OBJECTIVE: To describe syphilis treatment status and prenatal care among people with syphilis during pregnancy to identify missed opportunities for preventing congenital syphilis. METHODS: Six jurisdictions that participated in SET-NET (Surveillance for Emerging Threats to Pregnant People and Infants Network) conducted enhanced surveillance among people with syphilis during pregnancy based on case investigations, medical records, and linkage of laboratory data with vital records. Unadjusted risk ratios (RRs) were used to compare demographic and clinical characteristics by syphilis stage (primary, secondary, or early latent vs late latent or unknown) and treatment status during pregnancy (adequate per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's "Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021" vs inadequate or not treated) and by prenatal care (timely: at least 30 days before pregnancy outcome; nontimely: less than 30 days before pregnancy outcome; and no prenatal care). RESULTS: As of September 15, 2023, of 1,476 people with syphilis during pregnancy, 855 (57.9%) were adequately treated and 621 (42.1%) were inadequately treated or not treated. Eighty-two percent of the cohort received timely prenatal care. Although those with nontimely or no prenatal care were more likely to receive inadequate or no treatment (RR 2.50, 95% CI, 2.17-2.88 and RR 2.73, 95% CI, 2.47-3.02, respectively), 32.1% of those with timely prenatal care were inadequately or not treated. Those with reported substance use or a history of homelessness were nearly twice as likely to receive inadequate or no treatment (RR 2.04, 95% CI, 1.82-2.28 and RR 1.83, 95% CI, 1.58-2.13, respectively). CONCLUSION: In this surveillance cohort, people without timely prenatal care had the highest risk for syphilis treatment inadequacy; however, almost a third of people who received timely prenatal care were not adequately treated. These findings underscore gaps in syphilis screening and treatment for pregnant people, especially those experiencing substance use and homelessness, and the need for systems-based interventions, such as treatment outside of traditional prenatal care settings.

INTRODUCTION: Pregnant women and their offspring are often at increased direct and indirect risks of adverse outcomes during epidemics and pandemics. A coordinated research response is paramount to ensure that this group is offered at least the same level of disease prevention, diagnosis, and care as the general population. We conducted a landscape analysis and held expert consultations to identify research efforts relevant to pregnant women affected by disease outbreaks, highlight gaps and challenges, and propose solutions to addressing them in a coordinated manner. METHODS: Literature searches were conducted from 1 January 2015 to 22 March 2022 using Web of Science, Google Scholar and PubMed augmented by key informant interviews. Findings were reviewed and Quid analysis was performed to identify clusters and connectors across research networks followed by two expert consultations. These formed the basis for the development of an operational framework for maternal and perinatal research during epidemics. RESULTS: Ninety-four relevant research efforts were identified. Although well suited to generating epidemiological data, the entire infrastructure to support a robust research response remains insufficient, particularly for use of medical products in pregnancy. Limitations in global governance, coordination, funding and data-gathering systems have slowed down research responses. CONCLUSION: Leveraging current research efforts while engaging multinational and regional networks may be the most effective way to scale up maternal and perinatal research preparedness and response. The findings of this landscape analysis and proposed operational framework will pave the way for developing a roadmap to guide coordination efforts, facilitate collaboration and ultimately promote rapid access to countermeasures and clinical care for pregnant women and their offspring in future epidemics.

As the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic unfolded, the clinical and public health community raced to understand SARS-CoV-2 infection and develop life-saving vaccines. Pregnant persons were disproportionately impacted, experiencing more severe illness and adverse pregnancy outcomes. And yet, when COVID-19 vaccines became available in late 2020, safety and efficacy data were not available to inform their use during pregnancy because pregnant persons were excluded from pre-authorization clinical trials. Concerns about vaccine safety during pregnancy and misinformation linking vaccination and infertility circulated widely, creating a lack of vaccine confidence. Many pregnant people initially chose not to get vaccinated, and while vaccination rates rose after safety and effectiveness data became available, COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was suboptimal and varied across racial and ethnic distribution of the pregnant population. The COVID-19 pandemic experience provided valuable insights that can inform current and future approaches to maternal vaccination against.

BACKGROUND: Tularemia is caused by the gram-negative bacterium Francisella tularensis. Although rare, tularemia during pregnancy has been associated with pregnancy complications; data on efficacy of recommended antimicrobials for treatment are limited. We performed a systematic literature review to characterize clinical manifestations of tularemia during pregnancy and examine maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes with and without antimicrobial treatment. METHODS: We searched 9 databases, including Medline, Embase, Global Health, and PubMed Central, using terms related to tularemia and pregnancy. Articles reporting cases of tularemia with ≥1 maternal or fetal outcome were included. RESULTS: Of 5891 articles identified, 30 articles describing 52 cases of tularemia in pregnant patients met inclusion criteria. Cases were reported from 9 countries, and oropharyngeal and ulceroglandular tularemia were the most common presenting forms. A plurality (46%) of infections occurred in the second trimester. Six complications were observed: lymph node aspiration, lymph node excision, maternal bleeding, spontaneous abortion, intrauterine fetal demise, and preterm birth. No deaths among mothers were reported. Of 28 patients who received antimicrobial treatment, 1 pregnancy loss and 1 fetal death were reported. Among 24 untreated patients, 1 pregnancy loss and 3 fetal deaths were reported, including one where F. tularensis was detected in placental and fetal tissues. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy loss and other complications have been reported among cases of tularemia during pregnancy. However, risk of adverse outcomes may be lower when antimicrobials known to be effective are used. Without treatment, transplacental transmission appears possible. These data underscore the importance of prompt recognition and treatment of tularemia during pregnancy.

