Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:SARS-CoV-2 continues to spread widely in the US and worldwide. Pregnant women are more likely to develop severe or critical illness than their non-pregnant counterparts. Known risk factors for severe and critical disease outside of pregnancy, such as asthma, diabetes, and obesity have not been well-studied in pregnancy. We aimed to determine which clinical and pregnancy-related factors were associated with severe and critical COVID illness in pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN/UNASSIGNED: < .05. Multivariable logistic regression was performed including variables that were significantly different between groups. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:< .01). After adjustment, history of smoking remained significantly predictive of severe/critical disease [aOR 3.84 (95% CI, 1.25-11.82)]. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Pregnant women with a history of smoking, asthma, or other respiratory condition, and COVID-19 diagnosis in the second trimester of pregnancy were more likely to develop severe/critical disease. These findings may be useful in counseling women on their individual risk of developing the severe or critical disease in pregnancy and may help determine which women are good candidates for vaccination during pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE:However to the best of our knowledge, empirical data to validate these projections and to look more specifically at the consequences of "lockdowns," have not yet been published. The objective of our study was to compare the birth rates in New York City and Long Island hospitals during the 9 months after the lockdown, to the birth rates during the same time frames in previous years. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:This was a multicenter, retrospective study of live births from hospitals in the New York City Maternal-Fetal Medicine Research Consortium, an ongoing collaboration at several hospitals in New York City and Long Island. This consortium captures approximately one-third of the births in New York City (eg, of the 117,013 births recorded in 2017, 42,680 [36.6%] were from this consortium). To evaluate whether the lockdown in New York City (the first in the United States) between March 2020 and June 2020 resulted in a change in the number of births after the lockdown, we calculated the total live births 9 months after the lockdown (between December 2020 and February 2021) and compared the number with the total in the same 3 months during the previous 4 years. Fourteen hospitals with a total of greater than 55,000 annualized live births were included. Time series regression was performed to test the birth trends and to determine whether any change was a part of an ongoing trend. RESULTS:Figure 1 shows the total live births in the different time frames. There were 12,099 live births that occurred between December 2020 and February 2021. This is 2994 (19.8%) less live births than the previous year. In addition, the average number of live births in the 4 years before the study period was 15,101 births. This decrease was seen in all the hospitals included in the cohort. The hospitals located within New York City (N=10) had a larger drop in birth rate in the last 2 years (-1947, 18.9%) than in the hospitals located in Long Island (N=4) (-581, 13.4%). Figure 2 represents the total live births by individual hospitals in the different time frames. Among the entire cohort, the largest drop in birth rate in the previous years was only 4.9%. In addition, there was no significant trend in the number of births in the previous years (P=.586). Furthermore, no significant trend was identified in the hospitals located in New York City or Long Island (P=.831 and P=.178, respectively). Hospitals with large numbers of Medicaid-funded births showed the same trend as hospitals with smaller numbers of such births. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The steeper decrease in live births in hospitals located in New York City than in those located in Long Island may be related to the population density and the recommended social distancing practices. The population density is higher in New York City than in Long Island (27,000 people per square mile vs 2360 people per square mile). Thus, the lockdown may have had a reduced effect on the number of live births in areas with a lower population density. In addition, most of the New York City residents outmigrated to surrounding locations including Long Island, which may have diminished the decrease in live births. Our data clearly demonstrate that there were significant changes in the number of births in the 9 months after the nation's first lockdown. Although we cannot definitively determine the contributions of migration, family choice, or other factors to those changes, these preliminary findings should provide direction to future studies. That work should consider zip codes, parities, and other factors that might exaggerate or mitigate the trends we report here.

