Browsing by Author "Boudova, Sarah"

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    786 Neonatal outcomes in pregnant women with diagnosis of COVID-19
    (Elsevier, 2021) Izewski, Joanna; Boudova, Sarah; Rouse, Caroline E.; Ibrahim, Sherrine A.; Shanks, Anthony L.; Reinhardt, Jeff C.; Scifres, Christina; Haas, David M.; Peipert, Jeffrey F.; Tuuli, Methodius G.; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine
    Objective It is unclear whether infection with COVID-19 during pregnancy increases the risk of adverse neonatal outcomes. We tested the hypothesis that a diagnosis of COVID-19 during pregnancy increases the risk of neonatal respiratory morbidity and other adverse neonatal outcomes. Study Design: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from two labor and delivery units with universal COVID-19 testing policy between March 1 and May 31, 2020. Pregnant women with singleton pregnancies who delivered during the study period and underwent testing for COVID-19 at any point in their pregnancy were eligible. The primary outcome was a composite of neonatal respiratory morbidity defined as the occurrence of any one of the following: respiratory distress syndrome, transient tachypnea of the newborn, and need for respiratory support. The risk of neonatal morbidity with and without a COVID-19 diagnosis were compared using univariable and multivariable analyses. Stratified analysis compared the risks of adverse neonatal outcomes in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with COVID-19 to those without COVID-19. Results: Of 515 subjects meeting inclusion criteria, 55 (10.7%) tested positive for COVID-19; 19 (34.6%) were asymptomatic and 36 (65.4%) were symptomatic. No neonate tested positive for COVID-19. Rates of the primary outcome, composite neonatal respiratory morbidity, were not significantly different in patients with and without COVID-19 (21.8% vs 19.6%, P=0.692). There was no significant difference in the risk of neonatal respiratory morbidity in a Cox regression model accounting for time from diagnosis to delivery, and adjusting for gestational age at delivery, mode of delivery, and maternal diabetes (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.62; 95% CI 0.35, 1.09). There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcomes in patients with COVID-19 who were asymptomatic or symptomatic (Table). Conclusion: A diagnosis of COVID-19 during pregnancy does not appear to increase the risk of neonatal morbidity. These data may be useful in counseling women diagnosed with COVID-19 during pregnancy.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    975 ABO blood group, rhesus type and risk of COVID-19 in pregnant women
    (Elsevier, 2021) Ibrahim, Sherrine A.; Boudova, Sarah; Rouse, Caroline E.; Shanks, Anthony L.; Reinhardt, Jeffrey; Scifres, Christina; Haas, David M.; Peipert, Jeffrey F.; Tuuli, Methodius G.; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine
    Objective: There is controversy regarding the association of ABO blood group, Rhesus (Rh) type and risk of COVID-19. We tested the hypothesis that ABO blood group and Rh type are associated with COVID-19 diagnosis and symptoms during pregnancy. Study Design: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from two labor and delivery units with universal SARS-CoV-2 testing policy between March 1 and May 31, 2020. All pregnant women tested during the study period were eligible. The primary outcome was COVID-19 diagnosis. Secondary outcomes were measures of COVID-19 severity, including symptoms, ICU admission, respiratory support and treatment for COVID-19. Outcomes were compared across ABO blood groups. Women with blood group O or Rh positive blood type were compared with non-O groups and Rh negative, respectively, using univariable and multivariable analyses. Results: Of 586 pregnant women tested, 66 (11.3%) were positive. The most common ABO blood group in the cohort was O (52.2%) and 87.4% were Rh positive. Rates of the primary outcome, COVID-19 diagnosis, were not significantly different across ABO blood groups (P=0.47). There were also no significant differences in measures of COVID-19 severity among blood groups (Table). Compared to other blood groups, the risk of COVID-19 diagnosis was not significantly different in women with group O (13.1% vs 9.3%, adjusted OR 1.43; 95% CI 0.84, 2.4). Rh positive women were at a significantly higher risk of COVID-19 diagnosis (12.3% vs 4.1%, adjusted OR 3.38; 95% CI 1.03, 11.07) and a non-significant increased risk of symptoms (6.8% vs 2.7%, adjusted OR 2.67; 95% CI 0.63, 11.32), after adjusting for ABO blood group (Figure). Conclusion: We found no association between ABO blood group and diagnosis or severity of COVID-19 in pregnant women. However, Rhesus positive women may be at a higher risk of COVID-19.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A Novel Use of Laryngoscope for Difficult Papanicolaou Smear Collection
    (Hindawi, 2021-09-23) Boudova, Sarah; Thomas, Caitlin; Wolfe, John; Schilder, Jeanne M.; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine
    The prevalence of cervical cancer has dropped significantly since introduction of the Papanicolaou (Pap) screen. The greatest risk factor for cervical cancer is inadequate screening. Altered pelvic anatomy can limit the ability to collect a Pap smear. In the presented case, a woman with a history of fibroids and bleeding presented for an exam under anesthesia. Traditional approaches for collecting a Pap smear failed. A GlideScope video laryngoscope was used to visualize the cervix, and a Pap smear was collected. The specimen was satisfactory, negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy, and HPV negative. A laryngoscope can be repurposed to visualize collection of a challenging Pap smear. Novel approaches for Pap smear collection and cervical cancer screening are needed and have the potential to save lives.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Hepatitis C virus detection and management after implementation of universal screening in pregnancy