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is the leading cause of acute lower respiratory tract infections in neonates, infants, and children worldwide. The virus is estimated to infect 97% of this population in the United States by the age of 2 years, leading to hospitalization for severe lower respiratory tract disease in 2-3% of infants younger than age 6 months. Two preventive options, prenatal administration of a maternal vaccine and administration of a long-acting monoclonal antibody to the infant, are now available for the prevention of RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection in infants in the United States. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has recommended a new maternal vaccination, RSVPreF, to be administered between 32 0/7 and 36 6/7 weeks of gestation to reduce the risk of RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection in infants in the first 6 months of life. The monoclonal antibody nirsevimab was approved by the FDA and recommended by the CDC for prevention of RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection in infants younger than age 8 months who are born during or entering their first RSV season and for infants and children aged 8-19 months who are at high risk for RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection and entering their second RSV season. Either maternal vaccination during pregnancy or monoclonal antibody administration to the infant is recommended to prevent RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection among infants, but both are not needed for most infants. Given that the availability of these products may vary as these recommendations are implemented, it is important that obstetricians and other prenatal practitioners have the information they need to counsel their pregnant patients about both options. We review the safety and efficacy of these products, current recommendations for their use, and relative advantages and disadvantages of both newly approved options for the prevention of RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection in infants to assist obstetricians and other prenatal practitioners in their counseling of pregnant patients.

THIS REPORT UPDATES PREVIOUS CDC GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON PREFERRED PREVENTION AND TREATMENT REGIMENS REGARDING NATURALLY OCCURRING ANTHRAX. ALSO PROVIDED ARE A WIDE RANGE OF ALTERNATIVE REGIMENS TO FIRST-LINE ANTIMICROBIAL DRUGS FOR USE IF PATIENTS HAVE CONTRAINDICATIONS OR INTOLERANCES OR AFTER A WIDE-AREA AEROSOL RELEASE OF: Bacillus anthracis spores if resources become limited or a multidrug-resistant B. anthracis strain is used (Hendricks KA, Wright ME, Shadomy SV, et al.; Workgroup on Anthrax Clinical Guidelines. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention expert panel meetings on prevention and treatment of anthrax in adults. Emerg Infect Dis 2014;20:e130687; Meaney-Delman D, Rasmussen SA, Beigi RH, et al. Prophylaxis and treatment of anthrax in pregnant women. Obstet Gynecol 2013;122:885-900; Bradley JS, Peacock G, Krug SE, et al. Pediatric anthrax clinical management. Pediatrics 2014;133:e1411-36). Specifically, this report updates antimicrobial drug and antitoxin use for both postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) and treatment from these previous guidelines best practices and is based on systematic reviews of the literature regarding 1) in vitro antimicrobial drug activity against B. anthracis; 2) in vivo antimicrobial drug efficacy for PEP and treatment; 3) in vivo and human antitoxin efficacy for PEP, treatment, or both; and 4) human survival after antimicrobial drug PEP and treatment of localized anthrax, systemic anthrax, and anthrax meningitis. CHANGES FROM PREVIOUS CDC GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDE AN EXPANDED LIST OF ALTERNATIVE ANTIMICROBIAL DRUGS TO USE WHEN FIRST-LINE ANTIMICROBIAL DRUGS ARE CONTRAINDICATED OR NOT TOLERATED OR AFTER A BIOTERRORISM EVENT WHEN FIRST-LINE ANTIMICROBIAL DRUGS ARE DEPLETED OR INEFFECTIVE AGAINST A GENETICALLY ENGINEERED RESISTANT: B. anthracis strain. In addition, these updated guidelines include new recommendations regarding special considerations for the diagnosis and treatment of anthrax meningitis, including comorbid, social, and clinical predictors of anthrax meningitis. The previously published CDC guidelines and recommendations described potentially beneficial critical care measures and clinical assessment tools and procedures for persons with anthrax, which have not changed and are not addressed in this update. In addition, no changes were made to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations for use of anthrax vaccine (Bower WA, Schiffer J, Atmar RL, et al. Use of anthrax vaccine in the United States: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, 2019. MMWR Recomm Rep 2019;68[No. RR-4]:1-14). The updated guidelines in this report can be used by health care providers to prevent and treat anthrax and guide emergency preparedness officials and planners as they develop and update plans for a wide-area aerosol release of B. anthracis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis at delivery and adverse maternal health and pregnancy outcomes during pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron variant predominance, with a focus on the time period of Omicron variant predominance. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional observational study with data from delivery hospitalizations in the Premier Healthcare Database from February 2020 to August 2023. The pre-Delta (February 2020-June 2021), Delta (July 2021-December 2021), and Omicron (January 2022-August 2023) periods of variant predominance were examined. Exposure to COVID-19 was identified by having a diagnostic code for COVID-19 during the delivery hospitalization. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) were calculated to compare the risks of adverse maternal and pregnancy outcomes for women with and without COVID-19 diagnoses at the time of delivery for each variant period. RESULTS: Among 2,990,973 women with delivery hospitalizations, 1.9% (n=56,618) had COVID-19 diagnoses noted at delivery admission discharge, including 26,053 during the Omicron period. Across all variant time periods, the prevalence of many adverse maternal and pregnancy outcomes during the delivery hospitalization was significantly higher for pregnant women with COVID-19 compared with pregnant women without COVID-19. In adjusted models, COVID-19 during the Omicron period was associated with significant increased risks for maternal sepsis (COVID-19: 0.4% vs no COVID-19: 0.1%; aPR 3.32, 95% CI, 2.70-4.08), acute respiratory distress syndrome (0.6% vs 0.1%; aPR 6.19, 95% CI, 5.26-7.29), shock (0.2% vs 0.1%; aPR 2.14, 95% CI, 1.62-2.84), renal failure (0.5% vs 0.2%; aPR 2.08, 95% CI, 1.73-2.49), intensive care unit admission (2.7% vs 1.7%; aPR 1.64, 95% CI, 1.52-1.77), mechanical ventilation (0.3% vs 0.1%; aPR 3.15, 95% CI, 2.52-3.93), in-hospital death (0.03% vs 0.01%; aPR 5.00, 95% CI, 2.30-10.90), stillbirth (0.7% vs 0.6%; aPR 1.17, 95% CI, 1.01-1.36), and preterm delivery (12.3% vs 9.6%; aPR 1.28, 95% CI, 1.24-1.33). CONCLUSION: Despite the possibility of some level of immunity due to previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, vaccination, or testing differences, risks of adverse outcomes associated with COVID-19 diagnosis at delivery remained elevated during the Omicron variant time period.

