Pub Date : 2025-02-03DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2025.01.036
Luís Belo
{"title":"Association of preeclampsia with metabolic syndrome features before, during, and after pregnancy.","authors":"Luís Belo","doi":"10.1016/j.ajog.2025.01.036","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajog.2025.01.036","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":7574,"journal":{"name":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.7,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143254243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2024.04.033
Isabelle Monier RM, PhD , Anne Ego MD, PhD , Alice Hocquette RM, PhD , Alexandra Benachi MD, PhD , Francois Goffinet MD, PhD , Nathalie Lelong MSc , Camille Le Ray MD, PhD , Jennifer Zeitlin DSc , ENP2021 Study Group
<div><h3>Background</h3><div><span>Small for gestational age is defined as a birthweight below a birthweight percentile threshold, usually the 10th percentile, with the third or fifth percentile used to identify severe small for gestational age. Small for gestational age is used as a proxy for growth restriction in the </span>newborn<span>, but small-for-gestational-age newborns can be physiologically small and healthy. In addition, this definition excludes growth-restricted newborns who have weights more than the 10th percentile. To address these limits, a Delphi study developed a new consensus definition of growth restriction in newborns on the basis of neonatal anthropometric and clinical parameters, but it has not been evaluated.</span></div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To assess the prevalence of growth restriction in the newborn according to the Delphi consensus definition and to investigate associated morbidity risks compared with definitions of Small for gestational age using birthweight percentile thresholds.</div></div><div><h3>Study Design</h3><div><span><span>Data come from the 2016 and 2021 French National Perinatal Surveys, which include all births ≥22 weeks and/or with birthweights ≥500 g in all maternity units in France over 1 week. Data are collected from </span>medical records<span> and interviews with mothers after the delivery. The study population included 23,897 liveborn singleton births. The Delphi consensus definition of growth restriction was birthweight less than third percentile or at least 3 of the following criteria: birthweight, head circumference or length <10th percentile, antenatal diagnosis<span> of growth restriction, or maternal hypertension<span><span>. A composite of neonatal morbidity at birth, defined as 5-minute </span>Apgar score <7, cord arterial pH <7.10, resuscitation and/or neonatal admission, was compared using the Delphi definition and usual birthweight percentile thresholds for defining small for gestational age using the following birthweight percentile groups: less than a third, third to fourth, and fifth to ninth percentiles. Relative risks were adjusted for maternal characteristics (age, parity, </span></span></span></span>body mass index, smoking, educational level, preexisting hypertension and diabetes, and study year) and then for the consensus definition and birthweight percentile groups. Multiple imputation by chained equations was used to impute missing data. Analyses were carried out in the overall sample and among term and preterm newborns separately.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We identified that 4.9% (95% confidence intervals, 4.6–5.2) of newborns had growth restriction. Of these infants, 29.7% experienced morbidity, yielding an adjusted relative risk of 2.5 (95% confidence intervals, 2.2–2.7) compared with newborns without growth restriction. Compared with birthweight ≥10th percentile, morbidity risks were higher for low birthweight percentiles (less than third
{"title":"Validity of a Delphi consensus definition of growth restriction in the newborn for identifying neonatal morbidity","authors":"Isabelle Monier RM, PhD , Anne Ego MD, PhD , Alice Hocquette RM, PhD , Alexandra Benachi MD, PhD , Francois Goffinet MD, PhD , Nathalie Lelong MSc , Camille Le Ray MD, PhD , Jennifer Zeitlin DSc , ENP2021 Study Group","doi":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.04.033","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.04.033","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div><span>Small for gestational age is defined as a birthweight below a birthweight percentile threshold, usually the 10th percentile, with the third or fifth percentile used to identify severe small for gestational age. Small for gestational age is used as a proxy for growth restriction in the </span>newborn<span>, but small-for-gestational-age newborns can be physiologically small and healthy. In addition, this definition excludes growth-restricted newborns who have weights more than the 10th percentile. To address these limits, a Delphi study developed a new consensus definition of growth restriction in newborns on the basis of neonatal anthropometric and clinical parameters, but it has not been evaluated.