Relationship between labour analgesia modalities and types of anaesthetic techniques in categories 2 and 3 intrapartum caesarean deliveries

General anesthesia (GA) is typically recommended for category 1 emergency cesarean delivery (CD). For categories 2–4 emergencies, either regional or GA can be used. The factors influencing the choice of anesthetic technique in these categories remain poorly understood. We analyzed the association between the type of labor analgesia and subsequent anesthetic techniques employed for intrapartum categories 2 and 3 CD. In a prospective longitudinal cohort study, 300 women were consequently enrolled and categorized according to Lucas’s classification of CD urgency. The techniques of anesthesia (GA, spinal, and epidural anesthesia [EA]) employed for CD were analyzed with respect to labor analgesia methods (remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia [remifentanil-PCA], EA, and nitrous oxide [N2O]). EA was the most frequent analgesic option (43.8%), followed by remifentanil-PCA (20.7%) and N2O (5.1%), while 30.4% of parturient women received no analgesia. All anesthetic methods showed a significant relationship with analgesic modalities (P < 0.001). Remifentanil-PCA was associated with a higher incidence of GA. Contraindication to EA was the primary factor related to the transition from remifentanil-PCA to GA. Most parturients who received EA were successfully converted to EA. Spinal anesthesia was the most common technique in women using N2O and those without labor analgesia. GA was associated with lower 5-min Apgar scores. The method of labor analgesia was associated with the anesthesia technique employed for categories 2 and 3 CD. This finding may guide patient counseling and intrapartum anesthetic planning. However, the analysis should be cautiously interpreted as the selection of anesthesia is a complex decision influenced by several clinical considerations.

Fetal death from SARS-CoV-2 mediated acute placental failure

INTRODUCTION

We demonstrate the nonlinear severity of symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the mother leading to fetal death after acute placental failure.

METHODS

Careful clinical evaluation, real-time RT-PCR molecular microbiologic testing, isolation of a viable virus, and autopsy with histologic results were used to investigate the possible vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection from mother to fetus.

RESULTS

Histologic changes in the placenta correlate with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Total nucleic acid isolated from vaginal swabs, fresh placental tissue, and deparaffinized tissue showed a high viral load of SARS-CoV-2. Complete genome sequencing confirmed the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant.

DISCUSSION

Several methods have been used to confirm SARS-CoV-2-mediated acute placental failure, all of which were conclusive. It should be noted that careful periodic fetal well-being checks are required in women infected with SARS-CoV-2, regardless of the severity of symptoms. Most of the cases described with fetal death occurred in the third trimester.

Clinical chorioamnionitis: where do we stand now?

Intraamniotic infection is an infection resulting in the inflammation of any combination of the amniotic fluid, the placenta, the fetus itself, the fetal membranes, umbilical cord, or the decidua. In the past, an infection of the amnion and chorion or both was dubbed chorioamnionitis. In 2015, a proposal was made by an expert panel that, instead of clinical chorioamnionitis, the name intrauterine inflammation or infection or both be used, abbreviated as Triple I or simply IAI. However, the abbreviation IAI did not gain popularity, and this article uses the term chorioamnionitis. Chorioamnionitis may arise prior to, during, or following labor. It can present as a chronic, subacute, or acute infection. Its clinical presentation is generally referred to as acute chorioamnionitis. The treatment of chorioamnionitis varies widely across the world due to different bacterial causes and the absence of sufficient evidence to support a specific treatment regimen. There are limited randomized controlled trials that have evaluated the superiority of antibiotic regimens for treating amniotic infections during labor. This lack of evidence-based treatment suggests that the current choice of antibiotics is based on limitations in existing research, rather than absolute science. Chorioamnionitis cannot be cured by antibiotic therapy alone without delivery, and therefore it is necessary to make a decision according to the guidelines for induction of labor or acceleration of delivery. When a diagnosis is suspected or established, it is therefore necessary to apply broad-spectrum antibiotics according to the protocol used by each country, and to continue with them until delivery. A commonly recommended first-line treatment for chorioamnionitis is a simple regimen consisting of amoxicillin or ampicillin and once-daily gentamicin. Available information is not sufficient to indicate the best antimicrobial regimen to treat this obstetric condition. However, the evidence that is currently available suggests that patients with clinical chorioamnionitis, primarily women with a gestational age of 34 weeks or more and those in labor, should receive treatment with this regime. However, antibiotic preferences may vary based on local policy, clinician experience and knowledge, bacterial reasons for the infection, antimicrobial resistance patterns, maternal allergies, and drug availability.

