TSH and FT4 reference interval recommendations and prevalence of gestational thyroid dysfunction: quantification of current diagnostic approaches

Context Guidelines recommend use of population- and trimester-specific TSH and FT4 reference intervals (RIs) in pregnancy. Since these are often unavailable, clinicians frequently rely on alternative diagnostic strategies. We sought to quantify the diagnostic consequences of current recommendations. Methods We included cohorts participating in the Consortium on Thyroid and Pregnancy. Different approaches were used to define RIs: a TSH fixed upper limit of 4.0 mU/L (fixed limit approach), a fixed subtraction from the upper limit for TSH of 0.5 mU/L (subtraction approach) and using non-pregnancy RIs. Outcome measures were sensitivity and false discovery rate (FDR) of women for whom levothyroxine treatment was indicated and those for whom treatment would be considered according to international guidelines. Results The study population comprised 52,496 participants from 18 cohorts. Compared to the use of trimester-specific reference intervals, alternative approaches had a low sensitivity (0.63-0.82) and high FDR (0.11-0.35) to detect women with a treatment indication or consideration. Sensitivity and FDR to detect a treatment indication in the first trimester were similar between the fixed limit, subtraction and non-pregnancy approach (0.77-0.11 vs 0.74-0.16 vs 0.60-0.11). The diagnostic performance to detect overt hypothyroidism, isolated hypothyroxinemia and (sub)clinical hyperthyroidism mainly varied between FT4 RI approaches, while the diagnostic performance to detect subclinical hypothyroidism varied between the applied TSH RI approaches. Conclusion Alternative approaches to define RIs for TSH and FT4 in pregnancy result in considerable over- and underdiagnosis compared with population- and trimester-specific RIs. Additional strategies need to be explored to optimize identification of thyroid dysfunction during pregnancy

Predictive performance for placental dysfunction related stillbirth of the competing risks model for small for gestational age fetuses

Objectives: To examine the predictive performance for placental dysfunction related stillbirths of the competing risks model for small-for-gestational-age (SGA) fetuses based on fetusa combination of maternal risk factors, estimated fetal weight (EFW) and uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI); and second, to compare the performance of this model with that of a stillbirth-specific model using the same biomarkers and with the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (RCOG) guideline for the investigation and management of the SGA fetus. Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: Two UK maternity hospitals. Population: A total of 131 514 women with singleton pregnancies attending for routine ultrasound examination at 19-24 weeks of gestation. Methods: The predictive performance for stillbirth achieved by three models was compared. Main outcome measure: Placental dysfunction related stillbirth. Results: At 10% false-positive rate, the competing risks model predicted 59%, 66% and 71% of placental dysfunction related stillbirths, at any gestation, at <37 weeks and at <32 weeks, respectively, which were similar to the respective figures of 62%, 70% and 73% for the stillbirth-specific model. At a screen positive rate of 21.8%, as defined by the RCOG guideline, the competing risks model predicted 71%, 76% and 79% of placental dysfunction related stillbirths at any gestation, at <37 weeks and at <32 weeks, respectively, and the respective figures for the RCOG guideline were 40%, 44% and 42%. Conclusion: The predictive performance for placental dysfunction related stillbirths by the competing risks model for SGA was similar to that of the stillbirth-specific model and superior to that of the RCOG guideline