OBJECTIVE:Vaccination presents an important strategy to mitigate illness in this population. However, there is a paucity of data on vaccination safety and pregnancy outcomes because pregnant women were excluded from the initial phase III clinical trials. Our objective was to describe the maternal, neonatal, and obstetrical outcomes of women who received a messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccination while pregnant during the first 4 months of vaccine availability. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:This was an institutional review board-approved descriptive study of pregnant women at New York University Langone Health who received at least 1 dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccination approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) from the time of the FDA Emergency Use Authorization to April 22, 2021. Eligible women were identified via search of the electronic medical record (EMR) system. Vaccine administration was ascertained via immunization records from the New York State Department of Health. Women were excluded if they were vaccinated before conception or during the postpartum period. Charts were reviewed for maternal demographics and pregnancy outcomes. Descriptive analyses were performed using the R software version 4.0.2 (The R Foundation, Boston, MA). RESULTS:We identified 424 pregnant women who received an mRNA vaccination. Of those, 348 (82.1%) received both doses and 76 (17.9%) received only 1 dose. The maternal characteristics and vaccination information are shown in Table 1. Of the included women, 4.9% had a history of a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis before vaccination. After vaccination, no patient in our cohort was diagnosed with COVID-19. In terms of the pregnancy outcomes, 9 women had spontaneous abortions, 3 terminated their pregnancies, and 327 have ongoing pregnancies. Of the women included, 85 delivered liveborn infants. There were no stillbirths in our population. Of the 9 spontaneous abortions, 8 occurred during the first trimester at a range of 6 to 13 weeks' gestation. There was 1 second trimester loss. The rate of spontaneous abortion among women vaccinated in the first trimester was 6.5%. The 327 women with ongoing pregnancies have been followed for a median of 4.6 weeks (range, 0-17 weeks) following their most recent dose. A total of 113 (34.6%) women, initiated vaccination during the first trimester, 178 (54.4%) initiated vaccination during the second trimester, and 36 (11.0%) during the third trimester. Following the vaccination, 2 fetuses (0.6%) developed intrauterine growth restriction, whereas 5 (1.5%) were diagnosed with anomalies. Outcomes for the 85 women who delivered are shown in Table 2. Of the women who delivered, 18.8% were diagnosed with a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy. The rate of preterm birth was 5.9%. One preterm delivery was medically indicated, whereas the remaining 3 were spontaneous. A total of 15.3% of neonates required admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Of the NICU admissions, 61.5% were because of hypoglycemia or an evaluation for sepsis. Other reasons for admission included prematurity, hypothermia, and transient tachypnea of the newborn. Of all the neonates, 12.2% were small for gestational age (SGA) per the World Health Organization standards. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Our rate of pregnancy-related hypertensive disorders is higher than our baseline institutional rate of 9.5%, however, this may be because of the underlying characteristics of our study population or skewing of our small sample size. Our 12.2% rate of SGA neonates is near the expected value based on the definition that 10% of neonates will be SGA at birth. The NICU admission rate is at par with our institutional rate of 12%. To date, most women in this series have had uncomplicated pregnancies and have delivered at-term. Strengths of this study include using the EMR system to identify subjects and gather data. We did not rely on self-enrollment and self-report, thereby reducing selection and recall bias. By performing manual chart reviews, we obtained detailed and reliable information about individual patients. One limitation of this study is the lack of a matched control group consisting of unvaccinated pregnant women and therefore direct conclusions could not be drawn about the relative risks of complications. In addition, our cohort is small and may not be generalizable. Finally, many women included are healthcare workers who had early access to vaccinations. As more pregnant women become eligible for the COVID-19 vaccinations, there is an urgent need to report on the maternal, neonatal, and obstetrical outcomes of COVID-19 vaccinations during pregnancy. The results of this study can be used to counsel and reassure pregnant patients facing this decision.

