Houle, Timothy T.

BACKGROUND: Early reports associating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with adverse pregnancy outcomes were biased by including only women with severe disease without controls. The Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology (SOAP) coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) registry was created to compare peripartum outcomes and anesthetic utilization in women with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection delivering at institutions with widespread testing. METHODS: Deliveries from 14 US medical centers, from March 19 to May 31, 2020, were included. Peripartum infection was defined as a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test within 14 days of delivery. Consecutive SARS-CoV-2–infected patients with randomly selected control patients were sampled (1:2 ratio) with controls delivering during the same day without a positive test. Outcomes were obstetric (eg, delivery mode, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and delivery <37 weeks), an adverse neonatal outcome composite measure (primary), and anesthetic utilization (eg, neuraxial labor analgesia and anesthesia). Outcomes were analyzed using generalized estimating equations to account for clustering within centers. Sensitivity analyses compared symptomatic and asymptomatic patients to controls. RESULTS: One thousand four hundred fifty four peripartum women were included: 490 with SARS-CoV-2 infection (176 [35.9%] symptomatic) and 964 were controls. SARS-CoV-2 patients were slightly younger, more likely nonnulliparous, nonwhite, and Hispanic than controls. They were more likely to have diabetes, obesity, or cardiac disease and less likely to have autoimmune disease. After adjustment for confounders, individuals experiencing SARS-CoV-2 infection exhibited an increased risk for delivery <37 weeks of gestation compared to controls, 73 (14.8%) vs 98 (10.2%) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03–2.09). Effect estimates for other obstetric outcomes and the neonatal composite outcome measure were not meaningfully different between SARS-CoV-2 patients versus controls. In sensitivity analyses, compared to controls, symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 patients exhibited increases in cesarean delivery (aOR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.09–2.27), postpartum length of stay (aOR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.18–2.60), and delivery <37 weeks of gestation (aOR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.29–3.36). These adverse outcomes were not found in asymptomatic women versus controls. SARS-CoV-2 patients (asymptomatic and symptomatic) were less likely to receive neuraxial labor analgesia (aOR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.35–0.75) and more likely to receive general anesthesia for cesarean delivery (aOR, 3.69; 95% CI, 1.40–9.74) due to maternal respiratory failure. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, multicenter US cohort study of women with and without peripartum SARS-CoV-2 infection, differences in obstetric and neonatal outcomes seem to be mostly driven by symptomatic patients. Lower utilization of neuraxial analgesia in laboring patients with asymptomatic or symptomatic infection compared to patients without infection requires further investigation.

Because up to 12% of obstetric patients meet criteria for the diagnosis of thrombocytopenia in pregnancy, it is not infrequent that the anesthesiologist must decide whether to proceed with a neuraxial procedure in an affected patient. Given the potential morbidity associated with general anesthesia for cesarean delivery, thoughtful consideration of which patients with thrombocytopenia are likely to have an increased risk of spinal epidural hematoma with neuraxial procedures, and when these risks outweigh the relative benefits is important to consider and to inform shared decision making with patients. Because there are substantial risks associated with withholding a neuraxial analgesic/anesthetic procedure in obstetric patients, every effort should be made to perform a bleeding history assessment and determine the thrombocytopenia etiology before admission for delivery. Whereas multiple other professional societies (obstetric, interventional pain, and hematologic) have published guidelines addressing platelet thresholds for safe neuraxial procedures, the US anesthesia professional societies have been silent on this topic. Despite a paucity of high-quality data, there are now meta-analyses that provide better estimations of risks. An interdisciplinary taskforce was convened to unite the relevant professional societies, synthesize the data, and provide a practical decision algorithm to help inform risk-benefit discussions and shared decision making with patients. Through a systematic review and modified Delphi process, the taskforce concluded that the best available evidence indicates the risk of spinal epidural hematoma associated with a platelet count ≥70,000 × 10 6 /L is likely to be very low in obstetric patients with thrombocytopenia secondary to gestational thrombocytopenia, immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in the absence of other risk factors. Ultimately, the decision of whether to proceed with a neuraxial procedure in an obstetric patient with thrombocytopenia occurs within a clinical context. Potentially relevant factors include, but are not limited to, patient comorbidities, obstetric risk factors, airway examination, available airway equipment, risk of general anesthesia, and patient preference.