    (Elsevier, 2024-02-08) Boudova, Sarah; Tholey, Danielle M.; Ferries-Rowe, Elizabeth; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine
    Background: Accurately identifying cases of hepatitis C virus has important medical and public health consequences. In the setting of rising hepatitis C virus prevalence and highly effective treatment with direct-acting antivirals, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine guidelines recently changed to recommend universal screening for hepatitis C virus during pregnancy. However, there is little data on the influence of this policy change on case identification and management. Objective: We aimed to examine the influence of universal hepatitis C virus screening on our patient population. Our primary objective was to determine if there was a difference in the detected hepatitis C virus prevalence after the policy change. Our secondary objectives were to determine which factors were associated with a positive test for hepatitis C virus and to examine postpartum management of pregnant patients living with hepatitis C virus, including the (1) gastroenterology referral rate, (2) treatment rate, (3) infantile hepatitis C virus screening rate, and (4) factors associated with being referred for treatment. Study design: We conducted a single-center, retrospective cohort study of deliveries that occurred before (July 2018-June 2020) and after (July 2020-December 2021) the implementation of universal hepatitis C virus screening. Information on hepatitis C virus and HIV status, if patients were screened for hepatitis C virus, history of intravenous drug use, and basic demographic information were abstracted from the electronic medical records. A subset of patients was administered a questionnaire regarding hepatitis C virus risk factors. For all patients who tested positive for hepatitis C virus, information on if they were referred for treatment in the postpartum period and if their infant was screened for hepatitis C virus were abstracted from the electronic medical records. Results: A total of 8973 deliveries occurred during this study period. A total of 71 (0.79%) patients had a detectable viral load. With implementation of universal screening, hepatitis C virus screening rates increased from 5.78% to 77.25% of deliveries (P<.01). The hepatitis C virus prevalence rates before and after universal screening was implemented were 0.78% and 0.81%, respectively (P=.88). There were significant demographic shifts in our pregnant population over this time period, including a reduction in intravenous drug use. A subset of 958 patients completed a hepatitis C virus risk factor questionnaire, in addition to undergoing universal hepatitis C virus screening. Ten patients screened positive with universal screening; only 8 of these individuals would have been identified with risk-based screening. Among the patients with a detectable viral load, 67.61% were referred for treatment and 18.75% were treated. A multivariate logistic regression model indicated that intravenous drug use was associated with significantly decreased odds of being referred for treatment (odds ratio, 0.14; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.59; P=.01). At the time of our evaluation, 52 infants were at least 18 months old and thus eligible for hepatitis C virus screening. Among these infants, 8 (15.38%) were screened for hepatitis C virus, and all were negative. Conclusion: Following the practice shift, we saw a significant increase in hepatitis C virus screening during pregnancy. However, postpartum treatment and infant screening remained low. Intravenous drug use was associated with a decreased likelihood of being referred for treatment. Pregnancy represents a unique time for hepatitis C virus case identification, although better linkage to care is needed to increase postpartum treatment.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Percutaneous debulking of tricuspid vegetations due to infectious endocarditis in pregnancy: a case report
    (Elsevier, 2023-04-26) Boudova, Sarah; Casciani, Thomas; Weida, Jennifer; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine
    Infective endocarditis is a rare but serious disease with increasing prevalence in women of childbearing age because of the opioid epidemic. Therefore, it is an increasingly frequent pregnancy complication. The gold standard of treatment is intravenous antibiotics with surgery reserved for refractory cases. However, pregnancy complicates decisions about the risk and timing of surgery. AngioVac represents a percutaneous alternative to surgical intervention. Here, we present a case of a 22-year-old G2P1001 woman with a history of intravenous drug use and infective endocarditis who continued to show signs and symptoms of septic pulmonary emboli despite management with intravenous antibiotics. The patient was deemed not to be a surgical candidate while pregnant and had an AngioVac procedure at 30 2/7 weeks of gestation with the removal of tricuspid vegetations. The patient was delivered via cesarean delivery at 32 5/7 weeks of gestation because of a nonreassuring fetal heart tracing. The patient's tricuspid valve was replaced on postpartum day 16. This case demonstrates that AngioVac can be safely used in the third trimester of pregnancy and may be considered in consultation with a multidisciplinary team for the management of infective endocarditis refractory to antibiotic treatment as an interim measure until surgery can be safely performed.