Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Pregnancy: A Comprehensive Review

Written By

Junna Ye, Jiaxin Li, Yizhu Lin, Yujuan Wang, Jingyi Wu and Zhuochao Zhou

Submitted: 24 September 2024 Reviewed: 22 October 2024 Published: 25 November 2024

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1007951

Chapter metrics overview

261 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

Health during pregnancy is a key determinant of population health, with approximately 85% of women worldwide experiencing pregnancy in their lifetime. However, due to different living conditions (local policies, living habits, etc.), medical conditions (genetic testing, medication, etc.), and previous pregnancy experiences (number of previous miscarriages, etc.), pregnant women suffer from a wide range of complications at the time of conception, which will increase the likelihood of adverse pregnancy outcomes, such as miscarriages, stillbirth, preterm labor, and birth defects. These factors also contribute to the physical health of the fetus after birth. In addition, there are some areas where proper contraceptive knowledge has not been disseminated to women of childbearing age, which has led to a number of unwanted pregnancies. Doctors and the government should pay more attention to pregnant women with illnesses and provide them with appropriate support to have a smooth pregnancy and delivery.

Keywords

  • pregnancy
  • fetus
  • physical and mental health
  • living conditions
  • contraception

1. Introduction

Pregnancy is the process of growth and development of the embryo and fetus in the mother’s body and is divided into three stages: 1–12 weeks, 12–28 weeks and 28–40 weeks. In turn, health during pregnancy is a key determinant of population health, with approximately 85% of women worldwide experiencing pregnancy [1]. However, most pregnant women suffer from comorbidities (e.g., coronary heart disease, obesity, and anxiety) (Figure 1) at the time of conception, combined with different living conditions (e.g., smoking, alcohol consumption, etc.), medical conditions (e.g., manner of intervening in the miscarriage, postnatal care, etc.), and previous pregnancy experiences, all of which lead to an increased likelihood of adverse pregnancy outcomes, including miscarriage, stillbirth, preterm labor (extraordinarily preterm, very preterm, moderate to late preterm), birth defects, etc. [2, 3, 4, 5]. Worldwide, 20 million women have pregnancies with high risks, and over 800 die from perinatal conditions every day [6]. At the same time, more and more women are experiencing pregnancy complications during pregnancy and after delivery. The postnatal and fetal status is also affected, and the quality of their health is greatly reduced. In addition, women conceive a life due to a lack of knowledge about contraception in some areas. Therefore, the health of pregnant women and fetuses deserves our attention.

Figure 1.

Risk factors and associated complications for pregnant women.

This chapter summarizes the relevant literature on pregnancy, describes the effects of maternal physical health, mental health, living conditions, and the number of previous pregnancies on pregnancy outcomes and postnatal neonatal conditions, and discusses the specific roles of these factors to mitigate the likelihood of adverse pregnancy outcomes and unfavorable neonatal conditions through medical care, government support, and other methods.

1.1 Cardiovascular diseases

Cardiovascular diseases are a group of heart and blood vessel disorders, mainly including congenital heart disease, rheumatic heart disease, and hypertension. It is a serious threat to human beings, especially to pregnant women, and is characterized by high prevalence, disability, and mortality.

Maternal deaths due to heart disease are currently on the rise and have become the most important cause of death in Western countries. In a subgroup of 5739 pregnant patients with prevalent diagnoses of congenital heart disease (57%) and valvular heart disease (29%), the highest mortality rate was in the pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) group (9%), with heart failure occurring in 11% and arrhythmia in 2% patients [7]. Another study also showed that women with congenital heart disease had a significantly higher frequency of stroke, heart failure, and arrhythmia during pregnancy. Neonatal mortality was significantly higher in the adult congenital heart disease group compared with the non-adult congenital heart disease group (0.83% vs. 0.22%; p = 0.001), and newborns of congenital heart disease pregnant women had low/very low or extremely immature birth weight (p < 0.001) or required more resuscitation and mechanical ventilation (both p < 0.001) [8]. The Norwegian Health Registry likewise registered all pregnant women in the country and studied whether chronic diseases were associated with miscarriage, and it found that women with cardiometabolic diseases had an increased risk of miscarriage (OR 1.25, 95% CI: 1.20–1.31; P < 0.001). And the risk was elevated for all diseases included in cardiometabolic diseases: atherosclerosis (OR 2.22; 95% CI: 1.42–3.49; p < 0.001), hypertensive disorders (OR 1.19; 95% CI: 1.13–1.26; p < 0.001), and type 2 diabetes mellitus (OR 1.38; 95% CI: 1.26–1.51; p < 0.001). In other categories, diseases such as hypoparathyroidism (OR 2.58; 95% CI: 1.35–4.92; p = 0.004), and Cushing’s syndrome (OR 1.97; 95% CI: 1.06–3.65; p = 0.03) had elevated risk [9].

Heart disease is a threat to the health of pregnant women in regions other than the West. At Madras Medical College in India, heart disease (HD) was diagnosed for the first time in 60.5% of pregnant women, with rheumatic HD being the most common (42%). The primary outcomes in pregnant women with heart disease were maternal mortality and maternal combined cardiac events (CE) (15.2%). The highest maternal mortality was in patients with prosthetic heart valves (PHV) (8.6%). The most common maternal combined cardiac event was heart failure (66.0%). So women with heart disease have a high mortality rate, the highest of which are PHV, pulmonary hypertension (PH), and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) [10] (Table 1). Therefore, pregnant women with heart disease need intensive specialized care and preconception counseling, and women at high risk are advised not to become pregnant.

Adverse maternal outcome predictors
Pulmonary hypertensionProsthetic heart valveLeft ventricular dysfunctionSignificant mitral stenosisSignificant aortic stenosis
Maternal cardiac events32.5%34.3%90.5%23.4%13.3%
Maternal
death
4.8%8.6%7.9%1.4%8.6%

Table 1.

Impact of various types of heart disease on pregnancy outcomes.

Note: all p < 0.05 (data from Pregnancy outcomes in women with heart disease: the Madras Medical College Pregnancy and Cardiac (M-PAC) Registry from India [10]).

Another high prevalence of cardiovascular disease is hypertension. A specific group of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy is idiopathic noncirrhotic portal hypertension (INCPH). A study of 24 pregnancies in 16 patients with INCPH found that the overall prognosis for mothers and infants was favorable, despite complications associated with portal hypertension (e.g., miscarriage and preterm labor). Most fetuses at 20 weeks of gestation were healthy, and mothers were asymptomatic at a median follow-up of 27 months postpartum [11]. To minimize hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) complications, prompt identification and treatment including regular blood pressure monitoring and self-monitoring, combined with equity identification strategies and quality improvement measures, should be used to prevent serious complications and death.

