Risk Factors for Retinopathy of Prematurity in the Netherlands: A Comparison of Two Cohorts

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) remains an important cause for preventable blindness. Aside from gestational age (GA) and birth weight, risk factor assessment can be important for determination of infants at risk of (severe) ROP. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Prospective, multivariable risk-analysis study (NEDROP-2) was conducted, including all infants born in 2017 in the Netherlands considered eligible for ROP screening by pediatricians. Ophthalmologists provided data of screened infants, which were combined with risk factors from the national perinatal database (Perined). Clinical data and potential risk factors were compared to the first national ROP inventory (NEDROP-1, 2009). During the second period, more strict risk factor-based screening inclusion criteria were applied. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Of 1,287 eligible infants, 933 (72.5%) were screened for ROP and matched with the Perined data. Any ROP was found in 264 infants (28.3% of screened population, 2009: 21.9%) and severe ROP (sROP) (stage ≥3) in 41 infants (4.4%, 2009: 2.1%). The risk for any ROP is decreased with a higher GA (odds ratio [OR] 0.59 and 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54–0.66) and increased for small for GA (SGA) (1.73, 1.11–2.62), mechanical ventilation &#x3e;7 days (2.13, 1.35–3.37) and postnatal corticosteroids (2.57, 1.44–4.66). For sROP, significant factors were GA (OR 0.37 and CI 0.27–0.50), SGA (OR 5.65 and CI 2.17–14.92), postnatal corticosteroids (OR 3.81 and CI 1.72–8.40), and perforated necrotizing enterocolitis (OR 7.55 and CI 2.29–24.48). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> In the Netherlands, sROP was diagnosed more frequently since 2009. No new risk factors for ROP were determined in the present study, apart from those already included in the current screening guideline.

Pregnancy Outcomes among Hispanics Stratified by Country of Origin

Objective To compare the perinatal outcomes among U.S.-born and foreign-born Hispanics and Caucasians and ascertain if length of time in the US was associated with the rate of adverse outcomes. Study Design Retrospective cohort analysis of gravidae enrolled in our institutional perinatal database. Women delivering a non-anomalous, singleton, at 24 weeks or more and self-identified as Caucasian or Hispanic were included. Women were stratified by country of birth and ethnicity into U.S.-born Caucasian, U.S.-born Hispanic, and U.S. foreign-born Hispanic. Composite maternal (CMM) and neonatal (CNM) morbidity was assessed. Results Of 20,422 women, 21% were Caucasian, 15% were U.S.-born Hispanics, and 64% were U.S. foreign-born Hispanics. Compared to Caucasians, U.S.-born and foreign-born Hispanic were older, more likely to be a grand multiparous, obese and less likely to be married. Compared to Caucasians, foreign-born Hispanics had a 1.42-fold increased risk of CMM (95% CI 1.26–1.30). Paradoxically, the rate of CNM was 40% lower among neonates born to foreign-born Hispanics (95% CI 0.51–0.74). A significant direct relationship was noted between time in the USA and CMM but not CNM among foreign-born Hispanics. Conclusion Despite less favorable baseline characteristics, U.S. foreign-born Hispanics have 40% less CNM compared to both Caucasians and U.S.-born Hispanics.

Non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy – an eleven-year retrospective analysis

Background Diagnosis and management of non-obstetric abdominal pathologies during pregnancy are clinically challenging for both obstetricians and general surgeons. Our aim was to evaluate the outcome of pregnant patients who had undergone non-obstetric abdominal surgery. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 76 pregnant patients who had required surgery for non-obstetric abdominal pathologies during pregnancy at our department from January 2005 to December 2015. Data were collected retrospectively from medical records as well as from our institutional perinatal database. We evaluated data for clinical presentation, perioperative management, preterm labor, and maternal and fetal outcomes. Results The patients’ mean age was 29 (interquartile range IQR 25–33) years. Indications for surgery were acute appendicitis in 63%, adnexal pathology in 11%, cholecystolithiasis in 5% and other indications in 21%; surgery was performed in an elective setting in 18% and in an emergent/urgent setting in 82%. In five cases, complications, three of them oncological, called for further surgery. Ninety-seven percent of operations were conducted under general anesthesia. Median skin-to-skin time was 50 (37–80) minutes, median in-hospital stay was 4 (3.5–6) days, and 5 % required postoperative intensive care. Preterm labor occurred in 15%, miscarriage in 7% (none of them directly related to abdominal surgery). Conclusion Abdominal surgery for non-obstetric pathology during pregnancy can be performed safely, if mandatory, without increases in maternal and fetal pathology, miscarriage, and preterm birth rates.

Risk of Cesarean Delivery among Nulliparous Asian-Indian Women with Term Singleton Pregnancies

Objective Asian-Indian women are a growing population in the United States, but little data exist about their risk of cesarean delivery (CD). We characterize the odds of CD among Asian-Indian women and determine whether neonatal birth weight modifies this relationship. Study Design This is a retrospective cohort study using an administrative perinatal database from California. We identified 1,029,940 nulliparous women with live, singleton, nonanomalous deliveries between 37 and 42 completed weeks of gestation. We performed multivariable logistic regression analyses to determine if Asian-Indian women were more likely to deliver by CD, compared with white non-Hispanic women, adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical variables. We explored if birth weight was an effect modifier, testing the interaction term's significance using Wald's test, and performed multivariable logistic regressions stratified by birth weight category. Results Asian-Indian women comprised 2.0% of the cohort. Compared with white non-Hispanic women, Asian-Indian women had an adjusted odds of 1.41 (95% confidence interval: 1.36–1.46) for CD. However, we noted effect modification of birth weight on the odds of CD by race/ethnicity (p < 0.001). Among all birth weight categories exceeding 3,000 g, Asian-Indian women had higher odds of CD than white non-Hispanic women. Conclusion Asian-Indian women are at greater risk of CD than white non-Hispanic women when birthweight exceeds 3,000 g.