E. Albert Reece, MD, PhD, MBA

Preventing infant mortality remains a significant challenge for ob.gyns. Despite the availability of a multitude of preventive and treatment options and some of the best possible medical care offered in the world, the United States lags behind many other developed and developing countries in its rate of infant deaths, which was an estimated 5.8 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2017. We can, and must, do better.

One of the major contributing factors to infant mortality is preterm birth. Defined as birth occurring prior to 37 weeks’ gestation, preterm birth is associated with a myriad of severe neonatal sequelae: low birth weight, bacterial sepsis, neonatal hemorrhage, and respiratory distress syndrome, among others. Therefore, many within the clinical and biomedical research spheres recognize that preventing preterm birth means reducing infant deaths.

However, therein lies the conundrum. We know very little about what causes preterm birth, which renders the current therapeutic strategies – such as use of progesterone supplements or cerclage placement – good for some but not all patients. It is thus vital to continue research to unravel the underlying mechanisms of preterm birth.

A promising area of investigation is the field of microbiome research, which has made great strides in advancing our awareness of the critical role of the millions of organisms living on and within us in maintaining health and fighting disease. For example, we now realize that eradicating all the commensals in our gastrointestinal tract has unintended and very negative consequences and, for patients whose good bacteria have been eliminated, fecal transplant is a therapeutic option. Therefore, it stands to reason that the microbes found in the vagina contribute significantly to women’s overall reproductive health.

The publication of the groundbreaking study characterizing the vaginal microbiome species in reproductive-age women opened new avenues of research into how these organisms contribute to women’s health. Importantly, this work, led initially by Jacques Ravel, PhD, a professor in the department of microbiology & immunology and associate director of the Institute for Genome Sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, has spawned additional investigations into the potential role of the vaginal microbiome in preterm birth.

To provide some insight into the research around how the microorganisms in the vagina may induce or prevent preterm birth is our guest author, Michal A. Elovitz, MD, the Hilarie L. Morgan and Mitchell L. Morgan President’s Distinguished Professor in Women’s Health, vice chair of translational research, and director of the Maternal and Child Health Research Center, department of obstetrics and gynecology, at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland School of Medicine as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

Preventing infant mortality remains a significant challenge for ob.gyns. Despite the availability of a multitude of preventive and treatment options and some of the best possible medical care offered in the world, the United States lags behind many other developed and developing countries in its rate of infant deaths, which was an estimated 5.8 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2017. We can, and must, do better.

One of the major contributing factors to infant mortality is preterm birth. Defined as birth occurring prior to 37 weeks’ gestation, preterm birth is associated with a myriad of severe neonatal sequelae: low birth weight, bacterial sepsis, neonatal hemorrhage, and respiratory distress syndrome, among others. Therefore, many within the clinical and biomedical research spheres recognize that preventing preterm birth means reducing infant deaths.

However, therein lies the conundrum. We know very little about what causes preterm birth, which renders the current therapeutic strategies – such as use of progesterone supplements or cerclage placement – good for some but not all patients. It is thus vital to continue research to unravel the underlying mechanisms of preterm birth.

A promising area of investigation is the field of microbiome research, which has made great strides in advancing our awareness of the critical role of the millions of organisms living on and within us in maintaining health and fighting disease. For example, we now realize that eradicating all the commensals in our gastrointestinal tract has unintended and very negative consequences and, for patients whose good bacteria have been eliminated, fecal transplant is a therapeutic option. Therefore, it stands to reason that the microbes found in the vagina contribute significantly to women’s overall reproductive health.

The publication of the groundbreaking study characterizing the vaginal microbiome species in reproductive-age women opened new avenues of research into how these organisms contribute to women’s health. Importantly, this work, led initially by Jacques Ravel, PhD, a professor in the department of microbiology & immunology and associate director of the Institute for Genome Sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, has spawned additional investigations into the potential role of the vaginal microbiome in preterm birth.

To provide some insight into the research around how the microorganisms in the vagina may induce or prevent preterm birth is our guest author, Michal A. Elovitz, MD, the Hilarie L. Morgan and Mitchell L. Morgan President’s Distinguished Professor in Women’s Health, vice chair of translational research, and director of the Maternal and Child Health Research Center, department of obstetrics and gynecology, at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland School of Medicine as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

Preventing infant mortality remains a significant challenge for ob.gyns. Despite the availability of a multitude of preventive and treatment options and some of the best possible medical care offered in the world, the United States lags behind many other developed and developing countries in its rate of infant deaths, which was an estimated 5.8 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2017. We can, and must, do better.

One of the major contributing factors to infant mortality is preterm birth. Defined as birth occurring prior to 37 weeks’ gestation, preterm birth is associated with a myriad of severe neonatal sequelae: low birth weight, bacterial sepsis, neonatal hemorrhage, and respiratory distress syndrome, among others. Therefore, many within the clinical and biomedical research spheres recognize that preventing preterm birth means reducing infant deaths.

However, therein lies the conundrum. We know very little about what causes preterm birth, which renders the current therapeutic strategies – such as use of progesterone supplements or cerclage placement – good for some but not all patients. It is thus vital to continue research to unravel the underlying mechanisms of preterm birth.

A promising area of investigation is the field of microbiome research, which has made great strides in advancing our awareness of the critical role of the millions of organisms living on and within us in maintaining health and fighting disease. For example, we now realize that eradicating all the commensals in our gastrointestinal tract has unintended and very negative consequences and, for patients whose good bacteria have been eliminated, fecal transplant is a therapeutic option. Therefore, it stands to reason that the microbes found in the vagina contribute significantly to women’s overall reproductive health.

The publication of the groundbreaking study characterizing the vaginal microbiome species in reproductive-age women opened new avenues of research into how these organisms contribute to women’s health. Importantly, this work, led initially by Jacques Ravel, PhD, a professor in the department of microbiology & immunology and associate director of the Institute for Genome Sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, has spawned additional investigations into the potential role of the vaginal microbiome in preterm birth.