Preeclampsia (PE) is a syndrome of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy that occurs most often after 20 weeks of gestation and is defined as new onset persistent hypertension with proteinuria or systemic involvement [12]. By comparing pregnant women in Sweden and China, a study found that the overall prevalence of preeclampsia was similar in both countries, with 16,068 (2.9%) and 1803 (2.3%) cases, but in terms of severity, there were 5222 (32.5%) cases in Sweden and 1228 (68.1%) cases in China. A higher risk factor for preeclampsia in China compared with Sweden was obesity (China: OR 5.12; 95% CI: 3.82–6.86; Sweden: OR 3.49; 95% CI: 3.31–3.67). In contrast, a higher risk factor for preeclampsia in Sweden compared with China was childlessness (Sweden: OR 3.91; 95% CI: 3.65–4.18; China: OR 1.65; 95% CI: 1.20–2.25) (Table 2). These suggest an association between obesity and childlessness and preeclampsia [13]. The impact of obesity on pregnancy complications in pregnant women with heart disease was further analyzed in a study, and it showed that pregnant women with a higher body mass index (BMI) (30 kg/m2 and above) had a higher risk of experiencing an adverse CE in 790 pregnancies (23% vs. 14%; p = 0.006). In multivariate models, obesity (OR 1.7; 95% CI: 1.0–2.7) and higher Canadian Cardiac Disease in Pregnancy risk index (CARPREG II) (OR 1.7; 95% CI: 1.5–1.9) predicted CE. Preeclampsia was more common in obese women compared to normal weight women (8% vs. 2%; p = 0.001). Therefore, obesity is a modifiable risk factor that should be focused on during preconception counseling [14]. These results support the association of increased PE risk with factors such as obesity and childlessness.

SwedenChina
Variable
Maternal age:
≥35 vs. <35
Mild preeclampsia
OR (95% CI)
1.31 (1.24–1.38)
(p<0.001)
2.15 (1.50–3.08)
(p<0.001)
Severe preeclampsia
OR (95% CI)
1.50 (1.39–1.62)
(p<0.001)
1.87 (1.44–2.43)
(p<0.001)
BMI: underweight vs. normal
Mild preeclampsia
OR (95% CI)
0.73 (0.61–0.87)
(p<0.001)
0.41 (0.18–0.91)
(p<0.001)
Severe preeclampsia
OR (95% CI)
0.75 (0.59–0.96)
(p = 0.03)
0.68 (0.46–0.99)
(p = 0.05)
BMI: overweight vs. normal
Mild preeclampsia
OR (95% CI)
1.81 (1.72–1.90)
(p<0.001)
3.20 (2.02–5.06)
(p<0.001)
Severe preeclampsia
OR (95% CI)
1.44 (1.35–1.55)
(p<0.001)
2.12 (1.49–3.03)
(p<0.001)
BMI: obesity vs. normal
Mild preeclampsia
OR (95% CI)
3.49 (3.31–3.67)
(p<0.001)
5.12 (3.82–6.86)
(p<0.001)
Severe preeclampsia
OR (95% CI)
2.31 (2.13–2.50)
(p<0.001)
4.01 (2.96–5.43)
(p<0.001)

Table 2.

Adjusted odds ratios for risk factors associated with mild preeclampsia and severe preeclampsia from multivariable logistic regression for Sweden and weighted logistic regression for China.

Data from preeclampsia prevalence, risk factors, and pregnancy outcomes in Sweden and China [13].

1.2 Pestilences

Dengue infection during pregnancy almost doubles fetal death rate (OR 1.9, 95% CI: 1.6–2.2). Severe dengue infection increases the risk of fetal death approximately fivefold (OR 4.9, 95% CI: 2.3–10.2) [15]. Although the mechanism by which dengue infection leads to stillbirth is not clear, there are three main hypotheses: the symptoms of dengue infection in the mother have a direct effect on the fetus (severe dengue); dengue infection causes changes affecting the placenta, and the dengue virus has a direct effect on the fetus [16].

Pregnant women infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) had higher odds of adverse perinatal outcomes (preterm labor, fetal dysplasia, fetal distress), but there were no differences in gestational diabetes, preeclampsia, eclampsia, or stillbirth. It is worthwhile to take precautions in advance, as pregnant women are recommended to be screened for HCV during pregnancy since they are still at risk for HCV infection during pregnancy [17].

Other infectious diseases, such as Q fever, also deserve public attention. The effect of Q fever (caused by Coxsackie bodies) on pregnancy is unknown, but available data suggest that it may increase the risk of early miscarriage, late preterm labor, or intrauterine fetal death. In addition, Q fever infection during pregnancy may increase the maternal risk of developing chronic Q fever. And Q fever is usually asymptomatic, so screening and treatment are recommended in high-endemic areas [18].

1.3 Autoimmune diseases

Autoimmune diseases are diseases in which an organism develops an immune response to its own antigens that results in damage to its own tissues. Pregnant women with autoimmune diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and primary immunodeficiency disorders (PID) are at higher risk for obstetric complications and adverse pregnancy outcomes, including fetal loss, preterm labor, fetal growth restriction, and preeclampsia, and the women are at risk for recurrence and exacerbation of pre-existing autoimmune diseases during pregnancy.

SLE increases the risk of pregnancy complications such as preeclampsia and poor fetal prognosis. A previous study using blood transcriptome analysis and multicolor flow cytometry found that immune markers such as interferon and plasma cells were downregulated in healthy pregnancies, whereas these markers were significantly elevated in preeclampsia and lupus pregnancies with fetal complications [19].

In addition, neuromyelitis optica myelitis optica spectrum disease (NMOSD) is particularly common in women of childbearing age. Pregnancy may exacerbate NMOSD and affect the outcome of the pregnancy, and some treatments carry risks to the fetus [20]. A systematic review and meta-analysis examined 15 studies involving 443 patients with NMOSD. Immunosuppressive therapy during pregnancy and older age at conception was found to be associated with a lower risk of pregnancy-related seizures. The recurrence rate was highest in the first postpartum trimester, while Expanded Disability Status Scale scores worsened significantly during pregnancy and the postpartum period. This suggests that immunosuppressive therapy may help to reduce the risk of pregnancy-related seizures, but the increased risk of recurrence in the postpartum period needs to be further validated [21].

Autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA), on the other hand, may flare up during pregnancy. Between 1997 and 2022, a study evaluated 33 women for recurrence or new onset of autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) in 45 pregnancies. Of the 20 women diagnosed with AIHA before pregnancy, 10 had recurrences, and 13 had new episodes of AIHA during pregnancy or in the puerperium (2 had recurrences during a second pregnancy). All these hemolytic events were severe and required treatment (e.g., steroids, intravenous human immunoglobulin, and blood transfusions), with complete remission in 65% of cases, maternal complications in 15% of cases, and adverse fetal events in 22% of cases. Despite the high risk of AIHA, a healthy pregnancy can be achieved with close monitoring and prompt treatment [22].

1.4 Endocrine diseases

During pregnancy, the endocrine system undergoes a series of physiologic changes to adapt to and support fetal development. Patients with endocrine disorders will also experience corresponding changes in their underlying diseases during pregnancy. Even some severe endocrine diseases can lead to infertility in patients.

Gestational diabetes (GD) is the most common endocrine disorder during pregnancy, and women with diabetes are at a higher risk of developing complications during pregnancy compared to those without. Hyperglycemia increases the prevalence of congenital malformations in infants before 8–10 weeks of gestation, when the fetus is forming its organs [23]. In addition, a retrospective cohort study investigated the association of history of spontaneous abortion (SAB) and induced abortion with the risk of GD in subsequent pregnancies. The study covered 102,259 pregnant women and showed that a history of SAB was significantly associated with the risk of GD and that this risk increased with the number of SABs.

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), which causes a range of symptoms in patients, has a prevalence of 5–13% in women [24]. It has been reported that women with PCOS have higher BMI after conception, greater weight gain during pregnancy, and higher chances of having adverse pregnancy outcomes such as miscarriage, gestational diabetes mellitus, gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, and cesarean delivery. Therefore, pregnant women should be screened for PCOS during prenatal checkups [25].

1.5 Hematologic diseases

The hematologic system is one of the most important systems and ensures the normal function of all kinds of blood cells in order to guarantee the health of the organism.

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a classic inherited blood disorder. The use of hydroxyurea during pregnancy in pregnant women with SCD increases the likelihood of miscarriage and stillbirth due to the association of hydroxyurea with live births of full-term infants with a birth weight of <5.5 pounds for full-term infants in live births, but not with preterm births or serious medical problems at the time of the baby’s birth [26]. Meanwhile, a study analyzed the impact of SCD and prenatal anemia on severe maternal morbidity (SMM) and other adverse pregnancy outcomes (APOs) during pregnancy. The study found that the incidence of SMM was significantly higher in patients with SCD than in anemic patients and controls, especially in complications related to thrombosis or SCD-specific pathology. The results suggest that prenatal anemia may play a mediating role in pregnancy risk and that pregnancy risk associated with SCD is similar across many APOs [27].

In addition, a chronic hematologic malignancy, myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), often cause true erythrocytosis, essential thrombocythemia (ET), primary myelofibrosis (PMF), and unclassifiable MPN (MPN-U) [28]. The live birth rate for pregnant women with MPN has been reported to be 65% in polycythemia vera (PV) and 70% in ET [29, 30, 31, 32]. In the study, there was a significant increase in preterm labor in MPN group pregnancies, 14% compared to 4% in control group pregnancies (p < 0.001). Correspondingly, low birth weight (<2500 g) was significantly increased in MPN pregnancies (p = 0.042). Maternal thrombotic complications occurred in three (1%) pregnancies in patients with MPN compared to none in controls. Pregnancy-related bleeding affected 14% of pregnancies in MPN compared with 9% in the control group (p < 0.110). Cesarean delivery was more common in MPN pregnancies. The incidence was 12.2 per 100,000 pregnancies. In conclusion, preterm labor is an important complication of MPN pregnancy, and maternal complications are less common than previously reported. Pregnant women with true erythrocytosis are at increased risk of fetal loss, and their high incidence of late miscarriage is associated with the presence of the JAK2v617F mutation, and therapeutically antithrombotic therapy appears to reduce the risk [4].

2. Mental health of pregnant women

Women of childbearing age have a high prevalence of mental illness, mood and anxiety disorders, with at least 15% of women of childbearing age using psychotropic medications—antidepressants, and this percentage is even higher when other mood stabilizers and antipsychotics are added to the equation [33].

More seriously, this may be exacerbated by the disproportionate burden resulting from low and middle incomes. Several studies have therefore investigated the probability of perinatal depression and anxiety among women living in different income countries. Low- and middle-income countries had the highest prevalence, with a combined prevalence of 25.5% (95% CI: 23.8%-27.1%; 197 studies from 23 countries, including 212,103 individuals). The combined prevalence in high- and middle-income countries was 24.7% (95% CI: 23.6% ~ 25.9%; 344 studies from 21 countries, including 364,103 individuals), and in low-income countries it was 20.7% (95% CI: 18.4% ~ 23.0%; 50 studies from seven countries, including 40,502 individuals) [34]. Another study determined the prevalence of six anxiety and related disorders among perinatal women in low- and middle-income countries through a systematic evaluation and meta-analysis. In 203 studies with 212,318 women, one in five pregnant and postpartum women living in low- and middle-income countries suffered from generalized anxiety disorder. In addition, 8.3 percent of women suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder [35]. Overall, depression and anxiety disorders are common in low- and middle-income countries. Therefore, accurate estimates of the prevalence of perinatal depression and anxiety disorders and the treatment of interventions for these disorders in low- and middle-income countries are essential for policy development, allocation of scarce resources and further improvement of the prognosis for women, infants and families.

3. Living conditions of pregnant women

External factors related to living conditions, such as smoking and alcohol consumption, social environment, economic development, ethnicity, regional location, etc., have a great impact on the health of pregnant women and their newborns.

The first is the lifestyle habits of pregnant women. Poor habits during pregnancy such as smoking and drinking increase the risk of pregnancy complications and adverse infant outcomes such as preterm labor, fetal growth restriction, and infant death [36]. In a cohort study, it was found that the risk of late stillbirth in pregnant women with dual exposure to alcohol and smoking after early pregnancy was 2.78 times higher than that of pregnant women with no exposure in early pregnancy or who had quit smoking by the end of early pregnancy [37]. Analysis of data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Surveillance System (PRAS) 2021 found that the prevalence of smoking was 12.1% pre-pregnancy, 5.4% during pregnancy, and 7.2% postpartum; 56.1% of women who smoked pre-pregnancy quit during pregnancy. The prevalence of smoking women who quit during pregnancy was 56.1% [36], with the majority of women choosing to actively quit in order to protect the fetus. In addition, external means such as alcohol screening and brief interventions (ASBI) have been shown to prevent or reduce alcohol use during pregnancy; after the intervention, the proportion of pregnant women reporting abstinence increased (OR 2.26; 95% CI: 1.43–3.56) [3].