Pregnant and postpartum women are at increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19 compared with nonpregnant women of reproductive age. COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for all persons ≥6 months of age. Health care providers (HCPs) have a unique opportunity to counsel women of reproductive age, including pregnant and postpartum patients, about the importance of receiving COVID-19, influenza, and tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccines. Data from the Fall 2022 DocStyles survey were analyzed to examine the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination attitudes and practices among HCPs caring for women of reproductive age, and to determine whether providers recommended and offered or administered COVID-19 vaccines to women of reproductive age, including their pregnant patients. Overall, 82.9% of providers reported recommending COVID-19 vaccination to women of reproductive age, and 54.7% offered or administered the vaccine in their practice. Among HCPs who cared for pregnant patients, obstetrician-gynecologists were more likely to recommend COVID-19 vaccination to pregnant patients (94.2%) than were family practitioners or internists (82.1%) (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 1.1). HCPs were more likely to offer or administer COVID-19 vaccination on-site to pregnant patients if they also offered or administered influenza (aPR = 5.5) and Tdap vaccines (aPR = 2.3). Encouraging HCPs to recommend, offer, and administer the COVID-19 vaccines along with influenza or Tdap vaccines might help reinforce vaccine confidence and increase coverage among women of reproductive age, including pregnant women.

BACKGROUND: To characterize neurodevelopmental abnormalities in children up to 36 months of age with congenital Zika virus exposure. METHODS: From the U.S. Zika Pregnancy and Infant Registry, a national surveillance system to monitor pregnancies with laboratory evidence of Zika virus infection, pregnancy outcomes and presence of Zika associated birth defects (ZBD) were reported among infants with available information. Neurologic sequelae and developmental delay were reported among children with ≥1 follow-up exam after 14 days of age or with ≥1 visit with development reported, respectively. RESULTS: Among 2248 infants, 10.1% were born preterm, and 10.5% were small-for-gestational age. Overall, 122 (5.4%) had any ZBD; 91.8% of infants had brain abnormalities or microcephaly, 23.0% had eye abnormalities, and 14.8% had both. Of 1881 children ≥1 follow-up exam reported, neurologic sequelae were more common among children with ZBD (44.6%) vs. without ZBD (1.5%). Of children with ≥1 visit with development reported, 46.8% (51/109) of children with ZBD and 7.4% (129/1739) of children without ZBD had confirmed or possible developmental delay. CONCLUSION: Understanding the prevalence of developmental delays and healthcare needs of children with congenital Zika virus exposure can inform health systems and planning to ensure services are available for affected families. IMPACT: We characterize pregnancy and infant outcomes and describe neurodevelopmental abnormalities up to 36 months of age by presence of Zika associated birth defects (ZBD). Neurologic sequelae and developmental delays were common among children with ZBD. Children with ZBD had increased frequency of neurologic sequelae and developmental delay compared to children without ZBD. Longitudinal follow-up of infants with Zika virus exposure in utero is important to characterize neurodevelopmental delay not apparent in early infancy, but logistically challenging in surveillance models.

Substance use during pregnancy increases risk for a wide range of adverse maternal and neonatal health outcomes. Polysubstance use is common among people who use substances during pregnancy; however, the risks of combined substance exposures during pregnancy are poorly understood. In this report, we provide an overview of the activities of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and partners and identified gaps related to (1) surveillance, (2) routine screening, and (3) prevention of polysubstance use during pregnancy. Efforts by CDC and other partners to reduce polysubstance use during pregnancy can improve the health of pregnant people and their infants and children.