To provide some insight into the research around how the microorganisms in the vagina may induce or prevent preterm birth is our guest author, Michal A. Elovitz, MD, the Hilarie L. Morgan and Mitchell L. Morgan President’s Distinguished Professor in Women’s Health, vice chair of translational research, and director of the Maternal and Child Health Research Center, department of obstetrics and gynecology, at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland School of Medicine as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

The average student in America learns that genes form the building blocks of what makes us human by the time they receive their high school diploma. Indeed, the completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003 paved the way for our genetic makeup, much like our medical history, to become a routine part of our health care. For example, our faculty at the University of Maryland School of Medicine discovered an important gene – CYP2C19 – which is involved in the metabolism of the antiplatelet medicine clopidogrel (Plavix). Although most people have this gene, some don’t. Therefore, when we manage a patient with coronary disease, we use a genetic screen to determine whether that patient has CYP2C19 and then modify therapy based on these results.

Our genes also have become commodities – from companies willing to analyze our genes to determine our racial and ethnic ancestry or propensity for certain diseases to those that can sequence the family dog’s genes.

Advances in genomics similarly have impacted ob.gyn. practice. Because of rapidly evolving gene analysis tools, we can now, for example, noninvasively test a developing fetus’s risk for chromosomal abnormalities and determine a baby’s sex by merely examining fetal DNA in a pregnant woman’s bloodstream. Although not diagnostic, these gene-based prenatal screening tests have reduced the need for unnecessary, costly, and highly invasive procedures for many of our patients.
Importantly, our recognition that certain genes can confer a higher risk of disease has meant that performing a prenatal genetic evaluation can greatly inform the mother and her care team about potential problems her baby may have that may require additional management. For babies who have congenital heart defects, a genetic evaluation performed in addition to sonographic examination can provide ob.gyns. with crucial details to enhance pregnancy management and postnatal care decisions.

The importance of genetic testing and analysis in the detection, treatment, and prevention of congenital heart defects is the topic of part two of this two-part Master Class series authored by Shifa Turan, MD, associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine and director of the Fetal Heart Program at the University of Maryland Medical Center. By using a combination of three- and four-dimensional ultrasound with gene assays, Dr. Turan and her colleagues can greatly enhance and personalize the care they deliver to their patients.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

The average student in America learns that genes form the building blocks of what makes us human by the time they receive their high school diploma. Indeed, the completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003 paved the way for our genetic makeup, much like our medical history, to become a routine part of our health care. For example, our faculty at the University of Maryland School of Medicine discovered an important gene – CYP2C19 – which is involved in the metabolism of the antiplatelet medicine clopidogrel (Plavix). Although most people have this gene, some don’t. Therefore, when we manage a patient with coronary disease, we use a genetic screen to determine whether that patient has CYP2C19 and then modify therapy based on these results.

Our genes also have become commodities – from companies willing to analyze our genes to determine our racial and ethnic ancestry or propensity for certain diseases to those that can sequence the family dog’s genes.

Advances in genomics similarly have impacted ob.gyn. practice. Because of rapidly evolving gene analysis tools, we can now, for example, noninvasively test a developing fetus’s risk for chromosomal abnormalities and determine a baby’s sex by merely examining fetal DNA in a pregnant woman’s bloodstream. Although not diagnostic, these gene-based prenatal screening tests have reduced the need for unnecessary, costly, and highly invasive procedures for many of our patients.
Importantly, our recognition that certain genes can confer a higher risk of disease has meant that performing a prenatal genetic evaluation can greatly inform the mother and her care team about potential problems her baby may have that may require additional management. For babies who have congenital heart defects, a genetic evaluation performed in addition to sonographic examination can provide ob.gyns. with crucial details to enhance pregnancy management and postnatal care decisions.

The importance of genetic testing and analysis in the detection, treatment, and prevention of congenital heart defects is the topic of part two of this two-part Master Class series authored by Shifa Turan, MD, associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine and director of the Fetal Heart Program at the University of Maryland Medical Center. By using a combination of three- and four-dimensional ultrasound with gene assays, Dr. Turan and her colleagues can greatly enhance and personalize the care they deliver to their patients.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

The average student in America learns that genes form the building blocks of what makes us human by the time they receive their high school diploma. Indeed, the completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003 paved the way for our genetic makeup, much like our medical history, to become a routine part of our health care. For example, our faculty at the University of Maryland School of Medicine discovered an important gene – CYP2C19 – which is involved in the metabolism of the antiplatelet medicine clopidogrel (Plavix). Although most people have this gene, some don’t. Therefore, when we manage a patient with coronary disease, we use a genetic screen to determine whether that patient has CYP2C19 and then modify therapy based on these results.

Our genes also have become commodities – from companies willing to analyze our genes to determine our racial and ethnic ancestry or propensity for certain diseases to those that can sequence the family dog’s genes.

Advances in genomics similarly have impacted ob.gyn. practice. Because of rapidly evolving gene analysis tools, we can now, for example, noninvasively test a developing fetus’s risk for chromosomal abnormalities and determine a baby’s sex by merely examining fetal DNA in a pregnant woman’s bloodstream. Although not diagnostic, these gene-based prenatal screening tests have reduced the need for unnecessary, costly, and highly invasive procedures for many of our patients.
Importantly, our recognition that certain genes can confer a higher risk of disease has meant that performing a prenatal genetic evaluation can greatly inform the mother and her care team about potential problems her baby may have that may require additional management. For babies who have congenital heart defects, a genetic evaluation performed in addition to sonographic examination can provide ob.gyns. with crucial details to enhance pregnancy management and postnatal care decisions.

