Just launched - feedback most welcome!
Send feedback

COVID-19 Evidence Alerts
from McMaster PLUSTM

Current best evidence for clinical care (more info)

Back to homepage

Prognosis Juan J, Gil MM, Rong Z, et al. Effect of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on maternal, perinatal and neonatal outcome: systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Jul;56(1):15-27. doi: 10.1002/uog.22088.
Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on maternal, perinatal and neonatal outcome by performing a systematic review of available published literature on pregnancies affected by COVID-19.

METHODS: We performed a systematic review to evaluate the effect of COVID-19 on pregnancy, perinatal and neonatal outcome. We conducted a comprehensive literature search using PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database and Wan Fang Data up to and including 20 April 2020 (studies were identified through PubMed alert after that date). For the search strategy, combinations of the following keywords and medical subject heading (MeSH) terms were used: 'SARS-CoV-2', 'COVID-19', 'coronavirus disease 2019', 'pregnancy', 'gestation', 'maternal', 'mother', 'vertical transmission', 'maternal-fetal transmission', 'intrauterine transmission', 'neonate', 'infant' and 'delivery'. Eligibility criteria included laboratory-confirmed and/or clinically diagnosed COVID-19, patient being pregnant on admission and availability of clinical characteristics, including at least one maternal, perinatal or neonatal outcome. Exclusion criteria were non-peer-reviewed or unpublished reports, unspecified date and location of the study, suspicion of duplicate reporting and unreported maternal or perinatal outcomes. No language restrictions were applied.

RESULTS: We identified a high number of relevant case reports and case series, but only 24 studies, including a total of 324 pregnant women with COVID-19, met the eligibility criteria and were included in the systematic review. These comprised nine case series (eight consecutive) and 15 case reports. A total of 20 pregnant patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were included in the case reports. In the combined data from the eight consecutive case series, including 211 (71.5%) cases of laboratory-confirmed and 84 (28.5%) of clinically diagnosed COVID-19, the maternal age ranged from 20 to 44 years and the gestational age on admission ranged from 5 to 41 weeks. The most common symptoms at presentation were fever, cough, dyspnea/shortness of breath, fatigue and myalgia. The rate of severe pneumonia reported amongst the case series ranged from 0% to 14%, with the majority of the cases requiring admission to the intensive care unit. Almost all cases from the case series had positive computed tomography chest findings. All six and 22 cases that had nucleic-acid testing in vaginal mucus and breast milk samples, respectively, were negative for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Only four cases of spontaneous miscarriage or termination were reported. In the consecutive case series, 219/295 women had delivered at the time of reporting and 78% of them had Cesarean section. The gestational age at delivery ranged from 28 to 41 weeks. Apgar scores at both 1 and 5 min ranged from 7 to 10. Only eight neonates had birth weight < 2500 g and nearly one-third of neonates were transferred to the neonatal intensive care unit. There was one case of neonatal asphyxia and death. In 155 neonates that had nucleic-acid testing in throat swab, all, except three cases, were negative for SARS-CoV-2. There were no cases of maternal death in the eight consecutive case series. Seven maternal deaths, four intrauterine fetal deaths (one with twin pregnancy) and two neonatal deaths (twin pregnancy) were reported in a non-consecutive case series of nine cases with severe COVID-19. In the case reports, two maternal deaths, one neonatal death and two cases of neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infection were reported.

CONCLUSIONS: Despite the increasing number of published studies on COVID-19 in pregnancy, there are insufficient good-quality data to draw unbiased conclusions with regard to the severity of the disease or specific complications of COVID-19 in pregnant women, as well as vertical transmission, perinatal and neonatal complications. In order to answer specific questions in relation to the impact of COVID-19 on pregnant women and their fetuses, through meaningful good-quality research, we urge researchers and investigators to present complete outcome data and reference previously published cases in their publications, and to record such reporting when the data of a case are entered into one or several registries. © 2020 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Ratings
Discipline / Specialty Area Score
Pediatrics (General)
Infectious Disease
Public Health
Family Medicine (FM)/General Practice (GP)
Hospital Doctor/Hospitalists
Internal Medicine
Pediatric Hospital Medicine
Pediatric Neonatology
Comments from MORE raters

Infectious Disease rater

The authors present a comprehensive systematic review with more than 300 pregnant women infected with the new coronavirus and analysis of infection in more than 100 newborns. Currently, we have at least 5 similar systematic reviews published and obstetricians and pediatricians probably know about the main signs and symptoms of COVID-19 in pregnancy and newborns. However, a well-conducted study like this adds important information to what experts already know and assists in evidence-based decision making.

Pediatric Neonatology rater

The study has some major limitations -- most are listed by the authors -- which decreases the clinical utility/relevance of this systematic review.

Pediatric Neonatology rater

This is a useful collation of the literature and provides an appropriate conclusion: better data and research is needed to actually know the effects of SARS-CoV2 on neonates and pregnant women.

Public Health rater

The interpretation is limited by poor quality data.

Public Health rater

This is a very interesting document. Systematic reviews from observational studies are prone to bias and thus a careful and cautious reading is advised. This document addresses this issue with rigour and calls for an effort in reporting case series or cohorts with all relevant outcomes included. Every physician in contact with pregnant women or taking care of them these days would better to review these results in order to provide key information points to patients and families.