Faculty Bibliography

Novel coronavirus disease 2019 is rapidly spreading throughout the New York metropolitan area since its first reported case on March 1, 2020. The state is now the epicenter of coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak in the United States, with 84,735 cases reported as of April 2, 2020. We previously presented an early case series with 7 coronavirus disease 2019-positive pregnant patients, 2 of whom were diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 after an initial asymptomatic presentation. We now describe a series of 43 test-positive cases of coronavirus disease 2019 presenting to an affiliated pair of New York City hospitals for more than 2 weeks, from March 13, 2020, to March 27, 2020. A total of 14 patients (32.6%) presented without any coronavirus disease 2019-associated viral symptoms and were identified after they developed symptoms during admission or after the implementation of universal testing for all obstetric admissions on March 22. Among them, 10 patients (71.4%) developed symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 over the course of their delivery admission or early after postpartum discharge. Of the other 29 patients (67.4%) who presented with symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019, 3 women ultimately required antenatal admission for viral symptoms, and another patient re-presented with worsening respiratory status requiring oxygen supplementation 6 days postpartum after a successful labor induction. There were no confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 detected in neonates upon initial testing on the first day of life. Based on coronavirus disease 2019 disease severity characteristics by Wu and McGoogan, 37 women (86%) exhibited mild disease, 4 (9.3%) severe disease, and 2 (4.7%) critical disease; these percentages are similar to those described in nonpregnant adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (about 80% mild, 15% severe, and 5% critical disease).

As New York City became an international epicenter of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, telehealth was rapidly integrated into prenatal care at Columbia University Irving Medical Center, an academic hospital system in Manhattan. Goals of implementation were to consolidate in-person prenatal screening, surveillance, and examinations into fewer in-person visits while maintaining patient access to ongoing antenatal care and subspecialty consultations via telehealth virtual visits. The rationale for this change was to minimize patient travel and thus risk for COVID-19 exposure. Because a large portion of obstetric patients had underlying medical or fetal conditions placing them at increased risk for adverse outcomes, prenatal care telehealth regimens were tailored for increased surveillance and/or counseling. Based on the incorporation of telehealth into prenatal care for high-risk patients, specific recommendations are made for the following conditions, clinical scenarios, and services: (1) hypertensive disorders of pregnancy including preeclampsia, gestational hypertension, and chronic hypertension; (2) pregestational and gestational diabetes mellitus; (3) maternal cardiovascular disease; (4) maternal neurologic conditions; (5) history of preterm birth and poor obstetrical history including prior stillbirth; (6) fetal conditions such as intrauterine growth restriction, congenital anomalies, and multiple gestations including monochorionic placentation; (7) genetic counseling; (8) mental health services; (9) obstetric anesthesia consultations; and (10) postpartum care. While telehealth virtual visits do not fully replace in-person encounters during prenatal care, they do offer a means of reducing potential patient and provider exposure to COVID-19 while providing consolidated in-person testing and services. KEY POINTS: · Telehealth for prenatal care is feasible.. · Telehealth may reduce coronavirus exposure during prenatal care.. · Telehealth should be tailored for high risk prenatal patients..

OBJECTIVE:To characterize symptoms and disease severity among pregnant women with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection, along with laboratory findings, imaging, and clinical outcomes. METHODS:Pregnant women with COVID-19 infection were identified at two affiliated hospitals in New York City from March 13 to April 19, 2020, for this case series study. Women were diagnosed with COVID-19 infection based on either universal testing on admission or testing because of COVID-19-related symptoms. Disease was classified as either 1) asymptomatic or mild or 2) moderate or severe based on dyspnea, tachypnea, or hypoxia. Clinical and demographic risk factors for moderate or severe disease were analyzed and calculated as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs. Laboratory findings and associated symptoms were compared between those with mild or asymptomatic and moderate or severe disease. The clinical courses and associated complications of women hospitalized with moderate and severe disease are described. RESULTS:Of 158 pregnant women with COVID-19 infection, 124 (78%) had mild or asymptomatic disease and 34 (22%) had moderate or severe disease. Of 15 hospitalized women with moderate or severe disease, 10 received respiratory support with supplemental oxygen and one required intubation. Women with moderate or severe disease had a higher likelihood of having an underlying medical comorbidity (50% vs 27%, OR 2.76, 95% CI 1.26-6.02). Asthma was more common among those with moderate or severe disease (24% vs 8%, OR 3.51, 95% CI 1.26-9.75). Women with moderate or severe disease were significantly more likely to have leukopenia and elevated aspartate transaminase and ferritin. Women with moderate or severe disease were at significantly higher risk for cough and chest pain and pressure. Nine women received ICU or step-down-level care, including four for 9 days or longer. Two women underwent preterm delivery because their clinical status deteriorated. CONCLUSION:One in five pregnant women who contracted COVID-19 infection developed moderate or severe disease, including a small proportion with prolonged critical illness who received ICU or step-down-level care.

