American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm最新文献

{"title":"Reply to the letter regarding “systematic review on music interventions during pregnancy in favor of the well-being of mothers and eventually their offspring”","authors":"Johanna Maul MD, Birgit Arabin MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101588","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101588","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 3","pages":"Article 101588"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142932878","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":"Effect of single vs double-blind peer review: a difference-in-difference analysis","authors":"Rula Atwani MD, Carole Barake MD, Misooja Lee MD, George Saade MD, Hugh Taylor MD, Jim C. Huang PhD, Tetsuya Kawakita MD, MS","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101582","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101582","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 3","pages":"Article 101582"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142824645","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":"Vaginal progesterone for prevention of preterm birth in women with a history of preterm birth regardless of cervical length: an argument for use","authors":"Charlette E. Williams MD,&nbsp;Rupsa C. Boelig MD, MS","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101565","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101565","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>It is well understood that preterm birth accounts for a substantial amount of poor neonatal outcomes. In 2022, preterm birth affected about 1 of every 10 infants born in the United States with complications ranging from mild respiratory distress syndrome to neonatal death. The complexity of the treatment is secondary to the fact that preterm birth is a multifactorial syndrome with intricate sociocultural factors that influence our racially disproportionate poor outcomes. One of the key risk factors for preterm birth is a history of spontaneous preterm birth. Currently, there are conflicting recommendations regarding the use of vaginal progesterone prophylactically for the prevention of recurrent preterm birth. As described in Practice Bulletin number 234 of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the current recommendation is that patients with a singleton pregnancy and previous spontaneous preterm birth should be assessed with serial endovaginal ultrasound cervical length measurements to determine eligibility for vaginal progesterone. In contrast, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine suggests the use of prophylactic vaginal progesterone with patient-centered counseling and shared decision-making. We aimed to present the rationale for the use of prophylactic vaginal progesterone in patients with singleton gestations and a history of spontaneous preterm birth.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 1","pages":"Article 101565"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142755436","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":"Postpartum care receipt among parents of preterm infants admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit","authors":"Kristan Scott MD,&nbsp;Rachel F. Ledyard MPH,&nbsp;Niesha Darden,&nbsp;Celeste Durnwald MD,&nbsp;Sara C. Handley MD, MSCE,&nbsp;Timothy D. Nelin MD,&nbsp;Maggie Power CNM, MSN,&nbsp;Taneisha R. Sinclair MD,&nbsp;Heather H. Burris MD, MPH","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101659","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101659","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 5","pages":"Article 101659"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143543628","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":"Aspirin dosage for preeclampsia prophylaxis: an argument for 81-mg dosing","authors":"Kimen S. Balhotra MD,&nbsp;Baha M. Sibai MD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101568","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101568","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Research conducted over the past few decades has shown that low-dose aspirin can effectively reduce the risk of developing preeclampsia. Consequently, numerous prominent organizations have adopted the recommendation to use low-dose aspirin during pregnancy to prevent preeclampsia. However, the optimal dosage of low-dose aspirin (81mg versus 162mg) remains a subject of debate. Currently, there is insufficient high-quality data to justify the use of a higher dosage of low-dose aspirin. In this review, we review the existing evidence that supports the continued use of 81mg of aspirin over a higher dose and emphasize the need for high-quality research to alter current recommendations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 1","pages":"Article 101568"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142717308","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":"Aspirin dosage for preeclampsia prophylaxis: an argument for 162-mg dosing","authors":"Maura E. Jones Pullins MD,&nbsp;Kim A. Boggess MD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101620","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101620","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The optimal aspirin dose for preeclampsia prevention remains controversial, with international guidelines lacking consensus on the most effective regimen. Aspirin is a proven intervention for reducing the risk of preeclampsia, particularly when initiated early in pregnancy. Its benefits stem from the selective inhibition of cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1), reducing thromboxane A2 synthesis while preserving prostacyclin production, thereby restoring the vascular balance essential for placental health. A dose-response relationship has been established, with doses ≥100 mg showing significantly greater efficacy than lower doses. Furthermore, aspirin's pharmacological effects remain highly specific to COX-1 at the 162 mg dose, minimizing concerns about broader prostaglandin inhibition.</div><div>Emerging evidence suggests that certain patient factors, such as altered pharmacokinetics during pregnancy or obesity, may reduce aspirin's effectiveness at lower doses (e.g., 81 mg). In these studies, aspirin resistance was successfully overcome with a 162 mg dose. While concerns regarding safety at this dose have been raised, contemporary randomized controlled trials utilizing a 150 mg dose have shown no increase in adverse effects compared to placebo. As such, current evidence increasingly supports 162 mg as the optimal dose for preeclampsia prevention, offering greater effectiveness than the commonly used 81 mg dose, without significant evidence of increased risk.