</span></div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To assess the prevalence of growth restriction in the newborn according to the Delphi consensus definition and to investigate associated morbidity risks compared with definitions of Small for gestational age using birthweight percentile thresholds.</div></div><div><h3>Study Design</h3><div><span><span>Data come from the 2016 and 2021 French National Perinatal Surveys, which include all births ≥22 weeks and/or with birthweights ≥500 g in all maternity units in France over 1 week. Data are collected from </span>medical records<span> and interviews with mothers after the delivery. The study population included 23,897 liveborn singleton births. The Delphi consensus definition of growth restriction was birthweight less than third percentile or at least 3 of the following criteria: birthweight, head circumference or length <10th percentile, antenatal diagnosis<span> of growth restriction, or maternal hypertension<span><span>. A composite of neonatal morbidity at birth, defined as 5-minute </span>Apgar score <7, cord arterial pH <7.10, resuscitation and/or neonatal admission, was compared using the Delphi definition and usual birthweight percentile thresholds for defining small for gestational age using the following birthweight percentile groups: less than a third, third to fourth, and fifth to ninth percentiles. Relative risks were adjusted for maternal characteristics (age, parity, </span></span></span></span>body mass index, smoking, educational level, preexisting hypertension and diabetes, and study year) and then for the consensus definition and birthweight percentile groups. Multiple imputation by chained equations was used to impute missing data. Analyses were carried out in the overall sample and among term and preterm newborns separately.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We identified that 4.9% (95% confidence intervals, 4.6–5.2) of newborns had growth restriction. Of these infants, 29.7% experienced morbidity, yielding an adjusted relative risk of 2.5 (95% confidence intervals, 2.2–2.7) compared with newborns without growth restriction. Compared with birthweight ≥10th percentile, morbidity risks were higher for low birthweight percentiles (less than third","PeriodicalId":7574,"journal":{"name":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","volume":"232 2","pages":"Pages 224.e1-224.e13"},"PeriodicalIF":8.7,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140850314","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2024.04.031
Kristen A. Cagino MD, Rylee D. Trotter BBA, Katherine E. Lambert BS, Saloni C. Kumar MS, Baha M. Sibai MD
Background
The recent American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Practice Bulletin offers no guidance on the management of preeclampsia with severe features at <24 weeks of gestation. Historically, immediate delivery was recommended because of poor perinatal outcomes and high maternal morbidity. Recently, advances in neonatal resuscitation have led to increased survival at periviable gestational ages.
Objective
This study aimed to report perinatal and maternal outcomes after expectant management of preeclampsia with severe features at <24 weeks of gestation.
Study Design
This was a retrospective case series of preeclampsia with severe features at <24 weeks of gestation at a level 4 center between 2017 and 2023. Individuals requiring delivery within 24 hours of diagnosis were excluded. Perinatal and maternal outcomes were analyzed. Categorical variables from our database were compared with previously published data using chi-square tests.
Results
A total of 41 individuals were diagnosed with preeclampsia with severe features at <24 weeks of gestation. After the exclusion of delivery within 24 hours, 30 individuals (73%) were evaluated. The median gestational age at diagnosis was 22 weeks (interquartile range, 22–23). Moreover, 16% of individuals had assisted reproductive technology, 27% of individuals had chronic hypertension, 13% of individuals had pregestational diabetes mellitus, 30% of individuals had previous preeclampsia, and 73% of individuals had a body mass index of >30 kg/m2. The median latency periods at 22 and 23 weeks of gestation were 7 days (interquartile range, 4–23) and 8 days (interquartile range, 4–13). In preeclampsia with severe features, neonatal survival rates were 44% (95% confidence interval, 3%–85%) at 22 weeks of gestation and 29% (95% confidence interval, 1%–56%) at 23 weeks of gestation. There were 2 cases of acute kidney injury (7%) and 2 cases of pericardial or pleural effusions (7%). Overall perinatal survival at <24 weeks of gestation was 30% in our current study vs 7% in previous reports (P=.02).
Conclusion
For cases of expectant management of preeclampsia with severe features at <24 weeks of gestation, our findings showed an increased perinatal survival rate with decreased maternal morbidity compared with previously published data. This information may be used when counseling on expectant management of preeclampsia with severe features at <24 weeks of gestation.