Second, policies implemented for pregnant women in the country and city where they live can directly affect pregnancy. From 2015 to 2017, China implemented a comprehensive preconception-pregnancy management program for women with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in 11 centers from eight cities. Pregnant women in the original prospective cohort with serious pregnancy outcomes were compared with two control groups after implementation of the program, and the incidence of serious adverse pregnancy outcomes was lower in the prospective cohort (6.02%) than in the retrospective cohort (18.30%; corrected odds ratio 0.31; 95% CI: 0.13–0.74) [38]. On the other hand, in 2015, a publicly funded fertility program was introduced in Ontario, Canada to increase access to fertility treatment. For in vitro fertilization (IVF), the program provided for a selective single embryo transfer (eSET) policy. Statistically, comparing the pre-introduction and post-introduction of selective single embryo transfer (eSET), it was found that the rate of multiple pregnancies after Ovulation Promotion/Artificial Insemination (AI) decreased from 12.9% to 9.1%. After IVF, the rate of multiple pregnancies decreased from 29.4% to 7.1%. Therefore, the policy significantly reduced the multiple pregnancy rate [39]. The uniform management of the policy and the technical support provided a better and easier solution to the problems of pregnant women during pregnancy.

4. Medical care of diseases during pregnancy

For pregnant women suffering from various diseases during pregnancy, medical centers should take appropriate measures to monitor the development of the diseases in a timely manner, and to alleviate the pain caused by the diseases to the pregnant woman and her family through medication, surgery, and other means, and increase the likelihood of a good outcome of the pregnancy.

4.1 Drug delivery

One of the major challenges in the treatment of diseases during pregnancy is the transit of small molecule drugs through the placenta and their toxicity to the developing fetus. The placenta is responsible only for providing nutrients, removing waste products, and protecting the fetus from toxic substances in the maternal circulation. Thus, the placenta is a biological barrier between the mother and the fetus for drug delivery. The latest research in nanoparticle technology offers the opportunity for safe drug delivery during pregnancy by controlling the interaction of therapeutic drugs with placenta [40].

4.1.1 Diabetes mellitus

For patients with diabetes mellitus, there is currently no commercially available customized hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery system to achieve specific glycemic targets during pregnancy. A study was designed to evaluate the feasibility and performance of a customized closed-loop insulin delivery system (CLC-P) based on a regional model predictive controller for use at home by patients with gestational combined type 1 diabetes. Ten pregnant women with type 1 diabetes using insulin pumps in mid- or late-gestation (HbA1c 5.8 ± 0.6%) and with a mean gestational week on the system of 23.7 ± 3.5 weeks participated in the experiment. Compared with the break-in period (break-in 64.5 ± 16.3% vs. CLC-P 78.6 ± 9.2%; p = 0.002), the mean percentage of intervals increased by 14.1 percentage points, equivalent to 3.4 hours per day. Time above 140 mg/dL (p = 0.033) and time below 63 mg/dL and 54 mg/dL (both p = 0.037) were significantly reduced during CLC-P use (Table 3). Nine subjects exceeded the consensus goal of 70% or more of the time range during CLC-P use. The results suggest that extended use of CLC-P at home until delivery is feasible (Figure 2). This finding is helpful for pregnant women with diabetes, but larger randomized studies are needed to further evaluate systemic efficacy and pregnancy outcomes [41].

VariableRun-inCLC-PAbsolute difference (95% CI)P value
Primary outcome
Time in 63–140 mg/dL, %64.5 ± 16.378.6 ± 9.214.1
(6.6 to 21.7)
0.002
Secondary outcomes
 Time < 63 mg/dL, % [IQR]3.7
[1.5 to 6.4]
1.6
[1.4 to 2.1]
−2.8
(−8.3 to −0.3)
0.037
 Time < 54 mg/dL, % [IQR]1.0
[0.3 to 2.2]
0.4
[0.3 to 0.4]
−0.9
(−3.7 to −0.02)
0.037
 Time > 140 mg/dL, %29.8 ± 19.519.7 ± 9.5−10.1
(−19.2 to −1.0)
0.033
 Mean glucose, mg/dL123.1 ± 24.1115.1 ± 10.6−8.0
(−19.1 to 3.1)
0.139

Table 3.

Continuous glucose monitoring outcomes for run-in versus CLC-P use.

Note: all p < 0.05 (data from At-Home Use of a Pregnancy-Specific Zone-MPC Closed-Loop System for Pregnancies Complicated by Type 1 Diabetes: A Single-Arm, Observational Multicenter Study. Diabetes Care [41].)

Figure 2.

Continuous glucose monitoring outcomes for run-in versus CLC-P use.

Furthermore, regarding medications for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in pregnant women, it has been suggested that women with T2DM who are treated with oral hypoglycemic agents, such as metformin and sulfonylureas, should be switched to insulin prior to conception or, at the latest, after the diagnosis of pregnancy. However, it needs to be noted that metformin crosses the placenta and interacts with fetal environmental factors to adversely affect the fetus [42] (Figure 3).

Figure 3.

Drugs taken during pregnancy can adversely affect the fetus.

4.1.2 Eclampsia

Regarding eclampsia, low-dose aspirin (LDA) is an effective measure to prevent preeclampsia. A study analyzed risk factors for preeclampsia and their incidence using 2019 birth data from the United States. The results showed that the majority of pregnant women met the criteria for high- or moderate-risk factors in the 2021 LDA Recommended Guidelines, with multiple pregnancies and low socioeconomic status being the main risk factors. These data support the current guidelines and suggest that LDA should also be recommended for pregnant women with a single moderate risk factor to further reduce the incidence of pregnancy-related hypertension [43].