The importance of genetic testing and analysis in the detection, treatment, and prevention of congenital heart defects is the topic of part two of this two-part Master Class series authored by Shifa Turan, MD, associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine and director of the Fetal Heart Program at the University of Maryland Medical Center. By using a combination of three- and four-dimensional ultrasound with gene assays, Dr. Turan and her colleagues can greatly enhance and personalize the care they deliver to their patients.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

Regardless of political or ideological views, detecting the embryonic heartbeat in the first trimester is a major milestone for a patient. Measured via ultrasound, normal beating of 90-110 bpm around 6 weeks’ gestation indicates a high probability of a successful pregnancy. Once the embryo becomes a fetus, around gestational weeks 8-9, a strong fetal heartbeat of 140-170 bpm should be detected. Finding a heartbeat is a reassuring sign. However, simply seeing and/or hearing the heart is not enough to ensure that the fetus will develop without problems.

Congenital heart defects (CHDs) are the most common birth defects worldwide and, although many CHDs can be mild forms, approximately 25% are severe forms requiring early detection and intervention.¹ In addition, CHDs in the fetus can cause miscarriage, stillbirth, and infant deaths.

A 2014 analysis of data from the Wisconsin Stillbirth Service Program revealed that approximately 9% of stillbirths after 20 weeks’ gestation and nearly 4% of miscarriages prior to 20 weeks were attributable to congenital heart defects.² An analysis of the Active Malformations Surveillance Program at Brigham and Women’s Hospital also revealed CHDs as a major cause of stillbirths.³ In addition, a retrospective study of the Metropolitan Atlanta Congenital Defects program showed that, although 1-year survival of infants with severe CHDs has improved over the last 4 decades, mortality remains high.¹

Because advances in medicine and surgical procedures have significantly reduced deaths attributable to CHDs, more women with a preexisting heart condition are becoming pregnant. Women who have a CHD, even if corrected, can experience pregnancy complications such as arrhythmias, thrombosis, and cardiac dysfunction. In addition, babies of women with CHDs have a higher risk of developing cardiac defects as well.

Therefore, it is critical that we closely monitor our patients – both the mother and her baby – to ensure that the fetal heart is present, functional, and developing normally. We have invited Dr. Shifa Turan, associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland and director of the Fetal Heart Program at the University of Maryland Medical Center, both in Baltimore, to discuss the fetal heart. In this first section of a two-part series, Dr. Turan addresses how we can and should monitor fetal heart development.
 

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.
 

References

1. Pediatrics. 2013 May. doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-3435).

2. Am J Med Genet A. 2014 Mar. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.36366.

3. Birth Defects Res. 2018 Jan. 29. doi: 10.1002/bdr2.1097.

Regardless of political or ideological views, detecting the embryonic heartbeat in the first trimester is a major milestone for a patient. Measured via ultrasound, normal beating of 90-110 bpm around 6 weeks’ gestation indicates a high probability of a successful pregnancy. Once the embryo becomes a fetus, around gestational weeks 8-9, a strong fetal heartbeat of 140-170 bpm should be detected. Finding a heartbeat is a reassuring sign. However, simply seeing and/or hearing the heart is not enough to ensure that the fetus will develop without problems.

Congenital heart defects (CHDs) are the most common birth defects worldwide and, although many CHDs can be mild forms, approximately 25% are severe forms requiring early detection and intervention.¹ In addition, CHDs in the fetus can cause miscarriage, stillbirth, and infant deaths.

A 2014 analysis of data from the Wisconsin Stillbirth Service Program revealed that approximately 9% of stillbirths after 20 weeks’ gestation and nearly 4% of miscarriages prior to 20 weeks were attributable to congenital heart defects.² An analysis of the Active Malformations Surveillance Program at Brigham and Women’s Hospital also revealed CHDs as a major cause of stillbirths.³ In addition, a retrospective study of the Metropolitan Atlanta Congenital Defects program showed that, although 1-year survival of infants with severe CHDs has improved over the last 4 decades, mortality remains high.¹

Because advances in medicine and surgical procedures have significantly reduced deaths attributable to CHDs, more women with a preexisting heart condition are becoming pregnant. Women who have a CHD, even if corrected, can experience pregnancy complications such as arrhythmias, thrombosis, and cardiac dysfunction. In addition, babies of women with CHDs have a higher risk of developing cardiac defects as well.

Therefore, it is critical that we closely monitor our patients – both the mother and her baby – to ensure that the fetal heart is present, functional, and developing normally. We have invited Dr. Shifa Turan, associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland and director of the Fetal Heart Program at the University of Maryland Medical Center, both in Baltimore, to discuss the fetal heart. In this first section of a two-part series, Dr. Turan addresses how we can and should monitor fetal heart development.
 

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.
 

References

1. Pediatrics. 2013 May. doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-3435).

2. Am J Med Genet A. 2014 Mar. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.36366.

3. Birth Defects Res. 2018 Jan. 29. doi: 10.1002/bdr2.1097.

Regardless of political or ideological views, detecting the embryonic heartbeat in the first trimester is a major milestone for a patient. Measured via ultrasound, normal beating of 90-110 bpm around 6 weeks’ gestation indicates a high probability of a successful pregnancy. Once the embryo becomes a fetus, around gestational weeks 8-9, a strong fetal heartbeat of 140-170 bpm should be detected. Finding a heartbeat is a reassuring sign. However, simply seeing and/or hearing the heart is not enough to ensure that the fetus will develop without problems.

Congenital heart defects (CHDs) are the most common birth defects worldwide and, although many CHDs can be mild forms, approximately 25% are severe forms requiring early detection and intervention.¹ In addition, CHDs in the fetus can cause miscarriage, stillbirth, and infant deaths.

A 2014 analysis of data from the Wisconsin Stillbirth Service Program revealed that approximately 9% of stillbirths after 20 weeks’ gestation and nearly 4% of miscarriages prior to 20 weeks were attributable to congenital heart defects.² An analysis of the Active Malformations Surveillance Program at Brigham and Women’s Hospital also revealed CHDs as a major cause of stillbirths.³ In addition, a retrospective study of the Metropolitan Atlanta Congenital Defects program showed that, although 1-year survival of infants with severe CHDs has improved over the last 4 decades, mortality remains high.¹

Because advances in medicine and surgical procedures have significantly reduced deaths attributable to CHDs, more women with a preexisting heart condition are becoming pregnant. Women who have a CHD, even if corrected, can experience pregnancy complications such as arrhythmias, thrombosis, and cardiac dysfunction. In addition, babies of women with CHDs have a higher risk of developing cardiac defects as well.