{"title":"Expectant management of preeclampsia with severe features diagnosed at less than 24 weeks","authors":"Kristen A. Cagino MD, Rylee D. Trotter BBA, Katherine E. Lambert BS, Saloni C. Kumar MS, Baha M. Sibai MD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.04.031","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.04.031","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The recent American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Practice Bulletin offers no guidance on the management of preeclampsia<span><span> with severe features at <24 weeks of gestation. Historically, immediate delivery was recommended because of poor perinatal outcomes and high maternal morbidity. Recently, advances in </span>neonatal resuscitation have led to increased survival at periviable gestational ages.</span></div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This study aimed to report perinatal and maternal outcomes after expectant management of preeclampsia with severe features at <24 weeks of gestation.</div></div><div><h3>Study Design</h3><div>This was a retrospective case series of preeclampsia with severe features at <24 weeks of gestation at a level 4 center between 2017 and 2023. Individuals requiring delivery within 24 hours of diagnosis were excluded. Perinatal and maternal outcomes were analyzed. Categorical variables from our database were compared with previously published data using chi-square tests.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div><span><span>A total of 41 individuals were diagnosed with preeclampsia with severe features at <24 weeks of gestation. After the exclusion of delivery within 24 hours, 30 individuals (73%) were evaluated. The median gestational age at diagnosis was 22 weeks (interquartile range, 22–23). Moreover, 16% of individuals had assisted reproductive technology, 27% of individuals had chronic hypertension, 13% of individuals had pregestational diabetes mellitus, 30% of individuals had previous preeclampsia, and 73% of individuals had a </span>body mass index of >30 kg/m</span><sup>2</sup><span><span><span>. The median latency periods at 22 and 23 weeks of gestation were 7 days (interquartile range, 4–23) and 8 days (interquartile range, 4–13). In preeclampsia with severe features, neonatal survival rates were 44% (95% confidence interval, 3%–85%) at 22 weeks of gestation and 29% (95% confidence interval, 1%–56%) at 23 weeks of gestation. There were 2 cases of </span>acute kidney injury (7%) and 2 cases of pericardial or </span>pleural effusions (7%). Overall perinatal survival at <24 weeks of gestation was 30% in our current study vs 7% in previous reports (</span><em>P</em>=.02).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>For cases of expectant management of preeclampsia with severe features at <24 weeks of gestation, our findings showed an increased perinatal survival rate with decreased maternal morbidity compared with previously published data. This information may be used when counseling on expectant management of preeclampsia with severe features at <24 weeks of gestation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7574,"journal":{"name":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","volume":"232 2","pages":"Pages 212.e1-212.e8"},"PeriodicalIF":8.7,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140850071","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2024.08.023
Naomi N. Adjei MD, MPH , Allen M. Haas MS , Charlotte C. Sun DrPH, MPH , Hui Zhao PhD , Paul G. Yeh MD, DrPH , Sharon H. Giordano MD, MPH , Iakovos Toumazis PhD , Larissa A. Meyer MD, MPH
Background
Ovarian cancer is associated with delayed diagnosis and poor survival; thus, interest is high in identifying predictive and prognostic biomarkers and novel therapeutic agents.
Although the costs of ovarian cancer care are likely to increase as newer, more effective, but more expensive treatment regimens become available, information on the current costs of care for ovarian cancer—across the care continuum from diagnosis to the end of life—are lacking.
Objective
This study aimed to estimate real-world mean and median costs of ovarian cancer care within the first 5 years after diagnosis by patients' phase of care, age, race/ethnicity, and geographic region.
Study Design
We performed a retrospective cohort study of ovarian cancer patients diagnosed between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2020. We used claims data from Optum’s deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart database, which includes inpatient, outpatient, and prescription claims for commercial insurance and Medicare beneficiaries nationwide. Cost of ovarian cancer care were calculated for the start of care (ie, the first 6 months), continuing care (ie, period between the initial and end-of-life care), and end-of-life care (ie, the last 6 months) phases and reported in 2021 U.S. dollar amounts. Ovarian cancer care costs were stratified by age, race/ethnicity, and geographic region. Due to the skewed nature of cost data, the mean cost data were log-transformed for modeling. Ordinary least-squares regression was conducted on the log costs, adjusting for patient categorical age, race/ethnicity, and geographic region.
Results
A total of 7913 patients were included in the analysis. The mean cost per year for ovarian cancer care was >$200,000 during the start of care, between $26,000 and $88,000 during the continuing care phase, and >$129,000 during the end-of-life care phase. There were statistically significant associations between age and costs during each phase of care. Compared to younger patients, older patients incurred higher costs during the continuing care phase and lower costs during the end-of-life care phase. Geographic differences in the costs of ovarian cancer care were also noted regardless of the phase of care. There were no associations between cost and race/ethnicity in our cohort.
Conclusion
Ovarian cancer care costs are substantial and vary by the phase of care, age category, and geographic region. As more effective but expensive treatment options for ovarian cancer become available with potential survival benefit, sustainable interventions to reduce the cost of care for ovarian cancer will be needed throughout the cancer care continuum.