4.1.3 Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs)

MPNs are increasingly being detected in women of childbearing age. Pregnancy in women with MPNs has been associated with maternal thrombosis, hemorrhage, and placental dysfunction, leading to fetal growth restriction or loss. A total of 22 studies including 1210 pregnancies were included. The live birth rate was 71.3% (95% CI: 65.1% ~ 77.6%). The use of aspirin (11 studies, 227 patients; uncorrected ratio, 8.6; 95% CI: 4.0 ~ 18.1) and interferon (6 studies, 90 patients; uncorrected ratio 9.7; 95% CI: 2.3 ~ 41.0) was associated with a higher live birth rate. The addition of heparin to aspirin was not associated with an increased risk of live birth (6 studies, 96 patients; unadjusted odds ratio 2.1; 95% CI: 0.5 ~ 9). The most common maternal adverse event was preeclampsia, with an incidence of 3.1% (95% CI: 1.7% ~ 4.5%). Evidence suggested that aspirin or interferon therapy was associated with a higher rate of live births in patients with myeloproliferative tumor pregnancies [44].

4.1.4 Depression

In addition to insomnia, it is not uncommon for stress and physical discomforts of pregnancy to lead to depression during pregnancy. Pregnancy is physically and mentally more difficult for women who already suffer from depressive symptoms. About half of women treated for affective disorders discontinue antidepressants during pregnancy, but discontinuation may lead to postpartum relapse. A cohort study used a Danish and Norwegian sample consisting of 41,475 live-born singleton pregnant women in Denmark (1997–2016) and 16,459 women in Norway (2009–2018) who had been prescribed antidepressants at least once in the 6 months before pregnancy. Based on mixed data from Denmark and Norway, those who discontinued medication late (prior stabilization) were found to have a slightly elevated probability of developing psychiatric disorders compared to those who discontinued medication continuously. These findings suggest that women with severe mental illness who are currently receiving stable treatment may benefit from continued antidepressant treatment and individualized therapeutic counseling during pregnancy [45].

Therefore, when prescribing medication, doctors should take into account factors such as the stage of the pregnancy and whether or not the medication will pass through the placenta. In addition, drug researchers are supposed to consider developing drugs and materials that protect pregnant women and fetuses.

4.2 Genetic testing

Trisomy 21 is a group of chromosomal disorders that have an enormous impact on newborns and families, and many regions are now taking steps to prevent the occurrence of trisomy 21 in the early stages of pregnancy. Offering free deoxyribonucleic acid (cfDNA) testing in the first trimester of pregnancy to women at high risk for trisomy 21 may reduce invasive fetal karyotyping and the number of miscarriages. However, a randomized analysis of 2051 eligible women found that offering cfDNA screening but still requiring invasive testing in the event of a positive test did not significantly reduce the rate of miscarriage compared with invasive testing alone [46].

4.3 Complementary therapy

It is estimated that one in seven heterosexual couples are affected by infertility and therefore require the help of assisted reproductive therapy (ART) to conceive [47]. Interventions that may reduce the risk of miscarriage or increase the chances of a live birth include intrauterine injection of hCG at the time of embryo transfer at the stage of embryonic division, use of dehydroepiandrosterone and embryo culture media high in hyaluronic acid in women, and use of antioxidant therapy in men. Interventions that increase the potential risk of miscarriage or decrease the chance of live birth include the use of PGT-A fluorescence in situ hybridization and injection of embryo culture supernatant prior to embryo transfer in frozen cycles. When choosing an intervention, it is important to seek the advice of a medical professional and select the most appropriate one [48].

5. Adverse pregnancy outcomes

Adverse pregnancy outcomes are undesirable outcomes of pregnancy that may pose a threat to health and life of the mother and child, including miscarriage, stillbirth, and preterm labor.

5.1 Miscarriage

Research shows that parental age affects the risk of miscarriage. The risk of miscarriage is low (10%) for women aged 25–29 years, which rising rapidly after the age of 30 years, and as high as 53% for those aged 45 years and over [49]. For fathers, men aged 25–29 years had the lowest risk of miscarriage, which then increased with age, e.g., 1.04 (95% CI: 0.90–1.21) in the 30–34 year old group versus the 25–29 year old group [50]. So the optimal age for both parents to have children is 25–29 years, after which the risk of miscarriage increases with age.

Moreover, most pregnant women choose to conceive again after a miscarriage, but the timing and number of intervals between pregnancies is also critical. Most mothers between the ages of 25 and 34 choose to have another child after an interval of six months. Pregnancy intervals of more than 24 months were more common among women who smoked and had lower levels of education. However, the length of the interval between pregnancies was not found to be associated with subsequent risk of miscarriage, preterm labor, or birth of a small-for-gestational-age child [51]. At the same time, if another miscarriage occurred after a second pregnancy, the higher the number of miscarriages, the higher the risk of recurrence, with age-adjusted ratio of 1.54 (95% CI: 1.48–1.60) after one miscarriage, 2.21 (95% CI: 2.03 to 2.41) after two miscarriages, and 3.97 (95% CI: 3.29 to 4.78) after three consecutive miscarriages [49].

5.2 Stillbirth

In full-term pregnancies (37–42 weeks), the risk of stillbirth increases with gestational age. The perinatal risk is lowest at 39 weeks of gestation, while delivery before or after this time increases the risk of adverse outcomes [52]. Besides, at 41 weeks, the risk of labor and stillbirth increased significantly, and neonatal mortality did not decrease compared to the previous period. And the risk of stillbirth increased even more markedly when labor was resumed after 41 weeks [53].

In addition, the lifestyle habits of pregnant women are also associated with stillbirth. The relative risk of late stillbirth in pregnant women with prenatal exposure to alcohol, smoking, or both was 2.22, 1.60, and 2.78, respectively, compared to pregnant women with no exposure to alcohol or smoking [37]. Adverse lifestyle habits significantly increase the risk of stillbirth.

5.3 Prematurity

Live birth at less than 37 weeks of gestation is called preterm labor, where the extremely preterm (<28 weeks) and very preterm (28–32 weeks) are accompanied by a high prevalence of neurologic and respiratory complications in the newborn [5]. There are three factors that contribute to preterm labor, the first of which is maternal age. Pregnant women aged 20–34 years have an increased risk of adverse fetal outcomes and an increased risk of spontaneous preterm labor compared to pregnant women aged 35 years and older. And for women of any age, the shorter the interval between pregnancies, the greater the likelihood of adverse outcomes [54].

Besides, the environment in which a pregnant woman lives can also affect pregnancy outcomes; for example, air pollutants (nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) have been associated with the risk of preterm labor and congenital malformations [55, 56, 57, 58].