Therefore, it is critical that we closely monitor our patients – both the mother and her baby – to ensure that the fetal heart is present, functional, and developing normally. We have invited Dr. Shifa Turan, associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland and director of the Fetal Heart Program at the University of Maryland Medical Center, both in Baltimore, to discuss the fetal heart. In this first section of a two-part series, Dr. Turan addresses how we can and should monitor fetal heart development.
 

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.
 

References

1. Pediatrics. 2013 May. doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-3435).

2. Am J Med Genet A. 2014 Mar. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.36366.

3. Birth Defects Res. 2018 Jan. 29. doi: 10.1002/bdr2.1097.

When managing our pregnant patients, we often might be tempted to view the delivery of the baby as the conclusion of prenatal care. For many women, the baby’s birth coincides with a resolution of health conditions that they may have experienced during pregnancy, including edema, gestational diabetes, and hypertensive disorders. However, the postpartum period remains a critical time in the health of the mother. Indeed, the weeks immediately following parturition often are colloquially referred to as the fourth trimester, further emphasizing the importance of appropriate patient management and care during this time.

One of the key health conditions we must monitor in the immediate postpartum period is hypertension. According to a 2018 report compiling data from nine of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Maternal Mortality Review Committees, hypertensive disorders accounted for approximately 9.3% of pregnancy-related maternal deaths within 42 days after delivery (http://reviewtoaction.org/Report_from_Nine_MMRCs). Although women who have hypertensive disorders during pregnancy are at risk for complications after giving birth, women without gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, or eclampsia can experience these conditions post partum at a rate between 0.3% and 27.5% (Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012 Jun;206[6]:470-5). Therefore, we cannot assume that a patient with an uncomplicated pregnancy is completely “in the clear” after delivery.

Despite these somewhat grim statistics, postpartum hypertension and postpartum preeclampsia are readily managed and treatable. With vigilant monitoring and strong communication with our patients, ob.gyns. can reduce the risks of these complications from occurring, more quickly resolve symptoms as they might arise, and significantly improve the health and well-being of new mothers in the fourth trimester.

The importance of caring for all of our patients along the continuum of pregnancy, especially as it pertains to monitoring and preventing postpartum hypertension, is the focus of the third and final installment of this Master Class series on hypertension in pregnancy authored by Dr. Baha Sibai, professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Texas McGovern Medical School, Houston.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

When managing our pregnant patients, we often might be tempted to view the delivery of the baby as the conclusion of prenatal care. For many women, the baby’s birth coincides with a resolution of health conditions that they may have experienced during pregnancy, including edema, gestational diabetes, and hypertensive disorders. However, the postpartum period remains a critical time in the health of the mother. Indeed, the weeks immediately following parturition often are colloquially referred to as the fourth trimester, further emphasizing the importance of appropriate patient management and care during this time.

One of the key health conditions we must monitor in the immediate postpartum period is hypertension. According to a 2018 report compiling data from nine of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Maternal Mortality Review Committees, hypertensive disorders accounted for approximately 9.3% of pregnancy-related maternal deaths within 42 days after delivery (http://reviewtoaction.org/Report_from_Nine_MMRCs). Although women who have hypertensive disorders during pregnancy are at risk for complications after giving birth, women without gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, or eclampsia can experience these conditions post partum at a rate between 0.3% and 27.5% (Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012 Jun;206[6]:470-5). Therefore, we cannot assume that a patient with an uncomplicated pregnancy is completely “in the clear” after delivery.

Despite these somewhat grim statistics, postpartum hypertension and postpartum preeclampsia are readily managed and treatable. With vigilant monitoring and strong communication with our patients, ob.gyns. can reduce the risks of these complications from occurring, more quickly resolve symptoms as they might arise, and significantly improve the health and well-being of new mothers in the fourth trimester.

The importance of caring for all of our patients along the continuum of pregnancy, especially as it pertains to monitoring and preventing postpartum hypertension, is the focus of the third and final installment of this Master Class series on hypertension in pregnancy authored by Dr. Baha Sibai, professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Texas McGovern Medical School, Houston.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

When managing our pregnant patients, we often might be tempted to view the delivery of the baby as the conclusion of prenatal care. For many women, the baby’s birth coincides with a resolution of health conditions that they may have experienced during pregnancy, including edema, gestational diabetes, and hypertensive disorders. However, the postpartum period remains a critical time in the health of the mother. Indeed, the weeks immediately following parturition often are colloquially referred to as the fourth trimester, further emphasizing the importance of appropriate patient management and care during this time.

One of the key health conditions we must monitor in the immediate postpartum period is hypertension. According to a 2018 report compiling data from nine of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Maternal Mortality Review Committees, hypertensive disorders accounted for approximately 9.3% of pregnancy-related maternal deaths within 42 days after delivery (http://reviewtoaction.org/Report_from_Nine_MMRCs). Although women who have hypertensive disorders during pregnancy are at risk for complications after giving birth, women without gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, or eclampsia can experience these conditions post partum at a rate between 0.3% and 27.5% (Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012 Jun;206[6]:470-5). Therefore, we cannot assume that a patient with an uncomplicated pregnancy is completely “in the clear” after delivery.

Despite these somewhat grim statistics, postpartum hypertension and postpartum preeclampsia are readily managed and treatable. With vigilant monitoring and strong communication with our patients, ob.gyns. can reduce the risks of these complications from occurring, more quickly resolve symptoms as they might arise, and significantly improve the health and well-being of new mothers in the fourth trimester.