The authors reply: Sun appropriately raises questions about the proportion of women reporting spontaneous abortion in our recent article. We agree that the denominator used in that proportion — 827 completed pregnancies — is not an appropriate denominator for the calculation of a risk estimate or rate. | | The number of spontaneous abortions (104) reflects data reported by the participants as of March 30, 2021, during telephone follow-up. In this preliminary report, follow-up information was missing for the majority of pregnancies in which exposure to vaccination occurred in early pregnancy. Among the 1224 women who had been vaccinated before conception or in the first trimester, follow-up through 20 weeks of gestation had been completed for only 204 pregnancies that were known to be ongoing and for 1 pregnancy that resulted in stillbirth. Among the pregnancies that had not yet reached 20 weeks of gestation, there were 10 pregnancies with other outcomes before 20 weeks of gestation, including 8 ectopic pregnancies and 2 induced abortions. For the other 905 pregnancies, follow-up had not occurred to establish whether these pregnancies were ongoing past 20 weeks of gestation. We have amended Table 4 in our earlier publication and have clarified the text. | | Subsequently, we completed telephone follow-up for the 905 pregnancies and enrolled additional persons in the v-safe pregnancy registry. To determine the cumulative risk of spontaneous abortion from 6 to less than 20 weeks of gestation, we used life-table methods to perform an updated analysis, now reported in the Journal, involving 2456 women who received at least one dose of an mRNA Covid-19 vaccine before conception or before 20 weeks of gestation.1 The estimated risks (14.1% overall and 12.8% in age-standardized analyses) are consistent with the risks of spontaneous abortion reported in the general population.1

PROBLEM: Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is recommended for persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) during pregnancy. However, knowledge gaps exist about best practices for management of OUD during pregnancy and these data are needed to guide clinical care. PERIOD COVERED: 2014-2021. DESCRIPTION OF THE SYSTEM: Established in 2019, the Maternal and Infant Network to Understand Outcomes Associated with Medication for Opioid Use Disorder During Pregnancy (MAT-LINK) is a surveillance network of seven clinical sites in the United States. Boston Medical Center, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, The Ohio State University, and the University of Utah were the initial clinical sites in 2019. In 2021, three clinical sites were added to the network (the University of New Mexico, the University of Rochester, and the University of South Florida). Persons receiving care at the seven clinical sites are diverse in terms of geography, urbanicity, race and ethnicity, insurance coverage, and type of MOUD received. The goal of MAT-LINK is to capture demographic and clinical information about persons with OUD during pregnancy to better understand the effect of MOUD on outcomes and, ultimately, provide information for clinical care and public health interventions for this population. MAT-LINK maintains strict confidentiality through robust information technology architecture. MAT-LINK surveillance methods, population characteristics, and evaluation findings are described in this inaugural surveillance report. This report is the first to describe the system, presenting detailed information on funding, structure, data elements, and methods as well as findings from a surveillance evaluation. The findings presented in this report are limited to selected demographic characteristics of pregnant persons overall and by MOUD treatment status. Clinical and outcome data are not included because data collection and cleaning have not been completed; initial analyses of clinical and outcome data will begin in 2023. RESULTS: The MAT-LINK surveillance network gathered data on 5,541 reported pregnancies with a known pregnancy outcome during 2014-2021 among persons with OUD from seven clinical sites. The mean maternal age was 29.7 (SD = ±5.1) years. By race and ethnicity, 86.3% of pregnant persons were identified as White, 25.4% as Hispanic or Latino, and 5.8% as Black or African American. Among pregnant persons, 81.6% had public insurance, and 84.4% lived in urban areas. Compared with persons not receiving MOUD during pregnancy, those receiving MOUD during pregnancy were more likely to be older and White and to have public insurance. The evaluation of the surveillance system found that the initial four clinical sites were not representative of demographics of the South or Southwest regions of the United States and had low representation from certain racial and ethnic groups compared with the overall U.S. population; however, the addition of three clinical sites in 2021 made the surveillance network more representative. Automated extraction and processing improved the speed of data collection and analysis. The ability to add new clinical sites and variables demonstrated the flexibility of MAT-LINK. INTERPRETATION: MAT-LINK is the first surveillance system to collect comprehensive, longitudinal data on pregnant person-infant dyads with perinatal outcomes associated with MOUD during pregnancy from multiple clinical sites. Analyses of clinical site data demonstrated different sociodemographic characteristics between the MOUD and non-MOUD treatment groups. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIONS: MAT-LINK is a timely and flexible surveillance system with data on approximately 5,500 pregnancies. Ongoing data collection and analyses of these data will provide information to support clinical and public health guidance to improve health outcomes among pregnant persons with OUD and their children.

INTRODUCTION: Alcohol use during pregnancy can cause birth defects and developmental disabilities. From 2018 through 2020, 13.5% of pregnant women reported current drinking. The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends evidence-based tools (eg, AUDIT-C and SASQ) for implementing screening and brief interventions to reduce excessive alcohol use among adults, including pregnant people, for whom any alcohol use is considered excessive. METHODS: We used DocStyles 2019 data to conduct a cross-sectional analysis to examine current screening and brief intervention practices that primary care clinicians conduct among pregnant patients; clinicians' confidence levels in conducting screening, brief interventions, and referral to treatment; and the documentation of brief interventions in the medical record. RESULTS: A total of 1,500 US adult medicine clinicians completed the entire survey. Among the respondents who conduct screening (N = 1,373) and brief interventions (N = 1,357) in their practice, nearly all reported implementing screening (94.6%) and brief interventions (94.9%) with their pregnant patients for alcohol use, but fewer than half felt confident about conducting their screening practices (46.5%). Two-thirds (64%) reported using a tool that met the criteria recommended by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Over half documented brief interventions in electronic health record notes (51.7%) or designated space (50.7%). CONCLUSION: Pregnancy presents a unique opportunity for clinicians to incorporate screening into routine obstetric care and encourage behavior change among patients. Most providers reported always screening their pregnant patients for alcohol use, but fewer used evidence-based USPSTF-recommended screening tools. Increased clinician confidence in screening and brief intervention, the use of standardized screening tools tailored to pregnant people, and maximal use of electronic health record technology may enhance the benefits of their application to alcohol use, which ultimately can reduce adverse outcomes associated with alcohol use during pregnancy.