6. Neonatal status

During pregnancy, the state of the pregnant woman (e.g., pregnancy complications, drug delivery, and immune system) can affect fetal development, damage organs, and ultimately affect the health of the fetus after birth. The effects on the state of the fetus will be described next in terms of both the immune system and drug delivery.

Pregnant women sometimes take medications during pregnancy, and some of these medications can reach the fetus through the placenta and affect fetal health. For example, prenatal exposure to opioids is associated with an increased risk of asthma, dermatitis, infections, and eczema, but not autoimmune diseases or allergies [59]. Whereas the use of exogenous opioids during pregnancy has been found through rodent models, exposing the fetus to opioids during a critical period in the development of the immune system leads to an overreaction of the immune system, which in turn causes immune activation [60, 61]. One solution to minimize adverse fetal effects and improve therapeutic safety is to prevent placental-specific drug delivery through placental channels.

7. Contraception

Women can choose whether or not to have children. In some cases, women do not want children, and they need to learn contraception, deliberately preventing pregnancy through devices or drugs (Figure 4). However, in 2017, the teenage pregnancy rate in Brazil was 68.4/1000 (higher than the global (46/1000) and Latin American average (65.5/1000)). In addition, 66% of adolescent pregnancies are unwanted, and about 75% of adolescent mothers do not attend school. Although nearly 250 million women globally would like to delay or avoid pregnancy, about half of all pregnancies each year are unintended. This requires multifaceted preventive measures and emphasizes quality, comprehensive sexuality education from an early age [63].

Figure 4.

Contraception efficacy rates (data from contraception [62] and figure made by Chiplot).

In addition, although the contraceptive pill has been approved for more than 60 years, product gaps and unmet needs remain, and women who think about contraception are unable to use it for fear of side effects on their bodies. And the primary mechanism for male contraception—the condom—has remained unchanged for 100 years [64].

In summary, increasing the choice and use of contraceptives, popularizing sex education can contribute to the development of healthy families and slow population growth that places a disproportionate burden on the environment.

8. Conclusion

A pregnant woman’s own illness is the main factor that primarily affects her pregnancy status and the status of her fetus. Therefore, pregnant women should pay more attention to their pregnancy status and undergo regular checkups. On the other hand, doctors should also pay more attention to pregnant women with illnesses and choose appropriate treatments and medications for them. Local governments should also provide appropriate support to ensure that pregnant women can have a smooth pregnancy and delivery.

