Mode of delivery and neonatal outcomes with early preterm severe preeclampsia: does fetal growth restriction matter?

OBJECTIVE

Severe preeclampsia diagnosed at or prior to 34 weeks is an indication for preterm delivery. Many patients with severe preeclampsia develop fetal growth restriction as a result of the placental dysfunction associated with both conditions. The ideal mode of delivery in cases of preterm severe preeclampsia with fetal growth restriction remains controversial, with providers often proceeding directly to cesarean delivery rather than attempting a trial of labor due to theoretic concerns about the harms of labor in the face of placental dysfunction. There are limited data supporting this approach. This study evaluates whether the presence of fetal growth restriction affects the ultimate mode of delivery or neonatal outcomes among pregnancies with severe preeclampsia undergoing induction of labor at or before 34 weeks.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of singletons with severe preeclampsia undergoing induction of labor ≤ 34 weeks at a single center between January 2015 and April 2022. The primary predictor was fetal growth restriction, defined as estimated fetal weight < 10th percentile for gestational age on ultrasound. Mode of delivery and neonatal outcomes were compared between those with and without fetal growth restriction using Fisher's exact and Kruskal-Wallis tests, and multivariate logistic regression was used to obtain adjusted odds ratios.

RESULTS

159 patients were included (N = 117 without fetal growth restriction, N = 42 with fetal growth restriction). There was no difference in vaginal delivery between the groups (70% vs 67%, p = .70). While those with fetal growth restriction had a higher incidence of respiratory distress syndrome and longer neonatal hospital stay, these differences were not statistically significant after adjusting for gestational age at delivery. There were no significant differences in other neonatal outcomes, including Apgar score, cord blood gases, intraventricular hemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis, neonatal sepsis, and neonatal demise.

CONCLUSION

For pregnancies complicated by severe preeclampsia that require delivery ≤ 34 weeks, the likelihood of successful vaginal delivery following induction of labor does not differ based on presence of fetal growth restriction. Furthermore, fetal growth restriction is not an independent risk factor for adverse neonatal outcomes in this population. Induction of labor should be considered a reasonable approach and should be routinely offered to patients with concurrent preterm severe preeclampsia and fetal growth restriction.

Prenatal Diagnosis of Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia: Does Laterality Predict Perinatal Outcomes?

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to examine laterality as a predictor of outcomes among fetuses with prenatally diagnosed congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH).

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of pregnancies with CDH evaluated at our center from 2008 to 2016 compared cases with right-sided CDH (RCDH) versus left-sided CDH (LCDH). The primary outcome was survival to discharge. Secondary outcomes included ultrasound predictors of poor prognosis (liver herniation, stomach herniation, lung area-to-head circumference ratio [LHR]), concurrent anomalies, hydrops, stillbirth, preterm birth, mode of delivery, small for gestational age, use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and length of stay. Terminations and stillbirths were excluded from analyses of neonatal outcomes.

RESULTS

In this study, 157 (83%) LCDH and 32 (17%) RCDH cases were identified. Survival to discharge was similar (64 vs. 66.4%, p = 0.49) with regard to laterality. RCDH had higher rates of liver herniation (90.6 vs. 72%, p = 0.03), hydrops fetalis (15.6 vs. 1.3%, p < 0.01), and lower LHR (0.87 vs. 0.99, p = 0.04). LCDH had higher rates of stomach herniation (69.4 vs. 12.5%, p < 0.01). Rates of other outcomes were similar in univariate analyses. Adjusting for microarray abnormalities, the odds for survival to discharge for RCDH compared with LCDH was 0.93 (0.38-2.30, p = 0.88).

CONCLUSION

Compared with LCDH, fetuses with RCDH had higher rates of adverse ultrasound predictors, but equivalent survival.

Non-Immune Hydrops Fetalis: Do Placentomegaly and Polyhydramnios Matter?

OBJECTIVES

Polyhydramnios and placentomegaly are commonly observed in nonimmune hydrops fetalis (NIHF); however, whether their ultrasonographic identification is relevant for prognosis is controversial. We evaluated outcomes of fetal or neonatal death and preterm birth (PTB) in cases of NIHF alone and in those with polyhydramnios and/or placentomegaly (P/PM).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort of singletons with NIHF evaluated between 1994 and 2013. Nonimmune hydrops fetalis was defined as 2 or more abnormal fluid collections, including ascites, pericardial effusion, pleural effusion, and skin edema. Primary outcomes were intrauterine fetal demise (IUFD) and neonatal death. Secondary outcomes were PTB (<37, < 34, and <28 weeks) and spontaneous PTB. Outcomes were compared between cases of NIHF alone and NIHF with P/PM.

RESULTS

A total of 153 cases were included; 21% (32 of 153) had NIHF alone, and 79% (121 of 153) had NIHF with P/PM. There was no significant difference in neonatal death (38.1% versus 43.0%; P = .809) between the groups. Intrauterine fetal demise was seen more frequently in NIHF alone (34.4% versus 17.4%; P = .049). Nonimmune hydrops fetalis-with-P/PM cases were more likely to deliver before 37 weeks (80.0% versus 57.1%; P = .045) and before 34 weeks (60.0% versus 28.6%; P = .015) and to have spontaneous PTB (64.4% versus 33.3%; P = .042). Adjusted odds ratios accounting for the etiology of NIHF supported these findings, with the exception of IUFD.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to NIHF alone, pregnancies with NIHF and P/PM had a lower risk of IUFD and were at increased risk of PTB (<37 and <34 weeks) and spontaneous PTB. This information may help providers in counseling patients with NIHF and supports the need for close antenatal surveillance.

Perinatal Neuroprotection for Extremely Preterm Infants

The preterm brain is vulnerable to injury through multiple mechanisms, from direct cerebral injury through ischemia and hemorrhage, indirect injury through inflammatory processes, and aberrations in growth and development. While prevention of preterm birth is the best neuroprotective strategy, this is not always possible. This article will review various obstetric and neonatal practices that have been shown to confer a neuroprotective effect on the developing brain.