{"title":"Cost of ovarian cancer by the phase of care in the United States","authors":"Naomi N. Adjei MD, MPH , Allen M. Haas MS , Charlotte C. Sun DrPH, MPH , Hui Zhao PhD , Paul G. Yeh MD, DrPH , Sharon H. Giordano MD, MPH , Iakovos Toumazis PhD , Larissa A. Meyer MD, MPH","doi":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.08.023","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.08.023","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Ovarian cancer is associated with delayed diagnosis and poor survival; thus, interest is high in identifying predictive and prognostic biomarkers and novel therapeutic agents.</div><div>Although the costs of ovarian cancer care are likely to increase as newer, more effective, but more expensive treatment regimens become available, information on the current costs of care for ovarian cancer—across the care continuum from diagnosis to the end of life—are lacking.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This study aimed to estimate real-world mean and median costs of ovarian cancer care within the first 5 years after diagnosis by patients' phase of care, age, race/ethnicity, and geographic region.</div></div><div><h3>Study Design</h3><div>We performed a retrospective cohort study of ovarian cancer patients diagnosed between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2020. We used claims data from Optum’s deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart database, which includes inpatient, outpatient, and prescription claims for commercial insurance and Medicare beneficiaries nationwide. Cost of ovarian cancer care were calculated for the start of care (ie, the first 6 months), continuing care (ie, period between the initial and end-of-life care), and end-of-life care (ie, the last 6 months) phases and reported in 2021 U.S. dollar amounts. Ovarian cancer care costs were stratified by age, race/ethnicity, and geographic region. Due to the skewed nature of cost data, the mean cost data were log-transformed for modeling. Ordinary least-squares regression was conducted on the log costs, adjusting for patient categorical age, race/ethnicity, and geographic region.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 7913 patients were included in the analysis. The mean cost per year for ovarian cancer care was >$200,000 during the start of care, between $26,000 and $88,000 during the continuing care phase, and >$129,000 during the end-of-life care phase. There were statistically significant associations between age and costs during each phase of care. Compared to younger patients, older patients incurred higher costs during the continuing care phase and lower costs during the end-of-life care phase. Geographic differences in the costs of ovarian cancer care were also noted regardless of the phase of care. There were no associations between cost and race/ethnicity in our cohort.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Ovarian cancer care costs are substantial and vary by the phase of care, age category, and geographic region. As more effective but expensive treatment options for ovarian cancer become available with potential survival benefit, sustainable interventions to reduce the cost of care for ovarian cancer will be needed throughout the cancer care continuum.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7574,"journal":{"name":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","volume":"232 2","pages":"Pages 204.e1-204.e13"},"PeriodicalIF":8.7,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142003387","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2024.08.013
Emily D.S. Hales MPH, Amy K. Ferketich PhD, Mark A. Klebanoff MD, MPH
{"title":"Racial disparities in maternal health","authors":"Emily D.S. Hales MPH, Amy K. Ferketich PhD, Mark A. Klebanoff MD, MPH","doi":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.08.013","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.08.013","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":7574,"journal":{"name":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","volume":"232 2","pages":"Page e69"},"PeriodicalIF":8.7,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141987234","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2024.08.031
Li Zhen MD, Dong-Zhi Li MD
{"title":"Performance of first-trimester fetal anomaly scan: not just high sensitivity","authors":"Li Zhen MD, Dong-Zhi Li MD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.08.031","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.08.031","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":7574,"journal":{"name":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","volume":"232 2","pages":"Pages e72-e73"},"PeriodicalIF":8.7,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142091392","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2024.09.112
Greggory R. DeVore MD, Bardo Polanco PhD, RDMS, Wesley Lee MD, Jeffrey Brian Fowlkes PhD, Emma E. Peek BS, Manesha Putra MD, John C. Hobbins MD
{"title":"Is there evidence that decreased maternal activity increases fetal growth?","authors":"Greggory R. DeVore MD, Bardo Polanco PhD, RDMS, Wesley Lee MD, Jeffrey Brian Fowlkes PhD, Emma E. Peek BS, Manesha Putra MD, John C. Hobbins MD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.09.112","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.09.112","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":7574,"journal":{"name":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","volume":"232 2","pages":"Pages e57-e60"},"PeriodicalIF":8.7,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142363973","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2024.08.034
Meng Ding MMed, Chenyu Chi MMed
{"title":"Comprehensive reflections on first-trimester anomaly scan implementation in the Dutch national screening program","authors":"Meng Ding MMed, Chenyu Chi MMed","doi":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.08.034","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.08.034","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":7574,"journal":{"name":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","volume":"232 2","pages":"Page e79"},"PeriodicalIF":8.7,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142078859","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-01DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2024.07.012
Ms Meesha Vullikanti BA, Dr Alica Ely Yamin JD, MPH, PhD
{"title":"Obstetric violence is not a misnomer","authors":"Ms Meesha Vullikanti BA, Dr Alica Ely Yamin JD, MPH, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.07.012","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.07.012","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":7574,"journal":{"name":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","volume":"232 2","pages":"Page e51"},"PeriodicalIF":8.7,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141615736","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：