Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39917432›Full record

ArticleNIHR open research2025

Pulmonary aspiration during pregnancy or immediately postpartum in the UK: A population-based case-control study.

Nuala Lucas, Alison Gooda, Ruth Tunn, Marian Knight, UKOSS Aspiration in Pregnancy investigators

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NIHR open research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Nuala LucasLondon North West Healthcare NHS Trust, Watford Road, Harrow, Middlesex, HA1 3UJ, UK.
Alison GoodaNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.
Ruth TunnNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1187-1808
Marian KnightNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1984-4575
UKOSS Aspiration in Pregnancy investigators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Pulmonary aspiration of gastric contents is the most frequent cause of death associated with complications of airway management during general anaesthesia. Pregnancy increases aspiration risk owing to factors including delayed gastric emptying and increased intragastric pressure. We describe the incidence, risk factors, management, and outcomes of maternal pulmonary aspiration in pregnancy in the UK. Methods: We conducted a population-based surveillance and case-control study. Between September 2013 and August 2016, all UK consultant-led obstetric units prospectively identified cases of pulmonary aspiration among parturient women using a pre-defined case definition, and reported them via the UK Obstetric Surveillance System (UKOSS). Controls (n=1982) were obtained from four UKOSS studies conducted between 2005 and 2014. We calculated the incidence of pulmonary aspiration using 2013-2015 maternities as the denominator. We explored potential risk factors for aspiration using univariable logistic regression and described outcomes. Results: We identified 12 cases of pulmonary aspiration, giving an incidence of 5.2 per 1,000,000 maternities (95% CI 2.69-9.09). Cases were significantly less likely than controls to be multiparous (unadjusted odds ratio [uOR] 0.255, 95% CI 0.069-0.946), and significantly more likely to undergo caesarean section (uOR 24.89, 95% CI 3.18-194.85) and to receive general anaesthetic for caesarean section (p<0.001). Gestation was significantly shorter in cases than controls (uOR 0.782, 95% CI 0.702-0.870). Women who aspirated were significantly more likely to be admitted to the intensive therapy unit than controls (p<0.001). Infants of women who aspirated had significantly lower Apgar scores and were more likely to be admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit or to be stillborn compared with infants of women in the control group. Conclusions: Pulmonary aspiration is rare in UK obstetric anaesthetic practice; however, it remains a risk of general anaesthesia. Despite a large study population, our analyses lacked power to evaluate many potential risk factors. Future research should focus on developing methods to accurately identify pregnant women at risk of aspiration.

Indexed as

incidencepregnancypulmonary aspirationsurveillanceUK Obstetric Surveillance System

Identifiers

PMID39917432
PMCPMC11795022

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.