OBJECTIVES:Frailty, defined as loss of reserve and vulnerability to changes in health, affects many ovarian cancer patients who are planned to undergo surgery. The effect of frailty on postoperative readmissions in ovarian cancer patients remains poorly defined. We investigated the effect of frailty on unplanned readmission, morbidity, and mortality among patients undergoing surgery for ovarian cancer. STUDY DESIGN:Patients who underwent laparotomy for ovarian cancer between 2010 and 2014 were identified using the Nationwide Readmissions Database. Frailty was classified using the Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Groups Frailty Diagnoses Indicators. Primary outcomes were divided into index admission (intensive level of care, mortality, non-routine discharge,) 30-days (readmission and mortality), and 90-days (readmission and mortality). Multivariable regression models were fit, adjusting for patient, hospital, and clinical factors. RESULTS:From 2010 to 2014, there were 76,441 inpatient laparotomies identified with a 6.1% frailty rate. Frailty was associated with an increased risk of intensive level of care (aRR = 1.76, 95% CI: 1.68, 1.85), non-routine discharge (aRR = 1.39, 95% CI: 1.33, 1.45), and inpatient mortality (aRR = 1.91, 95% CI: 1.63, 2.23) during the index admission. Frail patients were more likely to be readmitted within 90 days (aRR = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.04-1.18), sustain mortality during 90-day readmission (aRR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.01-1.69), and have longer and costlier index hospital stays. Hospital readmission costs did not differ significantly between frail and non-frail patients. CONCLUSIONS:Frailty affects postoperative outcomes in ovarian cancer patients and is associated with an increased rate of 90-day readmission and mortality among those who are readmitted. Gynecologic oncologists should screen for frailty and consider outcomes in frail ovarian cancer patients when counseling for surgery.

In the spring of 2020, expeditious changes to obstetric care were required in New York as cases of COVID-19 increased and pandemic panic ensued. A reduction of in-person office visits was planned with provider appointments scheduled to coincide with routine maternal blood tests and obstetric ultrasounds. Dating scans were combined with nuchal translucency assessments to reduce outpatient ultrasound visits. Telehealth was quickly adopted for selected prenatal visits and consultations when deemed appropriate. The more sensitive cell-free fetal DNA test was commonly used to screen for aneuploidy in an effort to decrease return visits for diagnostic genetic procedures. Antenatal testing guidelines were modified with a focus on providing evidence-based testing for maternal and fetal conditions. For complex pregnancies, fetal interventions were undertaken earlier to avoid serial surveillance and repeated in-person hospital visits. These rapid adaptations to traditional prenatal care were designed to decrease the risk of coronavirus exposure of patients, staff, and physicians while continuing to provide safe and comprehensive obstetric care.

As of June 19, 2020 there are more than 8.6 million COVID-19 cases worldwide with over 450,000 deaths. Providing obstetrical care in the setting of the pandemic poses challenges to the healthcare system in that, in comparison to many other medical specialties, obstetrical care cannot be deferred. Pregnant patients represent a high risk population for exposure and infection with respiratory pathogens and, as they require multiple points of contact with the healthcare system, are especially vulnerable. The purpose of this review is assess current epidemiology and outcomes research related to COVID-19 with a focus on obstetric patients. This review covers the global spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, symptomatology, modes of transmission, and current knowledge gaps related to epidemiology and outcomes for the obstetric population.

Administrative data research on maternal racial disparities supports 2 broad clinical inferences. First, failure to rescue in terms of both death and severe maternal morbidity likely accounts for a significant proportion of maternal disparities. Second, risk for adverse outcomes by race is generally differential with risk for cardiovascular complications particularly high for non-Hispanic black women. These differentials suggest that underlying health conditions may represent an important contributor to overall disparities, and optimal longitudinal care utilization with nonobstetric specialists is required to mitigate risk.