Clinical trials are a key component of the evidence base for the treatment of headache disorders. In 1991, the International Headache Society Clinical Trials Standing Committee developed and published the first edition of the Guidelines for Controlled Trials of Drugs in Migraine. Advances in drugs, devices, and biologicals, as well as novel trial designs, have prompted several updates over the nearly 30 years since, including most recently the Guidelines for controlled trials of preventive treatment of chronic migraine (2018), the Guidelines for controlled trials of acute treatment of migraine attacks in adults (2019), and Guidelines for controlled trials of preventive treatment of migraine in children and adolescents (2019). The present update incorporates findings from new research and is intended to optimize the design of controlled trials of preventive pharmacological treatment of episodic migraine in adults. A guideline for clinical trials with devices will be published separately.

Abstract Pain and physical activity are tightly intertwined. Although their relationship has been explored in chronic pain conditions, we know little about the pattern of recovery in activity and its short- and long-term relationship with pain after surgery. We recruited 103 women undergoing elective cesarean delivery and acquired daily pain assessments and hourly steps in 98 of them for 2 months after surgery. Compliance was good, with 78% of subjects missing less than 7 days of activity. Study personnel required daily checking for compliance and 20 minutes per subject per week in study. Activity increased over the first 2 postoperative months in a log(time) manner. The slope of each modeled individual curve for activity was inversely correlated (r = −0.54; P < 0.0001) with worst daily pain. After removing these 2-month trends, pain and activity within an individual day were negatively associated with each point increase in pain being inversely associated with −119 steps (95% confidence interval [CI] = −214 to −25; P = 0.013). A patient's previous experience of pain was not associated with current activity as well as current activity was not associated with future pain scores. These data, although limited by the study of a single operation in a unique social circumstance with low risk of chronic postsurgical pain, demonstrate feasibility of measuring hourly activity for 2 months after surgery. Recovery from pain and inactivity are tightly correlated, and the negative relationship between within-day pain and activity without interday carryover relationships is in stark contrast to findings in chronic pain conditions.

Abstract We know very little about the change in pain in the first 2 months after surgery. To address this gap, we studied 530 women scheduled for elective cesarean delivery who completed daily pain diaries for 2 months after surgery through text messaging. Over 82% of subjects missed fewer than 10 diary entries and were included in the analysis. Completers were more likely to be Caucasian, nonsmokers, and with fewer previous pregnancies than noncompleters. Daily worst pain intensity ratings for the previous 24 hours were fit to a log(time) function and allowed to change to a different function up to 3 times according to a Bayesian criterion. All women had at least one change point, occurring 22 ± 9 days postoperatively, and 81% of women had only one change, most commonly to a linear function at 0 pain. Approximately 9% of women were predicted to have pain 2 months after surgery, similar to previous observations. Cluster analysis revealed 6 trajectories of recovery from pain. Predictors of cluster membership included severity of acute pain, perceived stress, surgical factors, and smoking status. These data demonstrate feasibility but considerable challenges to this approach to data acquisition. The form of the initial process of recovery from pain is common to all women, with divergence of patterns at 2 to 4 weeks after cesarean delivery. The change-point model accurately predicts recovery from pain; its parameters can be used to assess predictors of speed of recovery; and it may be useful for future observational, forecasting, and interventional trials.

Venous thromboembolism is recognized as a leading cause of maternal death in the United States. Thromboprophylaxis has been highlighted as a key preventive measure to reduce venous thromboembolism–related maternal deaths. However, the expanded use of thromboprophylaxis in obstetrics will have a major impact on the use and timing of neuraxial analgesia and anesthesia for women undergoing vaginal or cesarean delivery and other obstetric surgeries. Experts from the Society of Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia, and hematology have collaborated to develop this comprehensive, pregnancy-specific consensus statement on neuraxial procedures in obstetric patients receiving thromboprophylaxis or higher dose anticoagulants. To date, none of the existing anesthesia societies’ recommendations have weighed the potential risks of neuraxial procedures in the presence of thromboprophylaxis, with the competing risks of general anesthesia with a potentially difficult airway, or maternal or fetal harm from avoidance or delayed neuraxial anesthesia. Furthermore, existing guidelines have not integrated the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of anticoagulants in the obstetric population. The goal of this consensus statement is to provide a practical guide of how to appropriately identify, prepare, and manage pregnant women receiving thromboprophylaxis or higher dose anticoagulants during the ante-, intra-, and postpartum periods. The tactics to facilitate multidisciplinary communication, evidence-based pharmacokinetic and spinal epidural hematoma data, and Decision Aids should help inform risk–benefit discussions with patients and facilitate shared decision making.