BACKGROUND:In March 2020, as community spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) became increasingly prevalent, pregnant women appeared to be equally susceptible to developing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). While the disease course usually appears mild, severe and critical COVID-19 appears to lead to significant morbidity including ICU admission with prolonged hospital stay, intubation, mechanical ventilation and even death. Although there are recent reports regarding the impact of COVID-19 on pregnancy, information regarding the severity of COVID-19 in pregnant versus non-pregnant women remains unknown. OBJECTIVE:We aim to describe the outcomes of severe and critical COVID-19 infection in pregnant versus non-pregnant reproductive aged women. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:This is a multi-center retrospective case-control study of women with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection hospitalized with severe or critical COVID-19 in four academic medical centers in NYC and one in Philadelphia between March 12 and May 5, 2020. The cases consist of pregnant women admitted specifically for severe or critical COVID-19 and not for obstetric indication. The controls consist of reproductive aged, non-pregnant women admitted for severe or critical COVID-19. The primary outcome is a composite morbidity including: death, need for intubation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), non-invasive positive pressure ventilation or need for high flow nasal cannula oxygen supplementation. Secondary outcomes include ICU admission, length of stay, need for discharge to long term acute care facility and discharge with home oxygen requirement. RESULTS:Thirty-eight pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) confirmed infection were admitted to five institutions specifically for COVID-19, 29 (76.3%) meeting criteria for severe disease and 9 (23.7%) meeting criteria for critical disease. The mean age and BMI were significantly higher in the non-pregnant control group. The non-pregnant cohort was also noted to have increased frequency of pre-existing medical comorbidities, including diabetes, hypertension and coronary artery disease. Pregnant women were more likely to experience the primary outcome when compared to the non-pregnant control group (34.2% vs. 14.9%, p=0.03, adjusted OR 4.6 [95% CI 1.2-18.2]). Pregnant patients experienced higher rates of ICU admission (39.5% vs. 17.0%, p<0.01, adjusted OR 5.2 [95% CI 1.5-17.5]). Among pregnant women that underwent delivery, 72.7% occurred via cesarean delivery and mean gestational age at delivery was 33.8 ±5.5 weeks in patients with severe disease and 35 ±3.5 weeks in patients with critical COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS:Pregnant women with severe and/or critical COVID-19 are at increased risk for certain morbidities when compared to non-pregnant controls. Despite the higher comorbidities of diabetes and hypertension in the non-pregnant controls, the pregnant cases were at increased risk for composite morbidity, intubation, mechanical ventilation and ICU admission. These findings suggest that pregnancy may be associated with a worse outcome in women with severe and critical COVID-19. Our study suggests that similar to other viral infections such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, pregnant women may be at risk for greater morbidity and disease severity.

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in New York City, telehealth was rapidly implemented for obstetric patients. Though telehealth for prenatal care is safe and effective, significant concerns exist regarding equity in access among low-income populations. We performed a retrospective cohort study evaluating utilization of telehealth for prenatal care in a large academic practice in New York City, comparing women with public and private insurance. We found that patients with public insurance were less likely to have at least one telehealth visit than women with private insurance (60.9 vs. 87.3%, p < 0.001). After stratifying by borough, this difference remained significant in Brooklyn, one of the boroughs hardest hit by the pandemic. As COVID-19 continues to spread around the country, obstetric providers must work to ensure that all patients, particularly those with public insurance, have equal access to telehealth. KEY POINTS: · Telehealth for prenatal care is frequently utilized during the COVID-19 pandemic.. · Significant concerns exist regarding equity in access among lower-income populations.. · Women with public insurance in New York City were less likely to access telehealth for prenatal care..

OBJECTIVE:In October 2018, a measles (rubeola) outbreak was identified in New York City (NYC) & Rockland County (RC) and a public health campaign and hospital policy changes were made to increase awareness of the importance of vaccination and increase vaccination rates. We describe the prevalence of rubeola immunity in pregnant women and the change in uptake of postpartum MMR vaccination before and during the measles outbreak. METHODS:A multi-pronged intervention was developed by the health system with the intent of raising awareness of the outbreak, identifying patients at risk of contracting measles during pregnancy, and limiting exposure of inpatients to the disease. This was a quality improvement study to assess the impact of the intervention and public health policy on the rates of documentation of rubeola immunity and rubeola vaccination rates in non-immune women. Women who delivered at NYU Langone Health prior to the outbreak (7/1/2016 to 7/1/2017) were compared to women who delivered during the outbreak (7/1/18 to 7/1/19). The primary outcome was acceptance of MMR vaccination in non-immune women during the postpartum period. Analysis was conducted using logistic regression and chi-square tests, and alpha was set at 0.05. RESULTS:19585 patients were analyzed. 9,162 women delivered prior to outbreak and 10,423 delivered during the outbreak. Of these, 2589 (13.2%) were documented as living in a high-risk ZIP code, which were areas at the epicenter of the measles outbreak. 14,731 women (75.2%) were tested for rubeola immunity and 3270 (22.2%) of those tested were not immune. In the year of the outbreak, a higher proportion of women had rubeola immunity documented with serum titers than in the year prior to the outbreak (81% vs. 69%, p<0.001). Inpatient compliance with postpartum MMR administration was greater during the outbreak than prior to it (76% vs 59%, p <.001) for patients from both low risk and high-risk ZIP codes. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The NYC & RC measles outbreak, together with implementation of a health system wide education program and a change in public health policy led to an increase in the proportion of pregnant women being screened for rubeola immunity. It also led to an increase in uptake of the immediate postpartum MMR vaccine.