Pregnant people with COVID-19 are at increased risk for severe illness and adverse pregnancy outcomes. COVID-19 vaccinations are safe and effective, including for pregnant and recently pregnant people. The objective of this analysis was to describe the extent to which primary care physicians across the United States report confidence in talking with female patients of reproductive age about COVID-19 vaccination, recommending COVID-19 vaccinations to pregnant patients, and offering COVID-19 vaccinations at their practices in fall 2021. We analyzed cross-sectional data from the Fall 2021 DocStyles survey, a web-based panel survey of U.S. primary healthcare providers (64% response rate). Family practitioners/internists, obstetrician-gynecologists, and pediatricians were asked about confidence in talking with female patients of reproductive age about COVID-19 vaccination, vaccination practices regarding pregnant patients, and offering COVID-19 vaccinations. We describe results overall and by select physician characteristics. Among 1501 respondents, most were family practitioners/internists (67%), 17% were obstetrician-gynecologists, and 17% were pediatricians. Overall, 63% were very confident talking with female patients of reproductive age about COVID-19 vaccination, 80% recommended pregnant patients get vaccinated as soon as possible, and 50% offered COVID-19 vaccinations at their current practice. Obstetrician-gynecologists were most confident in talking with female patients, but only one-third offered the vaccine at their practices. This analysis found that most physicians felt confident talking about COVID-19 vaccinations and recommended pregnant patients get vaccinated as soon as possible. Provider recommendation for vaccination remains a key strategy for achieving high vaccination coverage, and consistent recommendations may improve vaccine acceptance among pregnant and postpartum people.

After reading the article by Hanna et al,1 we had concerns with their conclusions that do not seem to be supported by the data. This study included a sample of 11 lactating women with trace amounts of messenger RNA (mRNA) found in the breast milk of 5 women within 45 hours of monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. Based on these findings, the authors recommended caution regarding breastfeeding infants younger than 6 months within 48 hours of maternal vaccination and raised unfounded concerns about potential interference with routine infant vaccinations.

Despite universal prenatal syphilis screening recommendations and availability of effective antibiotic treatment, syphilis prevalence during pregnancy and the incidence of congenital syphilis have continued to increase in the United States (1,2). Concurrent increases in methamphetamine, injection drug, and heroin use have been described in women with syphilis (3). CDC used data on births that occurred during January 1, 2018-December 31, 2021, from two states (Arizona and Georgia) that participate in the Surveillance for Emerging Threats to Pregnant People and Infants Network (SET-NET) to describe the prevalence of substance use among pregnant persons with syphilis by congenital syphilis pregnancy outcome (defined as delivery of a stillborn or live-born infant meeting the surveillance case definition for probable or confirmed congenital syphilis). The prevalence of substance use (e.g., tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, illicit use of opioids, and other illicit, nonprescription substances) in persons with a congenital syphilis pregnancy outcome (48.1%) was nearly double that among those with a noncongenital syphilis pregnancy outcome (24.6%). Persons with a congenital syphilis pregnancy outcome were six times as likely to report illicit use of opioids and four times as likely to report using other illicit, nonprescription substances during pregnancy than were persons with a noncongenital syphilis pregnancy outcome. Approximately one half of persons who used substances during pregnancy and had a congenital syphilis pregnancy outcome had late or no prenatal care. Tailored interventions should address barriers and facilitators to accessing screening and treatment for syphilis among persons who use substances. The need for syphilis screening and treatment should be addressed at any health care encounter during pregnancy, especially among persons who use substances.

Public health emergencies, from Zika to COVID-19, have underscored the importance of addressing the needs of pregnant people and their infants. Recent events have underlined the critical role of mother-infant-linked longitudinal surveillance to characterize and assess the impacts of emerging, re-emerging, and persistent threats, including infectious diseases, on these populations. In partnership with state, local, and territorial health departments, CDC's National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities activated the Surveillance for Emerging Threats to Mothers and Babies Network (SET-NET) to capture information about pregnant people with laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) and their infants. SET-NET data were critical in recognizing the severe risks of COVID-19 during pregnancy, which ultimately informed clinical decisions and public health policy, specifically vaccine prioritization at the local, state, and national levels. This commentary describes the activation of SET-NET to monitor COVID-19 in pregnancy and highlights the experiences of health departments. We provide examples of how SET-NET findings informed COVID-19 prevention efforts and public health policy. Lastly, we identify opportunities to improve and advance surveillance efforts to protect the health of pregnant people and their infants in the United States from current and future threats.

