Lung Ultrasound Can Influence the Clinical Treatment of Pregnant Women With COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Yassa M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7300952 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Lung ultrasound has been suggested recently by the Chinese Critical Care Ultrasound Study Group and Italian Academy of Thoracic Ultrasound as an accurate tool to detect lung involvement in COVID-19. Although chest computed tomography (CT) represents the gold standard to assess lung involvement, with a specificity superior even to that of the nasopharyngeal swab for diagnosis, lung ultrasound examination can be a valid alternative to CT scan, with certain advantages, particularly for pregnant women. Ultrasound can be performed directly at the bed-side by a single operator, reducing the risk of spreading the disease among health professionals. Furthermore, it is a radiation-free exam, making it safer and easier to monitor those patients who require a series of exams. We report on four cases of pregnant women affected by COVID-19 who were monitored with lung ultrasound examination. All patients showed sonographic features indicative of COVID-19 pneumonia at admission: irregular pleural lines and vertical artifacts (B-lines) were observed in all four cases, and patchy areas of white lung were observed in two. Lung ultrasound was more sensitive than was chest X-ray in detecting COVID-19. In three patients, we observed almost complete resolution of lung pathology on ultrasound within 96 h of admission. Two pregnancies were ongoing at the time of writing, and two had undergone Cesarean delivery with no fetal complications. Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction analysis of cord blood and newborn swabs was negative in both of these cases. Copyright © 2020 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
| S-EPMC7267364 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7267379 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPregnant women less frequently receive COVID-19 vaccination and are at increased risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes from COVID-19.ObjectiveThis study aimed to first, describe the vaccination status, treatment, and outcomes of hospitalized, symptomatic pregnant women with COVID-19, and second, estimate whether treatment differs by pregnancy status among treatment-eligible (ie, requiring supplemental oxygen per National Institutes of Health guidelines at the time of the study) women.Study designFrom January to November 2021, the COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network completed medical chart abstraction for a probability sample of 2715 hospitalized women aged 15 to 49 years with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of these, 1950 women had symptoms of COVID-19 on admission, and 336 were pregnant. We calculated weighted prevalence estimates of demographic and clinical characteristics, vaccination status, and outcomes among pregnant women with symptoms of COVID-19 on admission. We used propensity score matching to estimate prevalence ratios and 95% confidence intervals of treatment-eligible patients who received remdesivir or systemic steroids by pregnancy status.ResultsAmong 336 hospitalized pregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19, 39.6% were non-Hispanic Black, 24.8% were Hispanic or Latino, and 61.9% were aged 25 to 34 years. Among those with known COVID-19 vaccination status, 92.9% were unvaccinated. One-third (32.7%) were treatment-eligible. Among treatment-eligible pregnant women, 74.1% received systemic steroids and 61.4% received remdesivir. Among those that were no longer pregnant at discharge (n=180), 5.4% had spontaneous abortions and 3.5% had stillbirths. Of the 159 live births, 29.0% were preterm. Among a propensity score-matched cohort of treatment-eligible hospitalized women of reproductive age, pregnant women were less likely than nonpregnant women to receive remdesivir (prevalence ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.97) and systemic steroids (prevalence ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.87).ConclusionMost hospitalized pregnant patients with symptomatic COVID-19 were unvaccinated. Hospitalized pregnant patients were less likely to receive recommended remdesivir and systemic steroids compared with similar hospitalized nonpregnant women. Our results underscore the need to identify opportunities for improving COVID-19 vaccination, implementation of treatment of pregnant women, and the inclusion of pregnant women in clinical trials.
| S-EPMC9371979 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) disease (COVID-19) has caused a large global outbreak and has had a major impact on health systems and societies worldwide. The generation of knowledge about the disease has occurred almost as fast as its global expansion. Very few studies have reported on the effects of the infection on maternal health, since its onset. The mother and foetus do not seem to be at particularly high risk. Nevertheless, obstetrics and maternal-foetal medicine practice have made profound changes in order to adapt to the pandemic. In addition, there are aspects specific to COVID-19 and gestation that should be known by specialists. In this review an evidenced-based protocol is presented for the management of COVID-19 in pregnancy.
| S-EPMC7328537 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7182016 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundData pertaining to COVID-19 in pregnancy are limited; to better inform clinicians, we collated data from COVID-19 cases during pregnancy and summarized clinical trials enrolling this population.MethodsWe performed a systematic literature review of PubMed/MEDLINE to identify cases of COVID-19 in pregnancy or the postpartum period and associated outcomes. We then evaluated the proportion of COVID-19 clinical trials (from ClinicalTrials.gov) excluding pregnant or breastfeeding persons (both through June 29, 2020).ResultsWe identified 11 308 published cases of COVID-19 during pregnancy. Of those reporting disease severity, 21% (416/1999) were severe/critical. Maternal and neonatal survival were reassuring (98% [10 437/10 597] and 99% [1155/1163], respectively). Neonatal disease was rare, with only 41 possible cases of infection reported in the literature. Of 2351 ongoing COVID-19 therapeutic clinical trials, 1282 were enrolling persons of reproductive age and 65% (829/1282) excluded pregnant persons. Pregnancy was an exclusion criterion for 69% (75/109) of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, 80% (28/35) of lopinavir/ritonavir, and 48% (44/91) of convalescent plasma studies. We identified 48 actively recruiting or completed drug trials reporting inclusion of this population.ConclusionsThere are limited published reports of COVID-19 in pregnancy despite more than 14 million cases worldwide. To date, clinical outcomes appear reassuring, but data related to important long-term outcomes are missing or not yet reported. The large number of clinical trials excluding pregnant persons, despite interventions with safety data in pregnancy, is concerning. In addition to observational cohort studies, pregnancy-specific adaptive clinical trials could be designed to identify safe and effective treatments.
