American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm最新文献

{"title":"Comparison of fetal abdominal circumference references for the prediction of small for gestational age","authors":"Katherine Pressman MD, Rebecca Nunge MD, Madeline Erwich BS, Gustavo Vilchez Lagos MD, PhD, Anthony O. Odibo MD MSCE, Jose R. Duncan MD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101737","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101737","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 9","pages":"Article 101737"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144561405","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Effectiveness of self-care interventions for the prevention of type 2 diabetes among women with previous gestational diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Sho Katsuragawa MD, MPH ,&nbsp;Thuy Mai MPH ,&nbsp;Annie R.A. McDougall PhD ,&nbsp;Lorena Romero MBIT ,&nbsp;Joshua P. Vogel PhD ,&nbsp;Maureen Makama PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101731","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101731","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Gestational diabetes (GDM) is associated with an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes later in life. Self-care interventions are known to prevent type 2 diabetes in high-risk populations. This systematic review aimed to investigate whether self-care interventions can prevent type 2 diabetes among women with previous GDM.</div></div><div><h3>Data sources</h3><div>A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and PsycINFO was conducted on December 2, 2024.</div></div><div><h3>Study eligibility criteria</h3><div>Randomised, cluster-randomised, and non-randomised controlled trials that compared the effects of self-care interventions with standard/usual care or no intervention for preventing type 2 diabetes among women with previous GDM were included. The primary outcomes were the incidence of type 2 diabetes, the composite incidence of any type of diabetes, glycated hemoglobin, fasting blood glucose, blood glucose level 2 hours after the oral glucose tolerance test, and body weight.</div></div><div><h3>Study appraisal and synthesis methods</h3><div>Risk of bias for included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (ROB2) or the Risk of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tool (ROBINS-I). Random effects models were employed for meta-analyses. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The search identified 35 trials including 6624 women. Only one randomised trial (<em>n</em>=1601) reported the incidence of type 2 diabetes, indicating that the lifestyle intervention focusing on diet and physical activity may have little to no effect (hazard ratio 0.89 [95% confidence interval 0.65–1.22], low certainty of evidence). The effects of self-care interventions on the other primary outcomes—composite incidence of any type of diabetes (three trials), glycated hemoglobin (three trials), fasting blood glucose (11 trials), blood glucose level 2 hours after the oral glucose tolerance test (six trials), and body weight (18 trials) were uncertain (very low certainty of evidence). Downgrading of the certainty of evidence was predominantly due to high risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Available evidence on the effect of self-care interventions for the prevention of type 2 diabetes among women with previous GDM is insufficient to draw strong conclusions, necessitating further research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 9","pages":"Article 101731"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144561406","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Letter to editor regarding Acupuncture before planned admission for induction of labor (ACUPUNT study): a randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Han Zhang, Yang Yu, Yi-Jie Hu","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101733","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101733","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":" ","pages":"101733"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144561407","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Letter to the Editor Re: \"Results of Cardiovascular Testing among Pregnant and Postpartum Persons Undergoing Standardized Cardiovascular Risk Assessment\".","authors":"Hadia Kashif, Iftikhar Khan, Abdullah Qureshi, Amna Binte Naeem","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101735","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101735","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":" ","pages":"101735"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144555215","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Response to Letter to the Editor: standardized cardiovascular risk assessment in pregnancy and postpartum.","authors":"Afshan B Hameed, Maryam Tarsa, Ashten Waks","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101736","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101736","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":" ","pages":"101736"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144530055","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"LETTER TO THE EDITOR regarding 'Nonsevere hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and oral antihypertensive medications: an argument against use'.","authors":"Laura A Magee, Peter von Dadelszen","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101702","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101702","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":" ","pages":"101702"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144530054","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Antenatal corticosteroid administration among infants born at 22 weeks’ gestation after a practice advisory endorsing its consideration","authors":"Caroline Fryar MD, MPH ,&nbsp;Tingting Liu BS ,&nbsp;Neill Bates MPH ,&nbsp;Dmitry Tumin PhD ,&nbsp;Kelly Bear DO ,&nbsp;Rachel Taylor MD ,&nbsp;James L. Whiteside MD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101728","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101728","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;BACKGROUND&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;div&gt;In response to an accumulation of evidence supporting antenatal steroid administration at 22 weeks of gestation with planned neonatal resuscitation, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, alongside the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, published a clinical practice advisory recommending consideration of antenatal steroids at 22 weeks of gestation in September 2021.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;OBJECTIVE&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;div&gt;This study aimed to determine whether the 2021 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists practice advisory was associated with an increase in the use of antenatal corticosteroids among infants born at 22 weeks of gestation.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;STUDY DESIGN&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;div&gt;This retrospective, secondary analysis used data from the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Vital Statistics System from 2017 to 2023. The primary outcome was antenatal steroid use as recorded on the birth certificate, and our main exposure was the birth year that was dichotomized as after (2022–2023) vs before (2017–2020) practice guideline implementation. The chi-square and rank-sum tests were used to compare gestational age before and after the implementation of the guideline, respectively. A multivariate regression using a difference-in-difference specification model was used to determine antenatal steroid use among births at 22 and 24 to 25 weeks of gestation, and a separate multivariate model was included using live births at 23 weeks of gestation for sensitivity analysis.