The importance of caring for all of our patients along the continuum of pregnancy, especially as it pertains to monitoring and preventing postpartum hypertension, is the focus of the third and final installment of this Master Class series on hypertension in pregnancy authored by Dr. Baha Sibai, professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Texas McGovern Medical School, Houston.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

Preeclampsia is such a complicated and insidious disease – and one with such serious implications for the fetus, the infant at birth, and the mother – that we decided to run a three-part series on its diagnosis and management. The complication can have an acute onset in many patients, and this acute onset may rapidly progress to eclampsia and to severe consequences, including maternal death. In addition, the disorder can occur as early as the late second trimester and can thus impact the timing of delivery and fetal age at birth. A full knowledge of the disease state – its pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and various therapeutic options, both medical and surgical – is critical for obstetricians to be able to affect the health and well-being of both the mother and fetus.

I have invited Dr. Baha M. Sibai, professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Texas McGovern Medical School, Houston, to deliver this series. Our first installment addressed diagnostic criteria and attempted to clarify confusion that may have been introduced with the 2013 publication of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Task Force Report on Hypertension in Pregnancy. It is important that the diagnostic criteria are well established and understood because the management of patients is very much based on accurate placement within these diagnostic criteria.

This second installment of our series focuses on the application of appropriate therapeutic measures for various diagnostic groups. Dr. Sibai has spent decades studying hypertensive disorders in pregnancy and developing practical clinical strategies for management. It is our hope that the guidance and algorithms presented here will be useful for improving patient care and outcomes of this serious obstetrical syndrome. A third installment on postpartum management will come later.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

Preeclampsia is such a complicated and insidious disease – and one with such serious implications for the fetus, the infant at birth, and the mother – that we decided to run a three-part series on its diagnosis and management. The complication can have an acute onset in many patients, and this acute onset may rapidly progress to eclampsia and to severe consequences, including maternal death. In addition, the disorder can occur as early as the late second trimester and can thus impact the timing of delivery and fetal age at birth. A full knowledge of the disease state – its pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and various therapeutic options, both medical and surgical – is critical for obstetricians to be able to affect the health and well-being of both the mother and fetus.

I have invited Dr. Baha M. Sibai, professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Texas McGovern Medical School, Houston, to deliver this series. Our first installment addressed diagnostic criteria and attempted to clarify confusion that may have been introduced with the 2013 publication of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Task Force Report on Hypertension in Pregnancy. It is important that the diagnostic criteria are well established and understood because the management of patients is very much based on accurate placement within these diagnostic criteria.

This second installment of our series focuses on the application of appropriate therapeutic measures for various diagnostic groups. Dr. Sibai has spent decades studying hypertensive disorders in pregnancy and developing practical clinical strategies for management. It is our hope that the guidance and algorithms presented here will be useful for improving patient care and outcomes of this serious obstetrical syndrome. A third installment on postpartum management will come later.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

Preeclampsia is such a complicated and insidious disease – and one with such serious implications for the fetus, the infant at birth, and the mother – that we decided to run a three-part series on its diagnosis and management. The complication can have an acute onset in many patients, and this acute onset may rapidly progress to eclampsia and to severe consequences, including maternal death. In addition, the disorder can occur as early as the late second trimester and can thus impact the timing of delivery and fetal age at birth. A full knowledge of the disease state – its pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and various therapeutic options, both medical and surgical – is critical for obstetricians to be able to affect the health and well-being of both the mother and fetus.

I have invited Dr. Baha M. Sibai, professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Texas McGovern Medical School, Houston, to deliver this series. Our first installment addressed diagnostic criteria and attempted to clarify confusion that may have been introduced with the 2013 publication of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Task Force Report on Hypertension in Pregnancy. It is important that the diagnostic criteria are well established and understood because the management of patients is very much based on accurate placement within these diagnostic criteria.

This second installment of our series focuses on the application of appropriate therapeutic measures for various diagnostic groups. Dr. Sibai has spent decades studying hypertensive disorders in pregnancy and developing practical clinical strategies for management. It is our hope that the guidance and algorithms presented here will be useful for improving patient care and outcomes of this serious obstetrical syndrome. A third installment on postpartum management will come later.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

Preeclampsia is one of the most significant medical complications in pregnancy because of the acute onset it can have in so many affected patients. This acute onset may then rapidly progress to eclampsia and to severe consequences, including maternal death. In addition, the disorder can occur as early as the late second trimester and can thus impact the timing of delivery and fetal age at birth.

It is an obstetrical syndrome with serious implications for the fetus, the infant at birth, and the mother, and it is one whose incidence has been increasing. A full knowledge of the disease state – its pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and various therapeutic options, both medical and surgical – is critical for the health and well-being of both the mother and fetus.

A new classification system introduced in 2013 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Task Force Report on Hypertension in Pregnancy has added further complexity to an already complicated disease. On one hand, attempting to precisely achieve a diagnosis with such an imprecise and insidious disease seems ill advised. On the other hand, it is important to achieve some level of clarity with respect to diagnosis and management. In doing so, we must lean toward overdiagnosis and maintain a low threshold for treatment and intervention in the interest of the mother and infant.

I have engaged Baha M. Sibai, MD, professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Texas McGovern Medical School, Houston, to introduce a practical approach for interpreting and utilizing the ACOG report. This installment is the first of a two-part series in which we hope to provide practical clinical strategies for this complex disease.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@MDedge.com.

Preeclampsia is one of the most significant medical complications in pregnancy because of the acute onset it can have in so many affected patients. This acute onset may then rapidly progress to eclampsia and to severe consequences, including maternal death. In addition, the disorder can occur as early as the late second trimester and can thus impact the timing of delivery and fetal age at birth.

It is an obstetrical syndrome with serious implications for the fetus, the infant at birth, and the mother, and it is one whose incidence has been increasing. A full knowledge of the disease state – its pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and various therapeutic options, both medical and surgical – is critical for the health and well-being of both the mother and fetus.

