No abstract

Background A reliable expected date of delivery (EDD) is important for pregnant women in planning for a safe delivery and critical for management of obstetric emergencies. We compared the accuracy of LMP recall, an early ultrasound (EUS) and a Smartphone App in predicting the EDD in South African pregnant women. We further evaluated the rates of preterm and post-term births based on using the different measures. Methods This is a retrospective sub-study of pregnant women enrolled in a randomized controlled trial between October 2017-December 2019. EDD and gestational age (GA) at delivery were calculated from EUS, LMP and Smartphone App. Data were analysed using SPSS version 25. A Bland–Altman plot was constructed to determine the limits of agreement between LMP and EUS. Results Three hundred twenty-five pregnant women who delivered at term (≥ 37 weeks by EUS) and without pregnancy complications were included in this analysis. Women had an EUS at a mean GA of 16 weeks and 3 days). The mean difference between LMP dating and EUS is 0.8 days with the limits of agreement 31.4–30.3 days (Concordance Correlation Co-efficient 0.835; 95%CI 0.802, 0.867). The mean(SD) of the marginal time distribution of the two methods differ significantly (p = 0.00187). EDDs were < 14 days of the actual date of delivery (ADD) for 287 (88.3%;95%CI 84.4–91.4), 279 (85.9%;95%CI 81.6–89.2) and 215 (66.2%;95%CI 60.9–71.1) women for EUS, Smartphone App and LMP respectively but overall agreement between EUS and LMP was only 46.5% using a five category scale for EDD-ADD with a kappa of .22. EUS 14–24 weeks and EUS < 14 weeks predicted EDDs < 14 days of ADD in 88.1% and 79.3% of women respectively. The proportion of births classified as preterm (< 37 weeks) was 9.9% (95%CI 7.1–13.6) by LMP and 0.3% (95%CI 0.1–1.7) by Smartphone App. The proportion of post-term (> 42 weeks gestation) births was 11.4% (95%CI 8.4–15.3), 1.9% (95%CI 0.9–3.9) and 3.4% (95%CI 1.9–5.9) by LMP, EUS and Smartphone respectively. Conclusions EUS and Smartphone App were the most accurate to estimate the EDD in pregnant women. LMP-based dating resulted in misclassification of a significantly greater number of preterm and post-term deliveries compared to EUS and the Smartphone App.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: There are limited data on the impact of antenatal antiretroviral regimens (ARV) on pregnancy and infant outcomes in HIV/HBV coinfection. We compared outcomes among 3 antenatal antiretroviral regimens for pregnant women with HIV/HBV. Methods:The PROMISE study enrolled ARV-naive pregnant women with HIV. Women with HBV were randomized to (no anti-HBV)-zidovudine (ZDV) + intrapartum nevirapine and 1 week of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine (TDF-FTC); (3TC)-3TC + ZDV + LPV/r; or (FTC-TDF)-FTC + TDF + LPV/r. Pairwise group comparisons were performed with Fisher exact, t, or log rank tests. Adverse pregnancy outcome (APO) was a composite of low birth weight, preterm delivery, spontaneous abortion, stillbirth, or congenital anomaly.Results: Of 138 women with HIV/HBV, 42, 48, and 48 were analyzed in the no anti-HBV, 3TC, and FTC-TDF arms. Median age was 27 years. APOs trended lower in the no anti-HBV (26%) vs 3TC (38%), and FTC-TDF arms (35%), P $ 0.25). More infant deaths occurred among the FTC-TDF [6 (13%)] vs no anti-HBV [2 (5%)] and 3TC [3 (7%)] arms. There were no differences in time-to-death, HIV-free survival, birth or one-year WHO Z-score length-for-age, and head circumference. Hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) was associated with an increased risk of APO, 48% vs 27% (odds ratio 2.79, 95% confidence interval: 1.19 to 6.67, post hoc). Conclusion:With HBV/HIV coinfection, the risk of an APO was increased with maternal ARV compared with ZDV alone, although the differences were not statistically significant. Maternal HBeAg was associated with a significantly increased risk of APO. Infant mortality was highest with FTC + TDF + LPV/r. Early assessment of HBeAg could assist in identifying high-risk pregnancies for close monitoring.