| S-EPMC7454907 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeInformation regarding the use of lung ultrasound (LUS) in patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is quickly accumulating, but its use for risk stratification and outcome prediction has yet to be described. We performed the first systematic and comprehensive LUS evaluation of consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection, in order to describe LUS findings and their association with clinical course and outcome.MethodsBetween 21/03/2020 and 04/05/2020, 120 consecutive patients admitted to the Tel Aviv Medical Center due to COVID-19, underwent complete LUS within 24 h of admission. A second exam was performed in case of clinical deterioration. LUS score of 0 (best)-36 (worst) was assigned to each patient. LUS findings were compared with clinical data.ResultsThe median baseline total LUS score was 15, IQR [7-20]. Baseline LUS score was 0-18 in 80 (67%) patients, and 19-36 in 40 (33%) patients. The majority had patchy pleural thickening (n = 100; 83%), or patchy subpleural consolidations (n = 93; 78%) in at least one zone. The prevalence of pleural thickening, subpleural consolidations and the total LUS score were all correlated with severity of illness on admission. Clinical deterioration was associated with increased follow-up LUS scores (p = 0.0009), mostly due to loss of aeration in anterior lung segments. The optimal cutoff point for LUS score was 18 (sensitivity = 62%, specificity = 74%). Both mortality and need for invasive mechanical ventilation were increased with baseline LUS score > 18 compared to baseline LUS score 0-18. Unadjusted hazard ratio of death for LUS score was 1.08 per point [1.02-1.16], p = 0.008; Unadjusted hazard ratio of the composite endpoint (death or need for invasive mechanical ventilation) for LUS score was 1.12 per point [1.05-1.2], p = 0.0008.ConclusionHospitalized patients with COVID-19, at all clinical grades, present with pathological LUS findings. Baseline LUS score strongly correlates with the eventual need for invasive mechanical ventilation and is a strong predictor of mortality. Routine use of LUS may guide patients' management strategies, as well as resource allocation in case of surge capacity.
| S-EPMC7454549 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7195406 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8220929 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveClinical trials evaluating pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment of COVID-19, either excluded pregnant women or included very few women. Unlike the numerous systematic reviews on prevalence, symptoms and adverse outcomes of COVID-19 in pregnancy, there are very few on the effects of treatment on maternal and neonatal outcomes in pregnancy. We undertook a systematic review of all published and unpublished studies on the effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for COVID-19 on maternal and neonatal pregnancy outcomes.Data sourcesWe performed a systematic literature search of the following databases: Medline, Embase, Cochrane database, WHO (World Health Organization) COVID-19 database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang databases from 1 December 2019 to 1 December 2020.Study eligibility criteriaStudies were only included if they involved pregnant or postnatal women who were exposed to pregnancy specific interventions like the mode of delivery and type of anaesthesia, pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions.Study appraisal and synthesis methodsWe first screened the titles and abstracts of studies and then assessed the full text of the selected studies in detail for eligibility. Data on study design, population, type of screening for COVID-19, country, hospital, country status (high or low and middle income), treatment given (mode of delivery, type of anaesthesia, type of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment was extracted. The pre-defined maternal outcomes we collected were mode of delivery (vaginal or by caesarean section), severe or critical COVID-19 (as defined by the authors), symptomatic COVID-19, maternal death, maternal hospital admission, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, ECMO and maternal pneumonia. The pre-defined neonatal outcomes we extracted were preterm birth (<37 weeks), stillbirth, neonatal death, NICU admission, neonatal COVID-19 positive, neonatal acidosis (pH < 7.0) and Apgar scores (<8 after 5 min). Study quality assessment was performed.ResultsFrom a total of 342 potential eligible studies, we included 27 studies in our systematic review, including 4943 pregnant women (appendix 3). Sixteen studies had a retrospective cohort design and 11 a prospective cohort design. There were no randomised controlled trials. There was a significant association between caesarean section and admission to ICU (OR 4.99, 95% CI 1.24 to 20.12; 4 studies, 153 women, I2 = 0%), and diagnosis of maternal COVID-19 pneumonia as defined by study authors (OR 3.09, 95% CI 1.52 to 6.28; 2 studies, 228 women, I2 = 0%). Women who had a preterm birth were more likely to have the baby via caesarean section (OR 3.03, 95% CI 1.71 to 5.36, 12 studies; 314 women, I2 = 0%). For pharmacological and non-pharmacological we provided estimates of the expected rates of outcomes in women exposed to various treatment of COVID-19. Comparative data for pregnant women, in particular for treatments proven to be effective in the general population, however, is lacking to provide clinically meaningful interpretation.ConclusionsWe found associations for pregnancy specific interventions, like mode of delivery and outcomes of the disease, but there were too few data on pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments in pregnant women with COVID-19. We report the rates of complications found in the literature. We encourage researchers to include pregnant women in their trials and report the data on pregnant women separately.
| S-EPMC8527829 | biostudies-literature