Background: Preterm birth is the leading cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality. The recurrence rate of spontaneous preterm birth is high, and additional preventive measures are required. Our... Show moreBackground: Preterm birth is the leading cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality. The recurrence rate of spontaneous preterm birth is high, and additional preventive measures are required. Our objective was to assess the effectiveness of low-dose aspirin compared to placebo in the prevention of preterm birth in women with a previous spontaneous preterm birth. Methods and findings: We performed a parallel multicentre, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial (the APRIL study). The study was performed in 8 tertiary and 26 secondary care hospitals in the Netherlands. We included women with a singleton pregnancy and a history of spontaneous preterm birth of a singleton between 22 and 37 weeks. Participants were randomly assigned to aspirin 80 mg daily or placebo initiated between 8 and 16 weeks of gestation and continued until 36 weeks or delivery. Randomisation was computer generated, with allocation concealment by using sequentially numbered medication containers. Participants, their healthcare providers, and researchers were blinded for treatment allocation. The primary outcome was preterm birth <37 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes included a composite of poor neonatal outcome (bronchopulmonary dysplasia, periventricular leukomalacia > grade 1, intraventricular hemorrhage > grade 2, necrotising enterocolitis > stage 1, retinopathy of prematurity, culture proven sepsis, or perinatal death). Analyses were performed by intention to treat.From May 31, 2016 to June 13, 2019, 406 women were randomised to aspirin (n = 204) or placebo (n = 202). A total of 387 women (81.1% of white ethnic origin, mean age 32.5 +/- SD 3.8) were included in the final analysis: 194 women were allocated to aspirin and 193 to placebo. Preterm birth <37 weeks occurred in 41 (21.2%) women in the aspirin group and 49 (25.4%) in the placebo group (relative risk (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 1.20, p= 0.32). In women with >80% medication adherence, preterm birth occurred in 24 (19.2%) versus 30 (24.8%) women (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.25, p = 0.29). The rate of the composite of poor neonatal outcome was 4.6% (n = 9) versus 2.6% (n = 5) (RR 1.79, 95% CI 0.61 to 5.25, p = 0.29). Among all randomised women, serious adverse events occurred in 11 out of 204 (5.4%) women allocated to aspirin and 11 out of 202 (5.4%) women allocated to placebo. None of these serious adverse events was considered to be associated with treatment allocation. The main study limitation is the underpowered sample size due to the lower than expected preterm birth rates. Conclusions: In this study, we observed that low-dose aspirin did not significantly reduce the preterm birth rate in women with a previous spontaneous preterm birth. However, a modest reduction of preterm birth with aspirin cannot be ruled out. Further research is required to determine a possible beneficial effect of low-dose aspirin for women with a previous spontaneous preterm birth. Show less
Hypertension during pregnancy and preeclampsia are associated with increased arterial thrombotic risk in later life. Whether these complications are associated with risk of venous thromboembolism ... Show moreHypertension during pregnancy and preeclampsia are associated with increased arterial thrombotic risk in later life. Whether these complications are associated with risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) on the short term after pregnancy and on the long term, that is, outside pregnancy, is largely unknown. We conducted a nationwide cohort study in women with at least 1 pregnancy and their first VTE risk by linking the Dutch perinatal registry (Perined) to anticoagulation clinics. We used Cox proportional hazard models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95% CI for VTE risk in women with hypertension during pregnancy, women with preeclampsia, compared with women with uncomplicated pregnancies (reference). A total of 1 919 918 women were followed for a median of 13.7 (interquartile range, 7.6-19.2) years for a total of 24 531 118 person-years in which 5759 first VTEs occurred; incidence rate: 2.3 (95% CI, 2.3-2.4) per 10 000 person-years. In the first pregnancy and 3-month postpartum period, VTE risk was higher in women with hypertension, HR, 2.0 (95% CI, 1.7-2.4), and highest among women with preeclampsia, HR, 7.8 (95% CI, 5.4-11.3), versus the reference group. On the long term, women with hypertension during pregnancy and preeclampsia had a higher VTE risk: HR, 1.5 (95% CI, 1.4-1.6) and HR, 2.1 (95% CI, 1.8-2.4), respectively, versus the reference group. When excluding events during pregnancy and postpartum, these HRs were 1.4 (95% CI, 1.3-1.5) and 1.6 (95% CI, 1.4-2.0), respectively. In conclusion, hypertension during pregnancy and preeclampsia are associated with an increased VTE risk during pregnancy and postpartum period and in the 13 years after. Show less