BACKGROUND:There is a growing body of evidence that sonographic signs of placenta accreta spectrum can be observed in the first trimester of pregnancy. The most significant marker is placental location next to or in the scar niche in women with a prior cesarean delivery. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to assess the performance of transvaginal ultrasound in the early prediction of placenta accreta spectrum in women with a prior cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort of women with a history of cesarean delivery who had transvaginal ultrasound at 11 to 14 weeks' gestation between September 2016 and May 2018. Ultrasound reports were reviewed and graded for suspicion of placenta accreta spectrum as follows: Grade 0 (no suspicion) if the placenta is not next to the scar; Grade 1 (intermediate suspicion) if the placenta is next or on the scar; Grade 2 (high suspicion) if the placenta was inside the scar niche. In addition, all images were reviewed and graded by trained specialists blinded to the outcome. The primary outcome was a histologic diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of first-trimester transvaginal ultrasound to detect placenta accreta spectrum were assessed. RESULTS:In this study, 467 patients were included, and 8 (1.7%) had placenta accreta spectrum at delivery. Using the original report, 442 patients (94.6%) were Grade 0, 20 (4.3%) Grade 1, and 5 (1.1%) Grade 2. The revised grading had 456 patients (97.6%) with Grade 0, 5 (1.1%) with Grade 1, and 6 (1.3%) with Grade 2. Patients with Grade 2 yielded a sensitivity of 62.5% (95% confidence interval, 24.5-91.5), specificity of 100% (95% confidence interval, 99.2-100.0), positive predictive value of 100% (95% confidence interval, 97.0-100.0), and negative predictive value of 99.4% (95% confidence interval, 98.4-99.7). Any sonographic suspicion of placenta accreta spectrum (Grade 1 or Grade 2) had a sensitivity of 75% (95% confidence interval, 34.9-96.8), specificity of 95.9% (95% confidence interval, 93.6-97.5), positive predictive value of 24% (95% confidence interval, 14.8-36.4), and negative predictive value of 99.6% (95% confidence interval, 98.5-99.9). The blinded image review yielded a better specificity (99.1% vs 95.9%; P=.001) and a positive predictive value (63.6% vs 24%; P=.02) with similar sensitivity (87.5% vs 75%; P=.52) and negative predictive value (99.8% vs 99.6%; P=.55). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Transvaginal ultrasound between 11 and 14 weeks' gestation in women a with prior cesarean delivery can identify at least 3 of 4 cases of placenta accreta spectrum. A finding of placental implantation within the scar niche has high positive predictive value for placenta accreta spectrum. Prospective studies are needed to assess routine screening for placenta accreta spectrum at 11 to 14 weeks' gestation in women with a prior cesarean delivery.

BACKGROUND:Vasa previa represents a rare prenatal finding with potentially life-threatening risk to the fetus. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to describe the natural history of prenatally diagnosed vasa previa and evaluate the association between antenatally diagnosed vasa previa and adverse obstetrical and neonatal outcomes. STUDY DESIGN:This was a multicenter descriptive and retrospective study of patients diagnosed prenatally with vasa previa on transvaginal ultrasound in the New York City Maternal-Fetal Medicine Research Consortium centers between 2012 and 2018. Outcomes evaluated included persistence of vasa previa at the time of delivery, gestational age at delivery, indications for unplanned unscheduled delivery, and neonatal course. RESULTS:A total of 165 pregnancies with vasa previa were included, of which 16 were twin gestations. Forty-three cases (26.1%) were noted to resolve on subsequent ultrasound. Of the remaining 122 cases with persistent vasa previa, 46 (37.7%) required unscheduled delivery. Twin gestations were nearly 3 times as likely to require unscheduled delivery as singleton gestations (73.3% vs 25.2%; P<.001). Most infants (70%) were admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit. There was 1 neonatal death (0.9%) because of complications related to prematurity. CONCLUSION:Despite the low neonatal mortality rate with prenatal detection of vasa previa, one-third of patients required unscheduled delivery, and more than half of neonates experienced complications related to prematurity.