Liquid-based perinatal life support (PLS) technology will probably be applied in a first-in-human study within the next decade. Research and development of PLS technology should not only address... Show moreLiquid-based perinatal life support (PLS) technology will probably be applied in a first-in-human study within the next decade. Research and development of PLS technology should not only address technical issues, but also consider socio-ethical and legal aspects, its application area, and the corresponding design implications. This paper represents the consensus opinion of a group of healthcare professionals, designers, ethicists, researchers and patient representatives, who have expertise in tertiary obstetric and neonatal care, bio-ethics, experimental perinatal animal models for physiologic research, biomedical modeling, monitoring, and design. The aim of this paper is to provide a framework for research and development of PLS technology. These requirements are considering the possible respective user perspectives, with the aim to co-create a PLS system that facilitates physiological growth and development for extremely preterm born infants. Show less
Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) are microcirculation defects following diabetes mellitus (DM). Unrecognized HFpEF is more... Show moreLeft ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) are microcirculation defects following diabetes mellitus (DM). Unrecognized HFpEF is more prevalent in women with diabetes compared to men with diabetes and therefore sex-specific diagnostic strategies are needed. Previously, we demonstrated altered plasma miRs in DM patients with microvascular injury [defined by elevated plasma Angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) levels]. This study hypothesized the presence of sex-differences in plasma miRs and Ang-2 in diabetic (female) patients with LVDD or HFpEF. After a pilot study, we assessed 16 plasma miRs in patients with LVDD (n = 122), controls (n = 244) and female diabetic patients (n = 10). Subsequently, among these miRs we selected and measured plasma miR-34a, -224 and -452 in diabetic HFpEF patients (n = 53) and controls (n = 52). In LVDD patients, miR-34a associated with Ang-2 levels (R-2 0.04, R = 0.21, p = 0.001, 95% CI 0.103-0.312), with plasma levels being diminished in patients with DM, while women with an eGFR < 60 ml/min and LVDD had lower levels of miR-34a, -224 and -452 compared to women without an eGFR < 60 ml/min without LVDD. In diabetic HFpEF women (n = 28), plasma Ang-2 levels and the X-chromosome located miR-224/452 cluster increased compared to men. We conclude that plasma miR-34a, -224 and -452 display an association with the microvascular injury marker Ang-2 and are particularly targeted to women with LVDD or HFpEF. Show less
Objective To compare the effect of induction of labour with a policy of expectant monitoring for intrauterine growth restriction near term. Design Multicentre randomised equivalence trial (the... Show moreObjective To compare the effect of induction of labour with a policy of expectant monitoring for intrauterine growth restriction near term. Design Multicentre randomised equivalence trial (the Disproportionate Intrauterine Growth Intervention Trial At Term (DIGITAT)). Setting Eight academic and 44 non-academic hospitals in the Netherlands between November 2004 and November 2008. Participants Pregnant women who had a singleton pregnancy beyond 36+0 weeks' gestation with suspected intrauterine growth restriction. Interventions Induction of labour or expectant monitoring. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was a composite measure of adverse neonatal outcome, defined as death before hospital discharge, five minute Apgar score of less than 7, umbilical artery pH of less than 7.05, or admission to the intensive care unit. Operative delivery (vaginal instrumental delivery or caesarean section) was a secondary outcome. Analysis was by intention to treat, with confidence intervals calculated for the differences in percentages or means. Results 321 pregnant women were randomly allocated to induction and 329 to expectant monitoring. Induction group infants were delivered 10 days earlier (mean difference -9.9 days, 95% CI -11.3 to -8.6) and weighed 130 g less (mean difference -130 g, 95% CI -188 g to -71 g) than babies in the expectant monitoring group. A total of 17 (5.3%) infants in the induction group experienced the composite adverse neonatal outcome, compared with 20 (61%) in the expectant monitoring group (difference -0.8%, 95% CI -4.3% to 3.2%). Caesarean sections were performed on 45 (14.0%) mothers in the induction group and 45 (13.7%) in the expectant monitoring group (difference 0.3%, 95% CI -5.0% to 5.6%). Conclusions In women with suspected intrauterine growth restriction at term, we found no important differences in adverse outcomes between induction of labour and expectant monitoring. Patients who are keen on non-intervention can safely choose expectant management with intensive maternal and fetal monitoring; however, it is rational to choose induction to prevent possible neonatal morbidity and stillbirth. Show less