A new classification system introduced in 2013 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Task Force Report on Hypertension in Pregnancy has added further complexity to an already complicated disease. On one hand, attempting to precisely achieve a diagnosis with such an imprecise and insidious disease seems ill advised. On the other hand, it is important to achieve some level of clarity with respect to diagnosis and management. In doing so, we must lean toward overdiagnosis and maintain a low threshold for treatment and intervention in the interest of the mother and infant.

I have engaged Baha M. Sibai, MD, professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Texas McGovern Medical School, Houston, to introduce a practical approach for interpreting and utilizing the ACOG report. This installment is the first of a two-part series in which we hope to provide practical clinical strategies for this complex disease.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@MDedge.com.

Preeclampsia is one of the most significant medical complications in pregnancy because of the acute onset it can have in so many affected patients. This acute onset may then rapidly progress to eclampsia and to severe consequences, including maternal death. In addition, the disorder can occur as early as the late second trimester and can thus impact the timing of delivery and fetal age at birth.

It is an obstetrical syndrome with serious implications for the fetus, the infant at birth, and the mother, and it is one whose incidence has been increasing. A full knowledge of the disease state – its pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and various therapeutic options, both medical and surgical – is critical for the health and well-being of both the mother and fetus.

A new classification system introduced in 2013 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Task Force Report on Hypertension in Pregnancy has added further complexity to an already complicated disease. On one hand, attempting to precisely achieve a diagnosis with such an imprecise and insidious disease seems ill advised. On the other hand, it is important to achieve some level of clarity with respect to diagnosis and management. In doing so, we must lean toward overdiagnosis and maintain a low threshold for treatment and intervention in the interest of the mother and infant.

I have engaged Baha M. Sibai, MD, professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Texas McGovern Medical School, Houston, to introduce a practical approach for interpreting and utilizing the ACOG report. This installment is the first of a two-part series in which we hope to provide practical clinical strategies for this complex disease.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@MDedge.com.

Some of our readers might remember the old saying, “Take two aspirin and call me in the morning,” as advice physicians gave to patients experiencing a minor malady. Aspirin often has been called a “wonder drug” as its uses continue to expand. From its first recorded use in the Ebers papyrus as an anti-inflammatory agent, to its first use in a clinical trial showing that it induces remission of fever and joint inflammation, to the discovery that it could prevent death from heart attack, to its anticancer properties, aspirin remains one of the most researched drugs in use today. According to ClinicalTrials.gov, there are over 465 active and nearly 1,000 completed aspirin-related clinical trials around the world.

Despite its myriad benefits, aspirin has been linked to bleeding, nausea, and gastrointestinal ulcers. Additionally, more research is needed to determine the risks/benefits of daily aspirin in younger adults (under age 50 years) or older adults (over age 70 years), although the ASPREE (Aspirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly) trial, expected to be completed in 2019, is working to determine the effects of daily low-dose aspirin (100 mg) on the health of people over age 65.

It is tempting to consider aspirin one of modern medicine’s so-called silver bullets, and, for women with a history of gestational hypertension and preeclampsia, it just might be. Aspirin use, especially daily aspirin, is typically not recommended during pregnancy, and most ob.gyns. will include aspirin on the “do not take” list they give to their patients during prenatal examinations. Women at risk for developing preeclampsia are the exceptions to this general rule, and a number of clinical studies have indicated that use of low-dose aspirin can help prevent disease as well as secondary outcomes for mother (i.e., placental abruption, antepartum hemorrhage) and baby (i.e., intrauterine growth restriction, stillbirth). In addition, aspirin is an easily obtainable, low-cost preventive measure for any patient at high risk.

To discuss the value of low-dose aspirin to prevent preeclampsia and how ob.gyns. can educate their patients and other health care professionals about its benefits, we have invited Charles J. Lockwood, MD, MHCM, senior vice president of University of South Florida Health and dean of Morsani College of Medicine at the University of South Florida, Tampa, and Jodi F. Abbott, MD, MSc, MHCM, director of obstetrics and gynecology at Boston Medical Center, and associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Boston University, to coauthor this month’s Master Class.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@MDedge.com.

Some of our readers might remember the old saying, “Take two aspirin and call me in the morning,” as advice physicians gave to patients experiencing a minor malady. Aspirin often has been called a “wonder drug” as its uses continue to expand. From its first recorded use in the Ebers papyrus as an anti-inflammatory agent, to its first use in a clinical trial showing that it induces remission of fever and joint inflammation, to the discovery that it could prevent death from heart attack, to its anticancer properties, aspirin remains one of the most researched drugs in use today. According to ClinicalTrials.gov, there are over 465 active and nearly 1,000 completed aspirin-related clinical trials around the world.

Despite its myriad benefits, aspirin has been linked to bleeding, nausea, and gastrointestinal ulcers. Additionally, more research is needed to determine the risks/benefits of daily aspirin in younger adults (under age 50 years) or older adults (over age 70 years), although the ASPREE (Aspirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly) trial, expected to be completed in 2019, is working to determine the effects of daily low-dose aspirin (100 mg) on the health of people over age 65.

It is tempting to consider aspirin one of modern medicine’s so-called silver bullets, and, for women with a history of gestational hypertension and preeclampsia, it just might be. Aspirin use, especially daily aspirin, is typically not recommended during pregnancy, and most ob.gyns. will include aspirin on the “do not take” list they give to their patients during prenatal examinations. Women at risk for developing preeclampsia are the exceptions to this general rule, and a number of clinical studies have indicated that use of low-dose aspirin can help prevent disease as well as secondary outcomes for mother (i.e., placental abruption, antepartum hemorrhage) and baby (i.e., intrauterine growth restriction, stillbirth). In addition, aspirin is an easily obtainable, low-cost preventive measure for any patient at high risk.

