature and in data collection across all future trials (randomised and non-randomised) may be facilitated by a core outcomes data set for stillbirth research. All future trials should assess short- and longer-term psychosocial outcomes for parents and families, alongside economic costs of interventions.

The Impact of Previous Pregnancy Loss on Lactating Behaviors and Use of Herbal Medicines during Breastfeeding: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Herbal Supplements in Breastfeeding InvesTigation (HaBIT)

Introduction

Complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs) are commonly used among lactating women, despite the poor knowledge of these products and of their safety. Perception of pregnancy- and breastfeeding-related difficulties and consequent use of CAMs may differ in bereaved women, by force of the distress related to previous loss, although no literature evidence is available. This Herbal supplements in Breastfeeding InvesTigation (HaBIT) post hoc analysis explored the impact of previous pregnancy loss on lactating behaviors and on use of CAMs during breastfeeding.

Methods

A web-based survey was conducted among lactating women with no previous alive child, resident in Tuscany (Italy). Data on lactating behavior and on CAMs use were collected and evaluated among women with previous pregnancy loss as compared to control women.

Results

Out of 476 women answering the questionnaire, 233 lactating women with one child were considered. Of them, 80 had history of pregnancy loss. Cesarean birth was significantly more frequent among women with history of pregnancy loss as compared to controls (41% versus 22%; p=0.004). Proportion, length of exclusive breastfeeding, and occurrence of breastfeeding-related complications were comparable among the two cohorts. More than half of women used CAMs during breastfeeding. Use of CAMs was more frequent among women with previous pregnancy loss (54% versus 68%; p=0.050), specifically considering herbal preparations (16% versus 30%; p=0.018). Major advisors for CAMs use were midwives. 18% and 23% of women without and with history of pregnancy loss declared no clear perception on CAMs efficacy and safety.

Conclusion

Overcoming the social taboo of pregnancy loss and training healthcare professionals for an adequate management of the perinatal period are essential for an effective and safe care. Despite the common use and advice on CAMs use during breastfeeding, it is important to acknowledge that limited evidence supports their safety and efficacy during such critical period.

Care following stillbirth in high-resource settings: Latest evidence, guidelines, and best practice points

Third-trimester stillbirth affects approximately 2.6 million women worldwide each year. Although most stillbirths (98%) occur in low- and middle-income countries, most of the research on the impact of stillbirth and bereavement care has come from high-income countries. The impact of stillbirth ranges from stigma to disenfranchised grief, broken relationships, clinical depression, chronic pain, substance use, increased use of health services, employment difficulties, and debt. Appropriate bereavement care following a stillbirth is essential to minimise the negative socio-economic impact on parents and their families. This article presents the best practice points in stillbirth bereavement care, including taking an individualised and flexible approach. The latest published research, guidelines, and best practice points from high-income countries will be used and will highlight the gaps in the research which urgently need to be addressed. Research and investment in appropriate, respectful aftercare is needed to minimise the negative impact for parents.

Relation between maternal thrombophilia and stillbirth according to causes/associated conditions of death

OBJECTIVE

To investigate maternal thrombophilia in cases of Stillbirth (SB), also an uncertain topic because most case series were not characterised for cause/associated conditions of death.

STUDY DESIGN

In a consecutive, prospective, multicentre design, maternal DNA was obtained in 171 cases of antenatal SB and 326 controls (uneventful pregnancy at term, 1:2 ratio). Diagnostic work-up of SB included obstetric history, neonatologist inspection, placenta histology, autopsy, microbiology/chromosome evaluations. Results audited in each centre were classified by two of us by using CoDAC. Cases were subdivided into explained SB where a cause of death was identified and although no defined cause was detected in the remnants, 64 cases found conditions associated with placenta-vascular disorders (including preeclampsia, growth restriction and placenta abruption - PVD). In the remnant 79 cases, no cause of death or associated condition was found. Antithrombin activity, Factor V Leiden, G20210A Prothrombin mutation (FII mutation) and acquired thrombophilia were analysed.

RESULTS

Overall, the presence of a thrombophilic defect was significantly more prevalent in mothers with SBs compared to controls. In particular, SB mothers showed an increased risk of carrying Factor II mutation (OR=3.2, 95% CI: 1.3-8.3, p=0.01), namely in unexplained cases. Such mutation was significantly associated also with previous SB (OR=8.9, 95%CI 1.2-70.5). At multiple logistic regression, Factor II mutation was the only significantly associated variable with SB (adj OR=3.8, 95% CI: 1.3-13.5).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that Factor II mutation is the only condition specifically associated with unexplained SB and could represents a risk of recurrence. PVD-associated condition is unrelated to thrombophilia.