Since May 2022, more than 6,900 cases of monkeypox virus infection have been reported in 52 countries. The World Health Organization is planning to rename the virus and its clades to reduce stigma. As of July 5, 2022, 556 cases have been reported in 33 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. The initial cases were travel-associated; however, person-to-person transmission is now occurring domestically. Close, sustained skin-to-skin contact, including during sexual activity, appears to be the primary mode of transmission. The risk of widespread community transmission remains low; however, rapid identification of monkeypox virus infection and isolation of affected individuals is critical to prevent further transmission. Most but not all cases have occurred in males; some infections have started with anogenital lesions and can be mistaken for common sexually transmitted infections. To facilitate rapid, accurate diagnosis of monkeypox virus infection, obstetrician-gynecologists (ob-gyns) in the United States should ask about recent travel history and new ulcers or lesions and perform a thorough visual inspection of skin and mucosal sites (oral, genital, perianal area) in patients presenting with new rash. Obstetrician-gynecologists should become familiar with the appearance of monkeypox lesions and know whom to call to report a suspected case, how and when to test for monkeypox virus, and how to counsel patients. In the event of a suspected case, ob-gyns should follow infection-control guidelines to prevent transmission and make recommendations to prevent further community spread. This article outlines the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of monkeypox virus infection, monkeypox virus infection during pregnancy, and implications for practicing ob-gyns in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant women less frequently receive Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and are at increased risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes from COVID-19. OBJECTIVES: First, describe the vaccination status, treatment, and outcomes of hospitalized, symptomatic pregnant women with COVID-19 and second, estimate whether treatment differs by pregnancy status among treatment-eligible (i.e., requiring supplemental oxygen per National Institutes of Health guidelines at the time of the study) women. STUDY DESIGN: During January-November 2021, the COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network completed medical chart abstraction for a probability sample of 2,715 hospitalized women aged 15-49 years with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of these, 1,950 women had symptoms of COVID-19 upon admission; 336 were pregnant. We calculated weighted prevalence estimates of demographic and clinical characteristics, vaccination status, and outcomes among pregnant women with symptoms of COVID-19 upon admission. We used propensity score matching to estimate prevalence ratios (PR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of treatment-eligible patients who received remdesivir or systemic steroids by pregnancy status. RESULTS: Among 336 hospitalized pregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19, 39.6% were non-Hispanic Black, 24.8% were Hispanic or Latino, and 61.9% were aged 25-34 years. Among those with known COVID-19 vaccination status, 92.9% were unvaccinated. One-third (32.7%) were treatment-eligible. Among treatment-eligible pregnant women, 74.1% received systemic steroids and 61.4% received remdesivir. Among those that were no longer pregnant at discharge (n=180), 5.4% had spontaneous abortions and 3.5% had stillbirths. Of the 159 live births, 29.0% were pre-term. Among a propensity score-matched cohort of treatment-eligible hospitalized women of reproductive age, pregnant women were less likely than non-pregnant women to receive remdesivir (PR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.69-0.97) and systemic steroids (PR: 0.80, 95% CI 0.73-0.87). CONCLUSION: Most hospitalized pregnant patients with symptomatic COVID-19 were unvaccinated. Hospitalized pregnant patients were less likely to receive recommended remdesivir and systemic steroids compared to similar hospitalized non-pregnant women. Our results underscore the need to identify opportunities for improving COVID-19 vaccination, implementation of treatment of pregnant women, and the inclusion of pregnant women in clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant and postpartum women are at increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19. We assessed COVID-19 vaccination coverage, intent, and attitudes among women of reproductive age overall and by pregnancy status in the United States. METHODS: Data from the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module collected during April 22-November 27, 2021, were analyzed to assess COVID-19 vaccination (receipt of 1 dose), intent for vaccination, and attitudes towards vaccination among women aged 18-49years overall and by pregnancy status (trying to get pregnant, currently pregnant, breastfeeding, and not trying to get pregnant or currently pregnant or breastfeeding). Logistic regression and predictive marginals were used to generate unadjusted and adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs and aPRs). Trend analyses were conducted to assess monthly changes in vaccination and intent. RESULTS: Our analyses included 110,925 women aged 18-49years. COVID-19 vaccination coverage (1 dose) was 63.2% overall (range from 53.3% in HHS Region 4 to 76.5% in HHS Region 1). Vaccination coverage was lowest among pregnant women (45.1%), followed by women who were trying to get pregnant (49.5%), women who were breastfeeding (51.5%), and all other women (64.9%). Non-Hispanic (NH) Black women who were pregnant or breastfeeding had significantly lower vaccination coverage (aPR: 0.74 and 0.66, respectively) than NH White women. DISCUSSION: Our findings are consistent with other studies showing lower vaccination coverage among pregnant individuals, with substantially lower vaccination coverage among NH Black women who are pregnant or breastfeeding. Given the overlapping and disproportionate risks of COVID-19 and maternal mortality among Black women, it is critical that COVID-19 vaccination be strongly recommended for these populations and all women of reproductive age. Healthcare and public health providers may take advantage of every opportunity to encourage vaccination and enlist the assistance of community leaders, particularly in communities with low vaccination coverage.

Severe coronavirus disease in neonates is rare. We analyzed clinical, laboratory, and autopsy findings from a neonate in the United States who was delivered at 25 weeks of gestation and died 4 days after birth; the mother had asymptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and preeclampsia. We observed severe diffuse alveolar damage and localized SARS-CoV-2 by immunohistochemistry, in situ hybridization, and electron microscopy of the lungs of the neonate. We localized SARS-CoV-2 RNA in neonatal heart and liver vascular endothelium by using in situ hybridization and detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA in neonatal and placental tissues by using reverse transcription PCR. Subgenomic reverse transcription PCR suggested viral replication in lung/airway, heart, and liver. These findings indicate that in utero SARS-CoV-2 transmission contributed to this neonatal death.