European Guidelines on Perinatal Care - Oxytocin for induction and augmentation of labor[Formula: see text]

OF RECOMMENDATIONS1. Oxytocin for induction or augmentation of labor should not be started when there is a previous scar on the body of the uterus (such as previous classical cesarean section, uterine perforation or myomectomy when uterine cavity is reached) or in any other condition where labor or vaginal delivery are contraindicated. (Moderate quality evidence +++-; Strong recommendation).2. Oxytocin should not be started before at least 1 h has elapsed since amniotomy, 6 h since the use of dinoprostone (30 min if vaginal insert) and 4 h since the use of misoprostol (Low quality evidence ++- -; Moderate recommendation).3. Cardiotocography (CTG) should be performed and a normal pattern without tachysystole should be documented for at least 30 min before oxytocin is used. Continuous CTG, with adequate monitoring of both fetal heart rate and uterine contractions, should be maintained for as long as oxytocin is used, and thereafter until delivery (Low ++- - to moderate +++- quality evidence; Strong recommendation).4. For labor induction, at least 1-h should be allowed after amniotomy before oxytocin infusion is started, to evaluate whether adequate uterine contractility has meanwhile ensued. For augmentation of labor, if the membranes are intact and there are conditions for a safe amniotomy, the latter should be considered before oxytocin is started (Very low quality evidence +- --; Weak recommendation).5. Oxytocin should be administered intravenously using the following regimen: 5 IU oxytocin diluted in 500 mL of 0.9% normal saline (NaCl) (each mL contains 10 mIU of oxytocin), in an infusion pump at increasing rates, as shown in Table 1, until a frequency of 3-4 contractions per 10 min is reached, a non-reassuring CTG pattern ensues, or maximum rates are reached (Low quality evidence ++ - -; Strong recommendation). If the frequency of contractions exceeds 5 in 10 min, the infusion rate should be reduced, even if a normal CTG pattern is present. With a non-reassuring CTG pattern, urgent clinical assessment by an obstetrician is indicated, and strong consideration should be given to reducing or stopping the oxytocin infusion. The minimal effective dose of oxytocin should always be used. (Low ++- - to Moderate +++- - quality evidence; Strong recommendation).[Table: see text]6. Use of oxytocin for induction and augmentation of labor should be regularly audited (Low quality evidence ++--; Strong recommendation).

Usefulness of COVID-19 screen-and-test approach in pregnant women: an experience from a country with low COVID-19 burden

OBJECTIVES

Information on the usefulness of screen-and-test strategies of pregnant women for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is lacking.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the Ljubljana Maternity Hospital database and searched for pregnant women, who were admitted to the hospital between March 15 and May 16, 2020, for a planned procedure or hospitalization. Their medical records were examined and SARS-CoV-2 test results were retrieved.

RESULTS

During the two-month period analyzed, there were a total of 265 scheduled admissions of pregnant women to our hospital. Two hundred two (76.2%) were tested for SARS-CoV-2 1 day prior to admission. All tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, regardless of having coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-compatible signs or symptoms (n=28) or not (n=174).

CONCLUSIONS

In a population with a low SARS-CoV-2 burden, usefulness of universal testing of pregnant women before admission to the hospital is limited. We recommend that obstetric units in regions with low SARS-CoV-2 burden enforce rational use of personal protective equipment and diligent screening protocols using targeted questionnaires, whereas SARS-CoV-2 laboratory testing should be performed only in screen-positives: those with high clinical suspicion of COVID-19 and/or suspected epidemiological history.