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;RESULTS&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;div&gt;After applying our exclusion criteria, a total of 11,203 live births in the United States at 22 to 25 weeks of gestation between 2017–2020 and 2022–2023 were available for analysis. Our bivariate analysis indicated an increased use of antenatal steroids in live births at 22 weeks of gestation from 48% (178/368) before to 61% (216/356) after the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guideline implementation (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=.001). However, steroid administration did not change at 23 weeks of gestation (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=.385), with only a slight increase from 63% to 66% at 24 to 25 weeks of gestation (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=.033) in our bivariate analysis. Our multivariate analysis found similar patterns, with 65% higher odds of steroid use in births at 22 weeks of gestation (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=.001), with no significant change in births at 24 to 25 weeks of gestation (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=.061). Similar results were found in our sensitivity analysis of births at 22 weeks of gestation (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=.001), but no significant association was identified for births at 23 weeks of gestation (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=.710).&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;CONCLUSION&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;div&gt;The recommendation by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists to consider antenatal corticosteroid administration in preterm deliveries at 22 weeks of gestation has led to an increase in this clinical practice. This significant association highlights the valu","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 9","pages":"Article 101728"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144486347","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Guidelines on cerclage placement: a comparative systematic review.","authors":"Aya Mudrik, Romi Levy, Alessandro Petrecca, Moti Gulersen, Suneet P Chauhan, Offer Erez, Misgav Rottenstreich","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101727","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101727","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Variability among professional society guidelines for cervical and abdominal cerclage may lead to inconsistent clinical practice and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to systematically identify, summarize, and compare professional medical-society guidelines on cervical and abdominal cerclage.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Guidelines were independently screened and selected by 2 reviewers. Quality was assessed using the AGREE II instrument. Data were extracted into a standardized form and synthesized narratively, focusing on comparing recommendations regarding indications, contraindications, timing, technique, and perioperative management of cerclage placement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty guidelines from ten professional societies were included. Consensus existed on several key indications, including history-indicated cerclage for ≥3 second-trimester losses, ultrasound-indicated cerclage for cervical lengths under 10 mm, and abdominal cerclage in cases of prior transvaginal cerclage failure or insufficient cervical tissue. However, disagreements remain. For instance, ACOG (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) recommends considering cerclage after one loss, whereas most guidelines require 3. There is also variation regarding the timing of physical examination cerclage beyond 24 weeks, with NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) extending the window to 28 weeks. Additionally, recommendations diverge on cerclage for prolapsed membranes, with some guidelines advising against the procedure due to a high risk of failure, while others support considering it.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Guidelines agree on history-indicated cerclage for ≥3 second-trimester losses, ultrasound-indicated cerclage for cervical lengths under 10 mm, and abdominal cerclage in cases of prior transvaginal cerclage failure or insufficient cervical tissue. While agreement exists on key indications and contraindications, notable divergences remain in certain recommendations. This review emphasizes the need for congruent recommendations to enhance consistency.</p>","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":" ","pages":"101727"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144337128","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Subcutaneous tissue closure and postoperative wound complications in cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Giulia Bonanni MD ,&nbsp;Vivian Nguyen ,&nbsp;Marta Francescutti ,&nbsp;Alireza A. Shamshirsaz MD ,&nbsp;Vincenzo Berghella MD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101724","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101724","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>The benefit of subcutaneous tissue closure during cesarean delivery (CD) has been well established in pregnant individuals with a subcutaneous tissue thickness greater than 2 cm. However, its routine application in all pregnant individuals remains a contentious topic. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate and quantify the effect of subcutaneous tissue closure compared to nonclosure on postoperative wound complications in all patients undergoing CD.</div></div><div><h3>Data Sources</h3><div>We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov from their inception to October 2024 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs).</div></div><div><h3>Study Eligibility Criteria</h3><div>Eligible studies included RCTs comparing subcutaneous tissue closure vs nonclosure in patients undergoing CD. Studies were excluded if they focused solely on selected subpopulations, such as pregnant individuals with subcutaneous fat &gt;2 cm or those classified as obese. Primary outcomes were seroma formation, hematoma, surgical site infection (SSI), and wound dehiscence. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain and cosmetic results.</div></div><div><h3>Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods</h3><div>Random-effects models were used to calculate relative risks (RR) for each outcome. Heterogeneity across studies was assessed using the I² statistic.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Eight trials comprising 1854 participants (918 closure, 936 nonclosure) met inclusion criteria. There were no significant differences between groups for SSI (RR 0.95, 95% CI: [0.69–1.31]), dehiscence (RR 0.64, 95% CI: [0.21–1.98]), seroma (RR 0.87, 95% CI: [0.05–14.81]), hematoma (RR 0.54, 95% CI: [0.02–15.90]), or composite wound outcomes (RR 1.05, 95% CI: [0.80–1.38]). Study heterogeneity was low (I²&lt;45%).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Subcutaneous tissue closure during CD does not significantly reduce the risk of wound complications when applied universally. These findings do not support its routine implementation for all patients with subcutaneous thickness less than 2 cm. Further research should focus on refining patient selection criteria and evaluating other potential benefits, including long-term cosmetic outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 9","pages":"Article 101724"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144337129","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Letter to Editors: systematic review on music interventions during pregnancy in favor of the well-being of mothers and eventually their offspring.","authors":"Can Ata, Benil Nesli Ata","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101726","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101726","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":" ","pages":"101726"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144303107","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}