Incidence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in women of reproductive age is increasing, leading to rising numbers of women with HCV infection in pregnancy and concerns of perinatal transmission. In April 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) began recommending HCV screening during each pregnancy. We describe maternal characteristics and timing of HCV testing among pregnant women identified with HCV infection. |

Zika virus infection during pregnancy can cause serious birth defects of the brain and eyes, including intracranial calcifications, cerebral or cortical atrophy, chorioretinal abnormalities, and optic nerve abnormalities (1,2). The frequency of these Zika-associated brain and eye defects, based on data from the U.S. Zika Pregnancy and Infant Registry (USZPIR), has been previously reported in aggregate (3,4). This report describes the frequency of individual Zika-associated brain and eye defects among infants from pregnancies with laboratory evidence of confirmed or possible Zika virus infection. Among 6,799 live-born infants in USZPIR born during December 1, 2015-March 31, 2018, 4.6% had any Zika-associated birth defect; in a subgroup of pregnancies with a positive nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) for Zika virus infection, the percentage was 6.1% of live-born infants. The brain and eye defects most frequently reported included microcephaly, corpus callosum abnormalities, intracranial calcification, abnormal cortical gyral patterns, ventriculomegaly, cerebral or cortical atrophy, chorioretinal abnormalities, and optic nerve abnormalities. Among infants with any Zika-associated birth defect, one third had more than one defect reported. Certain brain and eye defects in an infant might prompt suspicion of prenatal Zika virus infection. These findings can help target surveillance efforts to the most common brain and eye defects associated with Zika virus infection during pregnancy should a Zika virus outbreak reemerge, and might provide a signal to the reemergence of Zika virus, particularly in geographic regions without ongoing comprehensive Zika virus surveillance.

Pregnant women are at increased risk for severe COVID-19-related illness, and COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes and maternal and neonatal complications (1-3). To date, studies assessing whether COVID-19 during pregnancy is associated with increased risk for stillbirth have yielded mixed results (2-4). Since the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) became the predominant circulating variant,* there have been anecdotal reports of increasing rates of stillbirths in women with COVID-19.(†) CDC used the Premier Healthcare Database Special COVID-19 Release (PHD-SR), a large hospital-based administrative database,(§) to assess whether a maternal COVID-19 diagnosis documented at delivery hospitalization was associated with stillbirth during March 2020-September 2021 as well as before and during the period of Delta variant predominance in the United States (March 2020-June 2021 and July-September 2021, respectively). Among 1,249,634 deliveries during March 2020-September 2021, stillbirths were rare (8,154; 0.65%): 273 (1.26%) occurred among 21,653 deliveries to women with COVID-19 documented at the delivery hospitalization, and 7,881 (0.64%) occurred among 1,227,981 deliveries without COVID-19. The adjusted risk for stillbirth was higher in deliveries with COVID-19 compared with deliveries without COVID-19 during March 2020-September 2021 (adjusted relative risk [aRR] = 1.90; 95% CI = 1.69-2.15), including during the pre-Delta (aRR = 1.47; 95% CI = 1.27-1.71) and Delta periods (aRR = 4.04; 95% CI = 3.28-4.97). COVID-19 documented at delivery was associated with increased risk for stillbirth, with a stronger association during the period of Delta variant predominance. Implementing evidence-based COVID-19 prevention strategies, including vaccination before or during pregnancy, is critical to reducing the impact of COVID-19 on stillbirths.

Pregnant persons are at risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), and infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during pregnancy is associated with increased risks of preterm birth and other adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes.1 Although spontaneous abortion (pregnancy loss occurring at less than 20 weeks of gestation) is a common pregnancy outcome affecting 11 to 22% of recognized pregnancies (see Table S1 in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org),2-4 data to inform estimates of the risk of spontaneous abortion after receipt of an mRNA Covid-19 vaccine either before conception (30 days before the first day of the last menstrual period through 14 days after) or during pregnancy are limited.

BACKGROUND: Recommended testing for both infants with Zika-associated birth defects (i.e., microcephaly and selected brain or eye anomalies) and infants without birth defects whose mothers had laboratory evidence of possible Zika virus (ZIKV) infection during pregnancy includes nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) and immunoglobulin M (IgM) testing within days after birth. Brain and eye defects highly specific for congenital ZIKV infection have been described; sporadic reports have documented negative ZIKV testing in such infants. METHODS: Infants from the U.S. Zika Pregnancy and Infant Registry and Zika Birth Defects Surveillance with Zika-associated birth defects and maternal and infant laboratory testing for ZIKV and two congenital infections (i.e., cytomegalovirus [CMV] and toxoplasmosis) were reviewed for phenotype and laboratory results. Infants with at least one defect considered highly specific for congenital ZIKV infection were designated as having congenital Zika syndrome (CZS) clinical phenotype for this study. RESULTS: Of 325 liveborn infants with Zika-associated birth defects and laboratory evidence of maternal ZIKV infection, 33 (10%) had CZS clinical phenotype; 171 (53%) had ZIKV IgM testing with negative or no ZIKV NAAT. ZIKV IgM was negative in the remaining 120 infants, and for 90%, testing for CMV and toxoplasmosis was missing/incomplete. Among 11 infants testing negative for ZIKV IgM, CMV, and toxoplasmosis, 2 infants had CZS clinical phenotype. CONCLUSIONS: These data add support to previous reports of negative ZIKV IgM testing in infants with clear maternal and phenotypic evidence of congenital ZIKV infection. Follow-up care consistent with the diagnosis is recommended regardless of infant ZIKV test results.

