Antidepressants in pregnancy: applying causal epidemiological methods to understand service-use outcomes in women and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes in exposed children

Background

Antidepressants are commonly prescribed during pregnancy, despite a lack of evidence from randomised trials on the benefits or risks. Some studies have reported associations of antidepressants during pregnancy with adverse offspring neurodevelopment, but whether or not such associations are causal is unclear.

Objectives

To study the associations of antidepressants for depression in pregnancy with outcomes using multiple methods to strengthen causal inference.

Design

This was an observational cohort design using multiple methods to strengthen causal inference, including multivariable regression, propensity score matching, instrumental variable analysis, negative control exposures, comparison across indications and exposure discordant pregnancies analysis.

Setting

This took place in UK general practice.

Participants

Participants were pregnant women with depression.

Interventions

The interventions were initiation of antidepressants in pregnancy compared with no initiation, and continuation of antidepressants in pregnancy compared with discontinuation.

Main outcome measures

The maternal outcome measures were the use of primary care and secondary mental health services during pregnancy, and during four 6-month follow-up periods up to 24 months after pregnancy, and antidepressant prescription status 24 months following pregnancy. The child outcome measures were diagnosis of autism, diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and intellectual disability.

Data sources

UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

Results

Data on 80,103 pregnancies were used to study maternal primary care outcomes and were linked to 34,274 children with at least 4-year follow-up for neurodevelopmental outcomes. Women who initiated or continued antidepressants during pregnancy were more likely to have contact with primary and secondary health-care services during and after pregnancy and more likely to be prescribed an antidepressant 2 years following the end of pregnancy than women who did not initiate or continue antidepressants during pregnancy (odds ratioinitiation 2.16, 95% confidence interval 1.95 to 2.39; odds ratiocontinuation 2.40, 95% confidence interval 2.27 to 2.53). There was little evidence for any substantial association with autism (odds ratiomultivariableregression 1.10, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 1.35; odds ratiopropensityscore 1.06, 95% confidence interval 0.84 to 1.32), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (odds ratiomultivariableregression 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 1.29; odds ratiopropensityscore 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.75 to 1.25) or intellectual disability (odds ratiomultivariableregression 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.55 to 1.19; odds ratiopropensityscore 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 1.31) in children of women who continued antidepressants compared with those who discontinued antidepressants. There was inconsistent evidence of an association between initiation of antidepressants in pregnancy and diagnosis of autism in offspring (odds ratiomultivariableregression 1.23, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.78; odds ratiopropensityscore 1.64, 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 2.66) but not attention deficit hyperactivity disorder or intellectual disability; however, but results were imprecise owing to smaller numbers.

Limitations

Several causal-inference analyses lacked precision owing to limited numbers. In addition, adherence to the prescribed treatment was not measured.

Conclusions

Women prescribed antidepressants during pregnancy had greater service use during and after pregnancy than those not prescribed antidepressants. The evidence against any substantial association with autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder or intellectual disability in the children of women who continued compared with those who discontinued antidepressants in pregnancy is reassuring. Potential association of initiation of antidepressants during pregnancy with offspring autism needs further investigation.

Future work

Further research on larger samples could increase the robustness and precision of these findings. These methods applied could be a template for future pharmaco-epidemiological investigation of other pregnancy-related prescribing safety concerns.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (15/80/19) and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 15. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Feasibility of a RCT of techniques for managing an impacted fetal head during emergency caesarean section: the MIDAS scoping study

Background

Second-stage caesarean sections, of which there are around 34,000 per year in the UK, have greater maternal and perinatal morbidity than those in the first stage. The fetal head is often deeply impacted in the maternal pelvis, and extraction can be difficult. Numerous techniques are reported, but the superiority of one over another is contentious and there is no national guidance.

Objective

To determine the feasibility of a randomised trial of different techniques for managing an impacted fetal head during emergency caesarean.

Design

A scoping study with five work packages: (1) national surveys to determine current practice and acceptability of research in this area, and a qualitative study to determine acceptability to women who have experienced a second-stage caesarean; (2) a national prospective observational study to determine incidence and rate of complications; (3) a Delphi survey and consensus meeting on choice of techniques and outcomes for a trial; (4) the design of a trial; and (5) a national survey and qualitative study to determine acceptability of the proposed trial.

Setting

Secondary care.

Participants

Health-care professionals, pregnant women, women who have had a second-stage caesarean, and parents.

Results

Most (244/279, 87%) health-care professionals believe that a trial in this area would help guide their practice, and 90% (252/279) would be willing to participate in such a trial. Thirty-eight per cent (98/259) of parents reported that they would take part. Women varied in which technique they thought was most acceptable. Our observational study found that impacted head is common (occurring in 16% of second-stage caesareans) and leads to both maternal (41%) and neonatal (3.5%) complications. It is most often treated by an assistant pushing the head up vaginally. We designed a randomised clinical trial comparing the fetal pillow with the vaginal push technique. The vast majority of health-care professionals, 83% of midwives and 88% of obstetricians, would be willing to participate in the trial proposed, and 37% of parents reported that they would take part. Our qualitative study found that most participants thought the trial would be feasible and acceptable.

Limitations

Our survey is subject to the limitation that, although responses refer to contemporaneous real cases, they are self-reported by the surgeon and collected after the event. Willingness to participate in a hypothetical trial may not translate into recruitment to a real trial.

Conclusions

We proposed a trial to compare a new device, the fetal pillow, with a long-established procedure, the vaginal push technique. Such a trial would be widely supported by health-care professionals. We recommend that it be powered to test an effect on important short term maternal and baby outcomes which would require 754 participants per group. Despite the well-known difference between intent and action, this would be feasible within the UK.

Future work

We recommend a randomised controlled trial of two techniques for managing an impacted fetal head with an in-built internal pilot phase and alongside economic and qualitative substudies.

Study registration

This study is registered as Research Registry 4942.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 6. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Hepatitis E virus infection in pregnant women, Argentina

Background

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection is an important cause of acute hepatitis worldwide. In pregnant women, HEV can cause more severe symptoms, with high rates of fatal hepatic failure in endemic countries. However, HEV prevalence and circulation among pregnant women from South America is almost unknown. We aimed to investigate HEV infection in pregnant women for the first time in Argentina.

Methods

IgG and IgM anti-HEV antibodies and RNA-HEV were investigated (by ELISA assays and RT-Nested-PCR, respectively) in 202 serum samples from pregnant women collected in the central region of Argentina between 2015 and 2017. A control group of 155 non-pregnant women was included (year 2018).

Results

The IgG anti-HEV positivity rate was 8.4% (17/202), higher than the 2.6% (4/155) obtained for the non-pregnant women control group, and showing association between pregnancy and HEV infection (p = 0.023, OR = 3.5, CI95% = 1.1–10.5). Women younger than 25 years old presented higher levels of antibodies, and there were no differences in the prevalences between trimesters of pregnancy. Two samples were reactive for IgM anti-HEV, showing recent infections, although no symptoms were registered in these patients. All samples were negative for RNA-HEV amplification.

Conclusions

HEV produces infections in pregnant women from Argentina, alerting health teams to consider it as a possible cause of liver disease.