BackgroundPreterm birth is a global health priority. Using a progestogen during high-risk pregnancy could reduce PTB and adverse neonatal outcomes. MethodsSystematic review of randomised trials comparing vaginal progesterone, intramuscular 17hydroxyprogesterone caproate (17-OHPC), or oral progesterone with control, or with each other, in asymptomatic women at risk of preterm birth. We identified published and unpublished trials that completed primary data collection before July 30, 2016 (12 months before data collection began) by searching MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, the Maternity and Infant Care Database, and relevant trial registers between inception and July 30, 2019. Trials of progestogen to prevent early miscarriage or immediately-threatened preterm birth were excluded. Individual participant data were requested from investigators of eligible trials. Outcomes included preterm birth, early preterm birth, and mid-trimester birth. Adverse neonatal sequelae associated with early births were assessed using a composite of serious neonatal complications, and individually. Adverse maternal outcomes were investigated as a composite and individually. Individual participant data were checked and risk of bias assessed independently by two researchers. Primary meta-analyses used one-stage generalised linear mixed models that incorporated random effects to allow for heterogeneity across trials. FindingsInitial searches identified 47 eligible trials. Individual participant data were available for 30 of these trials. An additional trial was later included in a targeted update. Data were therefore available from a total of 31 trials (11,644 women and 16,185 offspring). Trials in singleton pregnancies included mostly women with previous spontaneous preterm birth or short cervix. Preterm birth before 34 weeks was reduced in such women who received vaginal progesterone (nine trials, 769 women; relative risk [RR] 0•78, 95% CI 0•68-0•90), 17-OHPC (five trials, 3,053 women; 0•83, 0•68-1•01), and oral progesterone (two trials, 183 women; 0•60, 0•41-0•90). Results for other birth and neonatal outcomes were consistently favourable, but less certain. A possible increase in maternal complications was suggested, but this was uncertain. We identified no consistent evidence of treatment interaction with any participant characteristics examined, although analyses within subpopulations questioned efficacy in women who did not have a short cervix. Trials in multifetal pregnancies mostly included women without additional risk factors. For twins, vaginal progesterone did not reduce preterm birth before 34 weeks (eight trials, 2046 women: RR 1•01, 95% CI 0•84-1•20) nor did 17-OHPC for twins or triplets (eight trials, 2253 women: 1•04, 0•92-1•18). Preterm premature rupture of membranes was increased with 17-OHPC exposure in multifetal gestations (rupture <34 weeks RR 1•59, 95% CI 1•15-2•22), but we found no consistent evidence of benefit or harm for other outcomes with either vaginal progesterone or 17-OHPC InterpretationVaginal progesterone and 17...

Objective To compare the neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and platelet indices between women with pre‐eclampsia and normotensive pregnant women. Methods A cross‐sectional study conducted from January to July 2017 at a tertiary care hospital in Delhi, India. The study compared pregnant women aged 18–40 years with pre‐eclampsia diagnosed at term with healthy pregnant women matched for gestational age. Venous blood samples were drawn and complete blood count was analyzed. The parameters recorded were hemoglobin, red cell distribution width (RDW), platelet count, mean platelet volume (MPV), plateletcrit, and platelet distribution width. Results There were 67 women included in each group. NLR was higher in women with pre‐eclampsia compared with the control group (6.8 ± 7.6 vs 3.0 ± 0.98; P=0.001). Both PLR (14.18 ± 14.4 vs 9.54 ± 3.6; P=0.012) and MPV (9.45 ± 1.19 vs 9.02 ± 1.1; P=0.029) were higher in the study group compared with the control group. Platelet count was lower in pre‐eclamptic women compared with the control group (188 ± 89.7 vs 200.1 ± 62.36; P=0.014). RDW was also higher in the study group (P=0.025). Conclusions The present study found that the inflammatory markers NLR, PLR, RDW, and MPV were higher in women with pre‐eclampsia. Measuring NLR and PLR may be useful in predicting pre‐eclampsia among women at high risk during prenatal follow‐up.

The incidence of cancer in pregnancy is increasing. The most frequent malignancies include breast and cervical cancers. Diagnosis may be complicated by late presentation. Imaging during pregnancy should consider risks to the fetus. Diagnostic work‐up, including tumor markers, can be influenced by the physiology of pregnancy. Treatment of cancer can often be safely administered with good maternal and fetal outcomes. Chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery must be adapted to the pregnancy state. Counselling and emotional support are an essential part of management.