This report provides CDC recommendations to U.S. health care providers regarding treatment, pre-exposure prophylaxis, and postexposure prophylaxis of plague. Yersinia pestis, the bacterium that causes plague, leads to naturally occurring disease in the United States and other regions worldwide and is recognized as a potential bioterrorism weapon. A bioweapon attack with Y. pestis could potentially infect thousands, requiring rapid and informed decision making by clinicians and public health agencies. The U.S. government stockpiles a variety of medical countermeasures to mitigate the effects of a bioterrorism attack (e.g., antimicrobials, antitoxins, and vaccines) for which the 21st Century Cures Act mandates the development of evidence-based guidelines on appropriate use. Guidelines for treatment and postexposure prophylaxis of plague were published in 2000 by a nongovernmental work group; since then, new human clinical data, animal study data, and U.S. Food and Drug Administration approvals of additional countermeasures have become available. To develop a comprehensive set of updated guidelines, CDC conducted a series of systematic literature reviews on human treatment of plague and other relevant topics to collect a broad evidence base for the recommendations in this report. Evidence from CDC reviews and additional sources were presented to subject matter experts during a series of forums. CDC considered individual expert input while developing these guidelines, which provide recommended best practices for treatment and prophylaxis of human plague for both naturally occurring disease and following a bioterrorism attack. The guidelines do not include information on diagnostic testing, triage decisions, or logistics involved in dispensing medical countermeasures. Clinicians and public health officials can use these guidelines to prepare their organizations, hospitals, and communities to respond to a plague mass-casualty event and as a guide for treating patients affected by plague.

The U.S. COVID-19 vaccination program launched on December 14, 2020. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended prioritizing COVID-19 vaccination for specific groups of the U.S. population who were at highest risk for COVID-19 hospitalization and death, including adults aged ≥75 years*; implementation varied by state, and eligibility was gradually expanded to persons aged ≥65 years beginning in January 2021. By April 19, 2021, eligibility was expanded to all adults aged ≥18 years nationwide.(†) To assess patterns of COVID-19 vaccination coverage among U.S. adults, CDC analyzed data submitted on vaccinations administered during December 14, 2020-May 22, 2021, by age, sex, and community-level characteristics. By May 22, 2021, 57.0% of persons aged ≥18 years had received ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose; coverage was highest among persons aged ≥65 years (80.0%) and lowest among persons aged 18-29 years (38.3%). During the week beginning February 7, 2021, vaccination initiation among adults aged ≥65 years peaked at 8.2%, whereas weekly initiation among other age groups peaked later and at lower levels. During April 19-May 22, 2021, the period following expanded eligibility to all adults, weekly initiation remained <4.0% and decreased for all age groups, including persons aged 18-29 years (3.6% to 1.9%) and 30-49 years (3.5% to 1.7%); based on the current rate of weekly initiation (as of May 22), younger persons will not reach the same levels of coverage as older persons by the end of August. Across all age groups, coverage (≥1 dose) was lower among men compared with women, except among adults aged ≥65 years, and lower among persons living in counties that were less urban, had higher social vulnerabilities, or had higher percentages of social determinants of poor health. Continued efforts to improve vaccination confidence and alleviate barriers to vaccination initiation, especially among adults aged 18-49 years, could improve vaccination coverage.

We evaluated nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) for Zika virus on whole-blood specimens compared with NAAT on serum and urine specimens among asymptomatic pregnant women during the 2015-2016 Puerto Rico Zika outbreak. Using NAAT, more infections were detected in serum and urine than in whole blood specimens.

BACKGROUND: Many pregnant persons in the United States are receiving messenger RNA (mRNA) coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) vaccines, but data are limited on their safety in pregnancy. METHODS: From December 14, 2020, to February 28, 2021, we used data from the "v-safe after vaccination health checker" surveillance system, the v-safe pregnancy registry, and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to characterize the initial safety of mRNA Covid-19 vaccines in pregnant persons. RESULTS: A total of 35,691 v-safe participants 16 to 54 years of age identified as pregnant. Injection-site pain was reported more frequently among pregnant persons than among nonpregnant women, whereas headache, myalgia, chills, and fever were reported less frequently. Among 3958 participants enrolled in the v-safe pregnancy registry, 827 had a completed pregnancy, of which 115 (13.9%) resulted in a pregnancy loss and 712 (86.1%) resulted in a live birth (mostly among participants with vaccination in the third trimester). Adverse neonatal outcomes included preterm birth (in 9.4%) and small size for gestational age (in 3.2%); no neonatal deaths were reported. Although not directly comparable, calculated proportions of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in persons vaccinated against Covid-19 who had a completed pregnancy were similar to incidences reported in studies involving pregnant women that were conducted before the Covid-19 pandemic. Among 221 pregnancy-related adverse events reported to the VAERS, the most frequently reported event was spontaneous abortion (46 cases). CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary findings did not show obvious safety signals among pregnant persons who received mRNA Covid-19 vaccines. However, more longitudinal follow-up, including follow-up of large numbers of women vaccinated earlier in pregnancy, is necessary to inform maternal, pregnancy, and infant outcomes.