BackgroundPreeclampsia is a female-specific risk factor for the development of future cardiovascular disease. Whether early preventive cardiovascular disease risk screenings combined with risk... Show moreBackgroundPreeclampsia is a female-specific risk factor for the development of future cardiovascular disease. Whether early preventive cardiovascular disease risk screenings combined with risk-based lifestyle interventions in women with previous preeclampsia are beneficial and cost-effective is unknown.MethodsA micro-simulation model was developed to assess the life-long impact of preventive cardiovascular screening strategies initiated after women experienced preeclampsia during pregnancy. Screening was started at the age of 30 or 40 years and repeated every five years. Data (initial and follow-up) from women with a history of preeclampsia was used to calculate 10-year cardiovascular disease risk estimates according to Framingham Risk Score. An absolute risk threshold of 2% was evaluated for treatment selection, i.e. lifestyle interventions (e.g. increasing physical activity). Screening benefits were assessed in terms of costs and quality-adjusted-life-years, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios compared with no screening.ResultsExpected health outcomes for no screening are 27.35 quality-adjusted-life-years and increase to 27.43 quality-adjusted-life-years (screening at 30 years with 2% threshold). The expected costs for no screening are euro9426 and around euro13,881 for screening at 30 years (for a 2% threshold). Preventive screening at 40 years with a 2% threshold has the most favourable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, i.e. euro34,996/quality-adjusted-life-year, compared with other screening scenarios and no screening.ConclusionsEarly cardiovascular disease risk screening followed by risk-based lifestyle interventions may lead to small long-term health benefits in women with a history of preeclampsia. However, the cost-effectiveness of a lifelong cardiovascular prevention programme starting early after preeclampsia with risk-based lifestyle advice alone is relatively unfavourable. A combination of risk-based lifestyle advice plus medical therapy may be more beneficial. Show less
IMPORTANCE Early plasma transfusion for women with severe postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is recommended to prevent coagulopathy. However, there is no comparative, quantitative evidence on the... Show moreIMPORTANCE Early plasma transfusion for women with severe postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is recommended to prevent coagulopathy. However, there is no comparative, quantitative evidence on the association of early plasma transfusion with maternal outcomes.OBJECTIVE To compare the incidence of adverse maternal outcomes among women who received plasma during the first 60 minutes of persistent PPH vs women who did not receive plasma for similarly severe persistent PPH.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This multicenter cohort study used a consecutive sample of women with persistent PPH, defined as PPH refractory to first-line measures to control bleeding, between January 1, 2011, and January 1, 2013. Time-dependent propensity score matching was used to select women who received plasma during the first 60 minutes of persistent PPH and match each of them with a woman who had shown the same severity and received the same treatment of PPH but who had not received plasma at the moment of matching. Transfusions were not guided by coagulation tests. Statistical analysis was performed from June 2018 to June 2019.EXPOSURES Transfusion of plasma during the first 60 minutes of persistent PPH vs no or later plasma transfusion.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Incidence of adverse maternal outcomes, defined as a composite of death, hysterectomy, or arterial embolization.RESULTS This study included 1216 women (mean [SD] age, 31.6 [5.0] years) with persistent PPH, of whom 932 (76.6%) delivered vaginally and 780 (64.1%) had PPH caused by uterine atony. Seven women (0.6%) died because of PPH, 62 women (5.1%) had a hysterectomy, and 159 women (13.1%) had arterial embolizations. Among women who received plasma during the first 60 minutes of persistent PPH, 114 women could be matched with a comparable woman who had not received plasma at the moment of matching. The incidence of adverse maternal outcomes was similar between the women, with adverse outcomes recorded in 24 women (21.2%) who received early plasma transfusion and 23 women (19.9%) who did not receive early plasma transfusion (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.57-2.09). Results of sensitivity analyses were comparable to the primary results.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this cohort study, initiation of plasma transfusion during the first 60 minutes of persistent PPH was not associated with adverse maternal outcomes compared with no or later plasma transfusion, independent of severity of PPH. Show less
Henriquez, D.D.C.A.; Gillissen, A.; Smith, S.M.; Cramer, R.A.; Akker, T. van den; Zwart, J.J.; ... ; TeMpOH-1 Study Grp 2019
Background The absence of a uniform and clinically relevant definition of severe postpartum haemorrhage hampers comparative studies and optimization of clinical management. The concept of... Show moreBackground The absence of a uniform and clinically relevant definition of severe postpartum haemorrhage hampers comparative studies and optimization of clinical management. The concept of persistent postpartum haemorrhage, based on refractoriness to initial first-line treatment, was proposed as an alternative to common definitions that are either based on estimations of blood loss or transfused units of packed red blood cells (RBC). We compared characteristics and outcomes of women with severe postpartum haemorrhage captured by these three types of definitions. Methods In this large retrospective cohort study in 61 hospitals in the Netherlands we included 1391 consecutive women with postpartum haemorrhage