References

  1. 1. Stock SJ, Aiken CE. Barriers to progress in pregnancy research: How can we break through? Science. 2023;380(6641):150-153. DOI: 10.1126/science.adf9347
  2. 2. Brown CC, Adams CE, George KE, Moore JE. Associations between comorbidities and severe maternal morbidity. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2020;136(5):892-901. DOI: 10.1097/aog.0000000000004057
  3. 3. Luong J, Board A, Gosdin L, Dunkley J, Thierry JM, Pitasi M, et al. Alcohol use, screening, and brief intervention among pregnant persons—24 U.S. jurisdictions, 2017 and 2019. MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2023;72(3):55-62. DOI: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7203a2
  4. 4. Bertozzi I, Rumi E, Cavalloni C, Cazzola M, Fabris F, Randi ML. Pregnancy outcome and management of 25 pregnancies in women with polycythemia vera. American Journal of Hematology. 2018;93(9):E234-E2e5. DOI: 10.1002/ajh.25210
  5. 5. Subtil D, Brabant G, Tilloy E, Devos P, Canis F, Fruchart A, et al. Early clindamycin for bacterial vaginosis in pregnancy (PREMEVA): A multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2018;392(10160):2171-2179. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(18)31617-9
  6. 6. Holness N. High-risk pregnancy. The Nursing Clinics of North America. 2018;53(2):241-251. DOI: 10.1016/j.cnur.2018.01.010
  7. 7. Roos-Hesselink J, Baris L, Johnson M, De Backer J, Otto C, Marelli A, et al. Pregnancy outcomes in women with cardiovascular disease: Evolving trends over 10 years in the ESC registry of pregnancy and cardiac disease (ROPAC). European Heart Journal. 2019;40(47):3848-3855. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz136
  8. 8. Lammers AE, Diller GP, Lober R, Möllers M, Schmidt R, Radke RM, et al. Maternal and neonatal complications in women with congenital heart disease: A nationwide analysis. European Heart Journal. 2021;42(41):4252-4260. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab571
  9. 9. Magnus MC, Morken NH, Wensaas KA, Wilcox AJ, Håberg SE. Risk of miscarriage in women with chronic diseases in Norway: A registry linkage study. PLoS Medicine. 2021;18(5):e1003603. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003603
  10. 10. Justin Paul G, Anne Princy S, Anju S, Anita S, Cecily Mary M, Gnanavelu G, et al. Pregnancy outcomes in women with heart disease: The Madras medical college pregnancy and cardiac (M-PAC) registry from India. European Heart Journal. 2023;44(17):1530-1540. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehad003
  11. 11. Andrade F, Shukla A, Bureau C, Senzolo M, D'Alteroche L, Heurgué A, et al. Pregnancy in idiopathic non-cirrhotic portal hypertension: A multicentric study on maternal and fetal management and outcome. Journal of Hepatology. 2018;69(6):1242-1249. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2018.08.007
  12. 12. Brown MA, Magee LA, Kenny LC, Karumanchi SA, McCarthy FP, Saito S, et al. The hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: ISSHP classification, diagnosis & management recommendations for international practice. Pregnancy Hypertens. 2018;13:291-310. DOI: 10.1016/j.preghy.2018.05.004
  13. 13. Yang Y, Le Ray I, Zhu J, Zhang J, Hua J, Reilly M. Preeclampsia prevalence, risk factors, and pregnancy outcomes in Sweden and China. JAMA Network Open. 2021;4(5):e218401. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.8401
  14. 14. Pfaller B, Siu SC, D'Souza R, Wichert-Schmitt B, Kumar Nair GK, Haberer K, et al. Impact of obesity on outcomes of pregnancy in women with heart disease. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2021;77(10):1317-1326. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.01.010
  15. 15. Paixão ES, Costa M, Teixeira MG, Harron K, de Almeida MF, Barreto ML, et al. Symptomatic dengue infection during pregnancy and the risk of stillbirth in Brazil, 2006-12: A matched case-control study. The Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2017;17(9):957-964. DOI: 10.1016/s1473-3099(17)30366-3
  16. 16. Goldenberg RL, McClure EM, Saleem S, Reddy UM. Infection-related stillbirths. Lancet. 2010;375(9724):1482-1490. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(09)61712-8
  17. 17. Chen PH, Johnson L, Limketkai BN, Jusuf E, Sun J, Kim B, et al. Trends in the prevalence of hepatitis C infection during pregnancy and maternal-infant outcomes in the US, 1998 to 2018. JAMA Network Open. 2023;6(7):e2324770. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.24770
  18. 18. Ghanem-Zoubi N, Paul M. Q fever during pregnancy: A narrative review. Clinical Microbiology and Infection. 2020;26(7):864-870. DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2019.10.024
  19. 19. Hong S, Banchereau R, Maslow BL, Guerra MM, Cardenas J, Baisch J, et al. Longitudinal profiling of human blood transcriptome in healthy and lupus pregnancy. The Journal of Experimental Medicine. 2019;216(5):1154-1169. DOI: 10.1084/jem.20190185
  20. 20. Mao-Draayer Y, Thiel S, Mills EA, Chitnis T, Fabian M, Katz Sand I, et al. Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders and pregnancy: Therapeutic considerations. Nature Reviews. Neurology. 2020;16(3):154-170. DOI: 10.1038/s41582-020-0313-y
  21. 21. Wang L, Su M, Zhou Z, Zhou L, ZhangBao J, Tan H, et al. Analysis of pregnancy-related attacks in neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Network Open. 2022;5(8):e2225438. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.25438
  22. 22. Fattizzo B, Bortolotti M, Fantini NN, Glenthøj A, Michel M, Napolitano M, et al. Autoimmune hemolytic anemia during pregnancy and puerperium: An international multicenter experience. Blood. 2023;141(16):2016-2021. DOI: 10.1182/blood.2022018890
  23. 23. Mills JL, Baker L, Goldman AS. Malformations in infants of diabetic mothers occur before the seventh gestational week. Implications for treatment. Diabetes. 1979;28(4):292-293. DOI: 10.2337/diab.28.4.292
  24. 24. Bozdag G, Mumusoglu S, Zengin D, Karabulut E, Yildiz BO. The prevalence and phenotypic features of polycystic ovary syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Human Reproduction. 2016;31(12):2841-2855. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dew218
  25. 25. Bahri Khomami M, Shorakae S, Hashemi S, Harrison CL, Piltonen TT, Romualdi D, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of pregnancy outcomes in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Nature Communications. 2024;15(1):5591. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-49749-1
  26. 26. Kroner BL, Hankins JS, Pugh N, Kutlar A, King AA, Shah NR, et al. Pregnancy outcomes with hydroxyurea use in women with sickle cell disease. American Journal of Hematology. 2022;97(5):603-612. DOI: 10.1002/ajh.26495
  27. 27. Early ML, Eke AC, Gemmill A, Lanzkron S, Pecker LH. Comparisons of severe maternal morbidity and other adverse pregnancy outcomes in pregnant people with sickle cell disease vs anemia. JAMA Network Open. 2023;6(2):e2254545. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.54545
  28. 28. Barbui T, Thiele J, Gisslinger H, Finazzi G, Vannucchi AM, Tefferi A. The 2016 revision of WHO classification of myeloproliferative neoplasms: Clinical and molecular advances. Blood Reviews. 2016;30(6):453-459. DOI: 10.1016/j.blre.2016.06.001
  29. 29. Griesshammer M, Sadjadian P, Wille K. Contemporary management of patients with BCR-ABL1-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms during pregnancy. Expert Review of Hematology. 2018;11(9):697-706. DOI: 10.1080/17474086.2018.1506325
  30. 30. Gangat N, Joshi M, Shah S, Yogarajah M, Patnaik MM, Pardanani A, et al. Pregnancy outcomes in myeloproliferative neoplasms: A Mayo clinic report on 102 pregnancies. American Journal of Hematology. 2020;95(5):E114-E1e7. DOI: 10.1002/ajh.25748
  31. 31. Gangat N, Guglielmelli P, Al-Kali A, Wolanskyj-Spinner AP, Camoriano J, Patnaik MM, et al. Pregnancy in patients with myelofibrosis: Mayo-Florence series of 24 pregnancies in 16 women. British Journal of Haematology. 2021;195(1):133-137. DOI: 10.1111/bjh.17626
  32. 32. Gangat N, Tefferi A. Myeloproliferative neoplasms and pregnancy: Overview and practice recommendations. American Journal of Hematology. 2021;96(3):354-366. DOI: 10.1002/ajh.26067
  33. 33. Yonkers KA. Treatment of psychiatric conditions in pregnancy starts with planning. The American Journal of Psychiatry. 2021;178(3):213-214. DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2020.20121791