Maternal and perinatal outcomes in high compared to low risk pregnancies complicated by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection (phase 2): the World Association of Perinatal Medicine working group on coronavirus disease 2019

BACKGROUND

It has still to be ascertained whether severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection in pregnancy is associated with worse maternal and fetal outcomes compared to low risk gestations.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate maternal and perinatal outcomes in high- and low-risk pregnancies complicated by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a multinational retrospective cohort study involving women with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection from 76 centers from 25 countries in Europe, the United States, South America, Asia, and Australia from April 4, 2020, to October 28, 2020. The primary outcome was a composite measure of maternal mortality and morbidity, including admission to the intensive care unit, use of mechanical ventilation, or death. The secondary outcome was a composite measure of adverse perinatal outcome, including miscarriage, fetal loss, neonatal and perinatal death, and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit. All outcomes were assessed in high- and low-risk pregnancies. Pregnancies were considered high risk in case of either preexisting chronic medical conditions in pregnancy or obstetrical disorders occurring in pregnancy. The Fisher exact test and logistic regression analysis were used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

A total of 887 singleton pregnancies who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection using reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction of nasal and pharyngeal swab specimens were included in the study. The risk of composite adverse maternal outcomes was higher in high-risk pregnancies than in low-risk pregnancies (odds ratio, 1.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.24; P=.035). In addition, women carrying high-risk pregnancies were at higher risk of hospital admission (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-2.04; P=.002), presence of severe respiratory symptoms (odds ratio, 2.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-3.21; P=.001), admission to the intensive care unit (odds ratio, 2.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.42-4.88), and invasive mechanical ventilation (odds ratio, 2.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-5.94; P=.002). When exploring perinatal outcomes, high-risk pregnancies were at high risk of adverse perinatal outcomes (odds ratio, 1.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-2.72; P=.009). However, such association was mainly because of the higher incidence of miscarriage in high-risk pregnancies compared with that in low-risk pregnancies (5.3% vs 1.6%, P=.008); furthermore, there was no difference in other explored outcomes between the 2 study groups. At logistic regression analysis, maternal age (odds ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.22; P=.023) and high-risk pregnancy (odds ratio, 4.21; 95% confidence interval, 3.90-5.11; P<.001) were independently associated with adverse maternal outcomes.

CONCLUSION

High-risk pregnancies complicated by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection were at higher risk of adverse maternal outcomes than low-risk pregnancies complicated by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection.

Risk factors associated with adverse fetal outcomes in pregnancies affected by Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a secondary analysis of the WAPM study on COVID-19

Objectives To evaluate the strength of association between maternal and pregnancy characteristics and the risk of adverse perinatal outcomes in pregnancies with laboratory confirmed COVID-19. Methods Secondary analysis of a multinational, cohort study on all consecutive pregnant women with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from February 1, 2020 to April 30, 2020 from 73 centers from 22 different countries. A confirmed case of COVID-19 was defined as a positive result on real-time reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) assay of nasal and pharyngeal swab specimens. The primary outcome was a composite adverse fetal outcome, defined as the presence of either abortion (pregnancy loss before 22 weeks of gestations), stillbirth (intrauterine fetal death after 22 weeks of gestation), neonatal death (death of a live-born infant within the first 28 days of life), and perinatal death (either stillbirth or neonatal death). Logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate parameters independently associated with the primary outcome. Logistic regression was reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results Mean gestational age at diagnosis was 30.6±9.5 weeks, with 8.0% of women being diagnosed in the first, 22.2% in the second and 69.8% in the third trimester of pregnancy. There were six miscarriage (2.3%), six intrauterine device (IUD) (2.3) and 5 (2.0%) neonatal deaths, with an overall rate of perinatal death of 4.2% (11/265), thus resulting into 17 cases experiencing and 226 not experiencing composite adverse fetal outcome. Neither stillbirths nor neonatal deaths had congenital anomalies found at antenatal or postnatal evaluation. Furthermore, none of the cases experiencing IUD had signs of impending demise at arterial or venous Doppler. Neonatal deaths were all considered as prematurity-related adverse events. Of the 250 live-born neonates, one (0.4%) was found positive at RT-PCR pharyngeal swabs performed after delivery. The mother was tested positive during the third trimester of pregnancy. The newborn was asymptomatic and had negative RT-PCR test after 14 days of life. At logistic regression analysis, gestational age at diagnosis (OR: 0.85, 95% CI 0.8-0.9 per week increase; p<0.001), birthweight (OR: 1.17, 95% CI 1.09-1.12.7 per 100 g decrease; p=0.012) and maternal ventilatory support, including either need for oxygen or CPAP (OR: 4.12, 95% CI 2.3-7.9; p=0.001) were independently associated with composite adverse fetal outcome. Conclusions Early gestational age at infection, maternal ventilatory supports and low birthweight are the main determinants of adverse perinatal outcomes in fetuses with maternal COVID-19 infection. Conversely, the risk of vertical transmission seems negligible.