To discuss the value of low-dose aspirin to prevent preeclampsia and how ob.gyns. can educate their patients and other health care professionals about its benefits, we have invited Charles J. Lockwood, MD, MHCM, senior vice president of University of South Florida Health and dean of Morsani College of Medicine at the University of South Florida, Tampa, and Jodi F. Abbott, MD, MSc, MHCM, director of obstetrics and gynecology at Boston Medical Center, and associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Boston University, to coauthor this month’s Master Class.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@MDedge.com.

Some of our readers might remember the old saying, “Take two aspirin and call me in the morning,” as advice physicians gave to patients experiencing a minor malady. Aspirin often has been called a “wonder drug” as its uses continue to expand. From its first recorded use in the Ebers papyrus as an anti-inflammatory agent, to its first use in a clinical trial showing that it induces remission of fever and joint inflammation, to the discovery that it could prevent death from heart attack, to its anticancer properties, aspirin remains one of the most researched drugs in use today. According to ClinicalTrials.gov, there are over 465 active and nearly 1,000 completed aspirin-related clinical trials around the world.

Despite its myriad benefits, aspirin has been linked to bleeding, nausea, and gastrointestinal ulcers. Additionally, more research is needed to determine the risks/benefits of daily aspirin in younger adults (under age 50 years) or older adults (over age 70 years), although the ASPREE (Aspirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly) trial, expected to be completed in 2019, is working to determine the effects of daily low-dose aspirin (100 mg) on the health of people over age 65.

It is tempting to consider aspirin one of modern medicine’s so-called silver bullets, and, for women with a history of gestational hypertension and preeclampsia, it just might be. Aspirin use, especially daily aspirin, is typically not recommended during pregnancy, and most ob.gyns. will include aspirin on the “do not take” list they give to their patients during prenatal examinations. Women at risk for developing preeclampsia are the exceptions to this general rule, and a number of clinical studies have indicated that use of low-dose aspirin can help prevent disease as well as secondary outcomes for mother (i.e., placental abruption, antepartum hemorrhage) and baby (i.e., intrauterine growth restriction, stillbirth). In addition, aspirin is an easily obtainable, low-cost preventive measure for any patient at high risk.

To discuss the value of low-dose aspirin to prevent preeclampsia and how ob.gyns. can educate their patients and other health care professionals about its benefits, we have invited Charles J. Lockwood, MD, MHCM, senior vice president of University of South Florida Health and dean of Morsani College of Medicine at the University of South Florida, Tampa, and Jodi F. Abbott, MD, MSc, MHCM, director of obstetrics and gynecology at Boston Medical Center, and associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Boston University, to coauthor this month’s Master Class.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@MDedge.com.

We live during an unprecedented time in the history of ob.gyn. practice. Only a relatively short time ago, the only way ob.gyns. could assess the health of the fetus was through the invasive and risky procedures of the amniocentesis and, later, chorionic villus sampling. A woman who might eventually have had a baby with a congenital abnormality would not have known of her fetus’s defect until after birth, when successful intervention might have been extremely difficult to achieve or even too late. At the time, in utero evaluation could be done only by static, low-resolution sonographic images of the fetus. By today’s standards of imaging technology, these once-revolutionary pictures are almost tantamount to cave paintings.

Therefore, while it is imperative that we employ all available technologies and techniques possible to detect and diagnose potential fetal developmental defects, we must also bear in mind that no test is ever infallible. It is our obligation to provide the very best information based on expert and thorough review.

This month we have invited Mary Donofrio, MD, director of the fetal heart program at Children’s National Medical Center, Washington, to discuss how the latest advances in imaging technology have enabled us to screen for and diagnose congenital heart diseases, and improve outcomes for mother and baby.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

We live during an unprecedented time in the history of ob.gyn. practice. Only a relatively short time ago, the only way ob.gyns. could assess the health of the fetus was through the invasive and risky procedures of the amniocentesis and, later, chorionic villus sampling. A woman who might eventually have had a baby with a congenital abnormality would not have known of her fetus’s defect until after birth, when successful intervention might have been extremely difficult to achieve or even too late. At the time, in utero evaluation could be done only by static, low-resolution sonographic images of the fetus. By today’s standards of imaging technology, these once-revolutionary pictures are almost tantamount to cave paintings.

Therefore, while it is imperative that we employ all available technologies and techniques possible to detect and diagnose potential fetal developmental defects, we must also bear in mind that no test is ever infallible. It is our obligation to provide the very best information based on expert and thorough review.

This month we have invited Mary Donofrio, MD, director of the fetal heart program at Children’s National Medical Center, Washington, to discuss how the latest advances in imaging technology have enabled us to screen for and diagnose congenital heart diseases, and improve outcomes for mother and baby.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

We live during an unprecedented time in the history of ob.gyn. practice. Only a relatively short time ago, the only way ob.gyns. could assess the health of the fetus was through the invasive and risky procedures of the amniocentesis and, later, chorionic villus sampling. A woman who might eventually have had a baby with a congenital abnormality would not have known of her fetus’s defect until after birth, when successful intervention might have been extremely difficult to achieve or even too late. At the time, in utero evaluation could be done only by static, low-resolution sonographic images of the fetus. By today’s standards of imaging technology, these once-revolutionary pictures are almost tantamount to cave paintings.

Therefore, while it is imperative that we employ all available technologies and techniques possible to detect and diagnose potential fetal developmental defects, we must also bear in mind that no test is ever infallible. It is our obligation to provide the very best information based on expert and thorough review.

This month we have invited Mary Donofrio, MD, director of the fetal heart program at Children’s National Medical Center, Washington, to discuss how the latest advances in imaging technology have enabled us to screen for and diagnose congenital heart diseases, and improve outcomes for mother and baby.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

Pregnancy presents a unique opportunity for ob.gyns. to counsel their patients on the benefits of adopting healthy lifestyle habits. Women routinely seek care from a practitioner on a regular basis. Expectant mothers are highly motivated to take care of themselves for the sake of their developing babies. Patients can be much more receptive to recommendations from their health care teams during pregnancy than they might be outside of pregnancy. Frequent biometric analyses allow ob.gyns. to monitor patients’ progress and let them know, in a supportive manner, where they might be “falling short” of their health goals.