  34. 34. Roddy Mitchell A, Gordon H, Lindquist A, Walker SP, Homer CSE, Middleton A, et al. Prevalence of perinatal depression in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry. 2023;80(5):425-431. DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2023.0069
  35. 35. Roddy Mitchell A, Gordon H, Atkinson J, Lindquist A, Walker SP, Middleton A, et al. Prevalence of perinatal anxiety and related disorders in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Network Open. 2023;6(11):e2343711. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.43711
  36. 36. Kipling L, Bombard J, Wang X, Cox S. Cigarette smoking among pregnant women during the perinatal period: Prevalence and health care provider inquiries—Pregnancy risk assessment monitoring system, United States, 2021. MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2024;73(17):393-398. DOI: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7317a2
  37. 37. Odendaal H, Dukes KA, Elliott AJ, Willinger M, Sullivan LM, Tripp T, et al. Association of prenatal exposure to maternal drinking and smoking with the risk of stillbirth. JAMA Network Open. 2021;4(8):e2121726. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.21726
  38. 38. Zheng X, Yang D, Luo S, Yan J, Guo X, Yang H, et al. Association of Implementation of a comprehensive preconception-to-pregnancy management plan with pregnancy outcomes among Chinese pregnant women with type 1 diabetes: The CARNATION study. Diabetes Care. 2021;44(4):883-892. DOI: 10.2337/dc20-2692
  39. 39. Velez MP, Soule A, Gaudet L, Pudwell J, Nguyen P, Ray JG. Multifetal pregnancy after implementation of a publicly funded fertility program. JAMA Network Open. 2024;7(4):e248496. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.8496
  40. 40. Figueroa-Espada CG, Hofbauer S, Mitchell MJ, Riley RS. Exploiting the placenta for nanoparticle-mediated drug delivery during pregnancy. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. 2020;160:244-261. DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2020.09.006
  41. 41. Levy CJ, Kudva YC, Ozaslan B, Castorino K, O'Malley G, Kaur RJ, et al. At-home use of a pregnancy-specific zone-MPC closed-loop system for pregnancies complicated by type 1 diabetes: A single-arm, observational multicenter study. Diabetes Care. 2023;46(7):1425-1431. DOI: 10.2337/dc23-0173
  42. 42. Ringholm L, Damm P, Mathiesen ER. Improving pregnancy outcomes in women with diabetes mellitus: Modern management. Nature Reviews. Endocrinology. 2019;15(7):406-416. DOI: 10.1038/s41574-019-0197-3
  43. 43. Wheeler SM, Myers SO, Swamy GK, Myers ER. Estimated prevalence of risk factors for preeclampsia among individuals giving birth in the US in 2019. JAMA Network Open. 2022;5(1):e2142343. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.42343
  44. 44. Maze D, Kazi S, Gupta V, Malinowski AK, Fazelzad R, Shah PS, et al. Association of Treatments for myeloproliferative neoplasms during pregnancy with birth rates and maternal outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Network Open. 2019;2(10):e1912666. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.12666
  45. 45. Trinh NTH, Munk-Olsen T, Wray NR, Bergink V, Nordeng HME, Lupattelli A, et al. Timing of antidepressant discontinuation during pregnancy and postpartum psychiatric outcomes in Denmark and Norway. JAMA Psychiatry. 2023;80(5):441-450. DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2023.0041
  46. 46. Malan V, Bussières L, Winer N, Jais JP, Baptiste A, Le Lorc'h M, et al. Effect of cell-free DNA screening vs direct invasive diagnosis on miscarriage rates in women with pregnancies at high risk of trisomy 21: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2018;320(6):557-565. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2018.9396
  47. 47. National Collaborating Centre for Ws, Children’s H. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Guidance. Fertility: Assessment and Treatment for People with Fertility Problems. London: Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists. Copyright © 2013, National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health; 2013
  48. 48. Holt-Kentwell A, Ghosh J, Devall A, Coomarasamy A, Dhillon-Smith RK. Evaluating interventions and adjuncts to optimize pregnancy outcomes in subfertile women: An overview review. Human Reproduction Update. 2022;28(4):583-600. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmac001
  49. 49. Magnus MC, Wilcox AJ, Morken NH, Weinberg CR, Håberg SE. Role of maternal age and pregnancy history in risk of miscarriage: Prospective register based study. BMJ. 2019;364:l869. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.l869
  50. 50. du Fossé NA, van der Hoorn MP, van Lith JMM, le Cessie S, Lashley E. Advanced paternal age is associated with an increased risk of spontaneous miscarriage: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Human Reproduction Update. 2020;26(5):650-669. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmaa010
  51. 51. Regan AK, Gissler M, Magnus MC, Håberg SE, Ball S, Malacova E, et al. Association between interpregnancy interval and adverse birth outcomes in women with a previous stillbirth: An international cohort study. Lancet. 2019;393(10180):1527-1535. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(18)32266-9
  52. 52. Hamilton I, Martin N, Liu J, DeFranco E, Rossi R. Gestational age and birth outcomes in term singleton pregnancies conceived with infertility treatment. JAMA Network Open. 2023;6(8):e2328335. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.28335
  53. 53. Muglu J, Rather H, Arroyo-Manzano D, Bhattacharya S, Balchin I, Khalil A, et al. Risks of stillbirth and neonatal death with advancing gestation at term: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies of 15 million pregnancies. PLoS Medicine. 2019;16(7):e1002838. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002838
  54. 54. Schummers L, Hutcheon JA, Hernandez-Diaz S, Williams PL, Hacker MR, VanderWeele TJ, et al. Association of short interpregnancy interval with pregnancy outcomes according to maternal age. JAMA Internal Medicine. 2018;178(12):1661-1670. DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.4696
  55. 55. Bekkar B, Pacheco S, Basu R, DeNicola N. Association of air pollution and heat exposure with preterm birth, low birth weight, and stillbirth in the US: A systematic review. JAMA Network Open. 2020;3(6):e208243. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.8243
  56. 56. Ren S, Haynes E, Hall E, Hossain M, Chen A, Muglia L, et al. Periconception exposure to air pollution and risk of congenital malformations. The Journal of Pediatrics. 2018;193:76-84.e6. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2017.09.076
  57. 57. Ghassabian A, Pierotti L, Basterrechea M, Chatzi L, Estarlich M, Fernández-Somoano A, et al. Association of exposure to ambient air pollution with thyroid function during pregnancy. JAMA Network Open. 2019;2(10):e1912902. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.12902
  58. 58. Wang X, Liu C, Zhang M, Han Y, Aase H, Villanger GD, et al. Evaluation of maternal exposure to PM(2.5) and its components on maternal and neonatal thyroid function and birth weight: A cohort study. Thyroid. 2019;29(8):1147-1157. DOI: 10.1089/thy.2018.0780
  59. 59. Kelty E, Rae K, Jantzie LL, Wyrwoll CS, Preen DB. Prenatal opioid exposure and immune-related conditions in children. JAMA Network Open. 2024;7(1):e2351933. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.51933
  60. 60. Newville J, Maxwell JR, Kitase Y, Robinson S, Jantzie LL. Perinatal opioid exposure primes the peripheral immune system toward hyperreactivity. Frontiers in Pediatrics. 2020;8:272. DOI: 10.3389/fped.2020.00272
  61. 61. Rushworth FH, Backos M, Rai R, Chilcott IT, Baxter N, Regan L. Prospective pregnancy outcome in untreated recurrent miscarriers with thyroid autoantibodies. Human Reproduction. 2000;15(7):1637-1639. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/15.7.1637
  62. 62. Woodhams EJ, Gilliam M. Contraception. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2019;170(3):Itc18-itc32. DOI: 10.7326/aitc201902050
  63. 63. The L. Preventing teenage pregnancies in Brazil. Lancet. 2020;395(10223):468. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30352-4
  64. 64. Anderson DJ, Johnston DS. A brief history and future prospects of contraception. Science. 2023;380(6641):154-158. DOI: 10.1126/science.adf9341

Written By

Junna Ye, Jiaxin Li, Yizhu Lin, Yujuan Wang, Jingyi Wu and Zhuochao Zhou

Submitted: 24 September 2024 Reviewed: 22 October 2024 Published: 25 November 2024