who received either >= 4 units of RBC or a multicomponent transfusion. Clinical characteristics and outcomes of women with severe postpartum haemorrhage defined as persistent postpartum haemorrhage were compared to definitions based on estimated blood loss or transfused units of RBC within 24 h following birth. Adverse maternal outcome was a composite of maternal mortality, hysterectomy, arterial embolisation and intensive care unit admission. Results One thousand two hundred sixty out of 1391 women (90.6%) with postpartum haemorrhage fulfilled the definition of persistent postpartum haemorrhage. The majority, 820/1260 (65.1%), fulfilled this definition within 1 h following birth, compared to 819/1391 (58.7%) applying the definition of >= 1 L blood loss and 37/845 (4.4%) applying the definition of >= 4 units of RBC. The definition persistent postpartum haemorrhage captured 430/471 adverse maternal outcomes (91.3%), compared to 471/471 (100%) for >= 1 L blood loss and 383/471 (81.3%) for >= 4 units of RBC. Persistent postpartum haemorrhage did not capture all adverse outcomes because of missing data on timing of initial, first-line treatment. Conclusion The definition persistent postpartum haemorrhage identified women with severe postpartum haemorrhage at an early stage of haemorrhage, unlike definitions based on blood transfusion. It also captured a large majority of adverse maternal outcomes, almost as large as the definition of >= 1 L blood loss, which is commonly applied as a definition of postpartum haemorrhage rather than severe haemorrhage. Show less
Objectives Compare the predictive performance of Framingham Risk Score (FRS), Pooled Cohort Equations (PCEs) and Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) model between women with and without a... Show moreObjectives Compare the predictive performance of Framingham Risk Score (FRS), Pooled Cohort Equations (PCEs) and Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) model between women with and without a history of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (hHDP) and determine the effects of recalibration and refitting on predictive performance. Methods We included 29 751 women, 6302 with hHDP and 17 369 without. We assessed whether models accurately predicted observed 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk (calibration) and whether they accurately distinguished between women developing CVD during follow-up and not (discrimination), separately for women with and without hHDP. We also recalibrated (updating intercept and slope) and refitted (recalculating coefficients) the models. Results Original FRS and PCEs overpredicted 10-year CVD risks, with expected:observed (E:O) ratios ranging from 1.51 (for FRS in women with hHDP) to 2.29 (for PCEs in women without hHDP), while E:O ratios were close to 1 for SCORE. Overprediction attenuated slightly after recalibration for FRS and PCEs in both hHDP groups. Discrimination was reasonable for all models, with C-statistics ranging from 0.70-0.81 (women with hHDP) and 0.72-0.74 (women without hHDP). C-statistics improved slightly after refitting 0.71-0.83 (with hHDP) and 0.73-0.80 (without hHDP). The E:O ratio of the original PCE model was statistically significantly better in women with hHDP compared with women without hHDP. Conclusions SCORE performed best in terms of both calibration and discrimination, while FRS and PCEs overpredicted risk in women with and without hHDP, but improved after recalibrating and refitting the models. No separate model for women with hHDP seems necessary, despite their higher baseline risk. Show less
AimTo provide a comprehensive overview of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction models for women and models that include female-specific predictors.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of... Show moreAimTo provide a comprehensive overview of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction models for women and models that include female-specific predictors.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of CVD risk prediction models for women in the general population by updating a previous review. We searched Medline and Embase up to July 2017 and included studies in which; (a) a new model was developed, (b) an existing model was validated, or (c) a predictor was added to an existing model.ResultsA total of 285 prediction models for women have been developed, of these 160 (56%) were female-specific models, in which a separate model was developed solely in women and 125 (44%) were sex-predictor models. Out of the 160 female-specific models, 2 (1.3%) included one or more female-specific predictors (mostly reproductive risk factors). A total of 591 validations of sex-predictor or female-specific models were identified in 206 papers. Of these, 333 (56%) validations concerned nine models (five versions of Framingham, SCORE, Pooled Cohort Equations and QRISK). The median and pooled C statistics were comparable for sex-predictor and female-specific models. In 260 articles the added value of new predictors to an existing model was described, however in only 3 of these female-specific that no competing interests exist. predictors (reproductive risk factors) were added.ConclusionsThere is an abundance of models for women in the general population. Female-specific and sex-predictor models have similar predictors and performance. Female-specific predictors are rarely included. Further research is needed to assess the added value of female-specific predictors to CVD models for women and provide physicians with a well-performing prediction model for women. Show less