Several years ago, our guest author, Dr. Shelley Ehrlich of the University of Cincinnati, spoke at a diabetes in pregnancy meeting about her research on BPA and its potential association with the development of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). As a perinatologist who worked for many years with patients who had diabetes in pregnancy, I was particularly struck by her preliminary findings which indicated that BPA might be altering gene expression, thereby leading to pregnancy-related disorders. At the time, Dr. Ehrlich’s research was still in the very early stages. However, her results were a new way of answering the age-old question of why some women, including those without other overt risk factors, might develop GDM.

Therefore, I’m delighted that Dr. Ehrlich agreed to author this month’s class to provide an overview of where her last few years of research has taken her.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@MDedge.com.

Pregnancy presents a unique opportunity for ob.gyns. to counsel their patients on the benefits of adopting healthy lifestyle habits. Women routinely seek care from a practitioner on a regular basis. Expectant mothers are highly motivated to take care of themselves for the sake of their developing babies. Patients can be much more receptive to recommendations from their health care teams during pregnancy than they might be outside of pregnancy. Frequent biometric analyses allow ob.gyns. to monitor patients’ progress and let them know, in a supportive manner, where they might be “falling short” of their health goals.

Several years ago, our guest author, Dr. Shelley Ehrlich of the University of Cincinnati, spoke at a diabetes in pregnancy meeting about her research on BPA and its potential association with the development of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). As a perinatologist who worked for many years with patients who had diabetes in pregnancy, I was particularly struck by her preliminary findings which indicated that BPA might be altering gene expression, thereby leading to pregnancy-related disorders. At the time, Dr. Ehrlich’s research was still in the very early stages. However, her results were a new way of answering the age-old question of why some women, including those without other overt risk factors, might develop GDM.

Therefore, I’m delighted that Dr. Ehrlich agreed to author this month’s class to provide an overview of where her last few years of research has taken her.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@MDedge.com.

Pregnancy presents a unique opportunity for ob.gyns. to counsel their patients on the benefits of adopting healthy lifestyle habits. Women routinely seek care from a practitioner on a regular basis. Expectant mothers are highly motivated to take care of themselves for the sake of their developing babies. Patients can be much more receptive to recommendations from their health care teams during pregnancy than they might be outside of pregnancy. Frequent biometric analyses allow ob.gyns. to monitor patients’ progress and let them know, in a supportive manner, where they might be “falling short” of their health goals.

Several years ago, our guest author, Dr. Shelley Ehrlich of the University of Cincinnati, spoke at a diabetes in pregnancy meeting about her research on BPA and its potential association with the development of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). As a perinatologist who worked for many years with patients who had diabetes in pregnancy, I was particularly struck by her preliminary findings which indicated that BPA might be altering gene expression, thereby leading to pregnancy-related disorders. At the time, Dr. Ehrlich’s research was still in the very early stages. However, her results were a new way of answering the age-old question of why some women, including those without other overt risk factors, might develop GDM.

Therefore, I’m delighted that Dr. Ehrlich agreed to author this month’s class to provide an overview of where her last few years of research has taken her.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@MDedge.com.

As ob.gyns., our decisions not only deeply affect the health and well-being of our patients, but can also dramatically impact their children and families. Perhaps nowhere else is the gravity of our medical choices more felt than in the management of premature labor. Premature birth is one of the major drivers of infant mortality, which remains a significant public health problem in the United States where the rate of infant mortality is nearly 6 of every 1,000 live births.

Equally important is a greater need across our practice to avoid being too quick to prescribe therapeutic measures that do not treat the root of the problem. We must instead provide guidance based on rigorously conducted research and analysis. However, even very promising results should not necessarily be used to guide all of clinical practice, and certainly not without scrutiny and considerable analysis.

To dissect the available data and present the most current findings regarding progesterone use to prevent preterm labor, we have invited Steve Caritis, MD, professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at Magee-Womens Hospital, University of Pittsburgh, to be the guest author for this month’s Master Class.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@frontlinemedcom.com.

As ob.gyns., our decisions not only deeply affect the health and well-being of our patients, but can also dramatically impact their children and families. Perhaps nowhere else is the gravity of our medical choices more felt than in the management of premature labor. Premature birth is one of the major drivers of infant mortality, which remains a significant public health problem in the United States where the rate of infant mortality is nearly 6 of every 1,000 live births.

Equally important is a greater need across our practice to avoid being too quick to prescribe therapeutic measures that do not treat the root of the problem. We must instead provide guidance based on rigorously conducted research and analysis. However, even very promising results should not necessarily be used to guide all of clinical practice, and certainly not without scrutiny and considerable analysis.

To dissect the available data and present the most current findings regarding progesterone use to prevent preterm labor, we have invited Steve Caritis, MD, professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at Magee-Womens Hospital, University of Pittsburgh, to be the guest author for this month’s Master Class.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@frontlinemedcom.com.

As ob.gyns., our decisions not only deeply affect the health and well-being of our patients, but can also dramatically impact their children and families. Perhaps nowhere else is the gravity of our medical choices more felt than in the management of premature labor. Premature birth is one of the major drivers of infant mortality, which remains a significant public health problem in the United States where the rate of infant mortality is nearly 6 of every 1,000 live births.

Equally important is a greater need across our practice to avoid being too quick to prescribe therapeutic measures that do not treat the root of the problem. We must instead provide guidance based on rigorously conducted research and analysis. However, even very promising results should not necessarily be used to guide all of clinical practice, and certainly not without scrutiny and considerable analysis.

To dissect the available data and present the most current findings regarding progesterone use to prevent preterm labor, we have invited Steve Caritis, MD, professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at Magee-Womens Hospital, University of Pittsburgh, to be the guest author for this month’s Master Class.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece said he had no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@frontlinemedcom.com.