Parity, placental location, amount of amniotic fluid, and type of breech presentation were associated with the success rate of ECV.

Background Obesity in pregnancy is increasing worldwide, reaching epidemic proportions in many countries and frequently creating challenges for obstetricians. We conducted this study to assess the effects of maternal obesity on maternal and perinatal outcomes. Methods A historical cohort study was performed on 16,609 women who delivered singleton babies in a 5-year period (2013–2017). Data were retrieved from the Cruces Perinatal Database (CPD) and only women whose prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) was known were included. Women were categorized according to the World Health Organization (WHO) classification: normal weight (BMI 20–24.9 kg/m2) and obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2). Obstetric, perinatal and neonatal outcomes were compared, and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using the normal-weight group as the reference. Results Compared to women of normal weight (n = 9778), obese women (n = 2207) had a higher risk of preeclampsia (aOR 2.199, 95% CI: 1.46–3.29), rectovaginal group B streptococcus colonization (aOR 1.299, 95% CI: 1.14–1.47), induction of labor (aOR 1.593, 95% CI: 1.44–1.75), cesarean section (aOR 2.755, 95% CI: 2.46–3.08), cesarean section in women with a history of cesarean delivery (aOR 1.409, 95% CI: 1.03–1.92), fetal weight ≥4000 g (aOR 2.090, 95% CI: 1.803–2.422) and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) (aOR 1.341, 95% CI: 1.12–1.59). No association was found with preterm birth (aOR 0.936, 95% CI: 0.77–1.13), stillbirth (aOR 0.921, 95% CI: 0.41–2.02) or neonatal mortality (aOR 2.205, 95% CI: 0.86–5.62). Conclusion Maternal obesity is associated with a higher risk of adverse pregnancy and perinatal outcomes. Pregnancy in this population of women should be considered and managed as high risk.

Introduction: Second-trimester fetal screening for congenital heart defects (CHD) included in routine obstetric care provides relevant information for decision making. The aim of this study was to describe the clinical practice of prenatal detection of CHD in terms of the process and results. Methods: The characteristics and results of ultrasound screening for major CHD were documented using data provided by hospitals for a national survey in Spain over the period of 2004–2006. Sixty-seven percent of eligible centers (56/83), covering 36% of total births nationwide, responded to the survey; 33 of these returned complete data regarding the screening results. Results: The number of major CHD occurring in the centers which provided data with results of screening was 1,060. The overall prenatal detection rate of major CHD was 65.7% (95% CI 57.8–74.7), but the detection rate in the routine second-trimester scan was 52.6% (95% CI 45.6–60.8). In 61% of these cases the parents chose to terminate the pregnancy. Two independent predictors of increased detection by center were identified: first, the uniformity and systematic character of the examination of the heart showing at least the 4-chamber view and outflow tracts (prevalence ratio 1.3, 95% CI 1.0–1.8) and second, the local availability of specialists in fetal echocardiography (prevalence ratio 1.4, 95% CI 1.1–1.9). Conclusions: The detection of major CHD in the first half of pregnancy has an important impact on parental decision making. The prenatal screening program for CHD should be globally strengthened in terms of qualifications and methodological approaches. To improve its performance locally, close collaboration with fetal heart specialists should be promoted.

In the prediction of sPTB within 7 days of testing in women with signs and symptoms of preterm labor, the PPV of PAMG-1 was significantly higher than that of phIGFBP-1 or fFN. Other diagnostic accuracy measures did not differ between the three biomarker tests. As prevalence affects the predictive performance of a diagnostic test, use of a highly specific assay for a lower-prevalence syndrome such as sPTB may optimize management. Copyright © 2018 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.