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 1","pages":"Article 101620"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143399980","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 “systematic review on music interventions during pregnancy in favor of the well-being of mothers and eventually their offspring”","authors":"Qingyong Zheng MD,&nbsp;Yongjia Zhou MD,&nbsp;Jianguo Xu MD,&nbsp;Jinhui Tian MD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101587","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101587","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 3","pages":"Article 101587"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142932835","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":"Inpatient pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in the antepartum period: an argument for risk-based thromboprophylaxis","authors":"Jerome J. Federspiel MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101567","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101567","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a significant cause of maternal morbidity and mortality in the United States. People hospitalized during pregnancy for reasons other than routine birth (ie, during antepartum admissions) are at increased risk of VTE compared with nonhospitalized obstetric patients, but there is no consensus regarding which patients should receive thromboprophylaxis during antepartum hospitalizations as the absolute event rates are low and anticoagulation can complicate antepartum management. We argue that an approach informed by individualized patient risk assessment is likely to produce the greatest net benefit for patients. Such an approach would avoid the pitfalls of universal pharmacologic prophylaxis (potential to interfere with unplanned delivery or receipt of neuraxial anesthesia) among patients for whom the absolute risk of VTE is low. In contrast, approaches that withhold pharmacologic prophylaxis from all antepartum patients likely place some at significant risk of VTE. We outline the arguments against universal pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis and against universal avoidance of pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis and discuss a risk-based approach proposed at our institution. Finally, we outline a research agenda for identification of optimal antepartum anticoagulation strategies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 1","pages":"Article 101567"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142717313","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":"Management of cervical cerclage after preterm premature rupture of membranes: an argument for removal","authors":"Fabrizio Zullo MD,&nbsp;Daniele Di Mascio MD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101570","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101570","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Cervical cerclage is a widely used intervention to prevent preterm birth in high-risk pregnancies. However, cerclage is associate with risks, including preterm premature rupture of membranes and subsequent complications, such as chorioamnionitis. Our review evaluates the evidence for immediate removal (ie, removal at the time of diagnosis) vs retention of cervical cerclage (ie, removal when clinically indicated) after preterm premature rupture of membranes, focusing on optimizing neonatal outcomes and minimizing maternal and fetal complications. A meta-analysis on the topic that included 169 patients in the “removal” group and 208 in the “retention” group showed that the rates of pregnancy prolongation &gt;48 hours and &gt;7 days were significantly lower in the group who underwent immediate removal of cerclage than in the group who had delayed removal of cerclage (pregnancy prolongation &gt;48 hours: 47% vs 85%, respectively; odds ratio, 0.15; pregnancy prolongation &gt;7 days: 33% vs 57%, respectively; odds ratio, 0.30). In addition, pregnancy latency was significantly lower, despite the absolute mean difference being only 2.84 days. However, the rates of chorioamnionitis and Apgar score &lt;7 at 5 minutes were significantly lower in the immediate removal group than in the retention group (chorioamnionitis: 29% vs 41%, respectively; odds ratio, 0.57; Apgar score &lt;7 at 5 minutes: 16% vs 43%, respectively; odds ratio, 0.22). A proposed balanced approach involves retaining the cerclage for approximately 24 hours after premature rupture of membranes (PROM) to permit steroid administration (initial dose followed by a second dose after 24 hours) before removal. This strategy aims to maximize steroid benefits while minimizing the risks of prolonged cerclage retention, potentially achieving a correct timing that optimizes neonatal outcomes without significantly increasing complications This management approach could be beneficial in situations where immediate removal may preclude full steroid benefits. Our recommendations support a protocol balancing appropriate timing for steroid administration with the risks of extended cerclage retention, namely, chorioamnionitis, unless further randomized controlled trials will show the proper evidence-based management in this clinical scenario.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 1","pages":"Article 101570"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142717315","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Preterm premature rupture of membranes in the late preterm period: an argument against expectant management","authors":"Ghamar Bitar MD,&nbsp;Baha M. Sibai MD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101619","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101619","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Preterm premature rupture of membranes is defined as the leakage of amniotic fluid through the cervical os before 37 weeks of gestation and before the onset of labor and complicates nearly 3% of deliveries and 30% of indicated late preterm deliveries. The current management of preterm premature rupture of membranes, which occurs between 34 and 36 weeks of gestation, has pivoted from recommending delivery to recommending either delivery or expectant management because of a large trial that evaluated these management strategies. The potential neonatal benefits of expectant management, reducing complications of prematurity, must be weighed with the maternal risks (and, therefore, attached neonatal risks) of prolonging the gestation under close surveillance. Proceeding towards delivery is recommended for preterm premature rupture of membranes occurring at or later than 34 weeks gestation, given the higher risk of maternal complications, specifically hemorrhage and infection, with expectant management. Furthermore, limited evidence exists to prove the increased risks of adverse neonatal outcomes, including sepsis or composite neonatal morbidity, with immediate delivery compared with expectant management.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 1","pages":"Article 101619"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143477149","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}