Background and Objectives: During pregnancy, women undergo various physiological and anatomical changes that are accentuated as the pregnancy progresses, but return to their previous state a few weeks/months after the pregnancy. However, a targeted therapeutic approach is needed. Most of the time, during this period, these changes precipitate the appearance of pain, musculoskeletal pain being the most common. Pregnant women should avoid treating musculoskeletal pain with medication and should choose alternative and complementary methods. Exercise along with rest is the basis for treating chronic musculoskeletal pain. Side effects of physical therapy are rare and, in addition, it is not contraindicated in pregnant women. The benefits of this type of treatment in combating pain far outweigh the risks, being an easy way to improve quality of life. The objective of this article is to discuss the management of musculoskeletal pain during pregnancy, to identify the main musculoskeletal pain encountered in pregnant women along with drug treatment, and to expose the beneficial effects of alternative and complementary methods in combating pain. Materials and Methods: A literature search was conducted using medical databases, including PubMed, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect, using the keywords “changes of pregnancy”, “musculoskeletal pain”, “pregnancy pain”, “pain management”, “pharmacological approach”, “alternative and complementary treatment” and specific sites. Information was collected from studies whose target population included pregnant women who complained of musculoskeletal pain during the 9 months of pregnancy; pregnant women with other pathologies that could increase their pain were not included in this review. Results: The articles related to the most common non-obstetric musculoskeletal pain in pregnancy along with pharmacological treatment options and alternative and complementary methods for musculoskeletal pain management during pregnancy were selected. Conclusions: The results were used to guide information towards the safest methods of therapy but also to raise awareness of the treatment criteria in order to compare the effectiveness of existing methods. Treatment must consider the implications for the mother and fetus, optimizing non-pharmacological therapeutic options.

Preeclampsia is a pregnancy-specific illness that is hypothesized to occur due to vitamin D deficiency during pregnancy. Therefore, vitamin D supplementation in early pregnancy should be explored for preventing preeclampsia and promoting neonatal well-being. The present study follows a case-control analysis that aims to determine the effect of vitamin D supplements on reducing the probability of recurrent preeclampsia. We identified 59 patients for the control group without vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy, while 139 patients were included in the cases group of pregnant women with a history of preeclampsia who confirmed taking daily vitamin D supplements in either 2000 UI or 4000 UI until the 36th week of pregnancy. There were 61 (80.3%) patients with a normal serum vitamin D level measured at 32 weeks in the pregnant women who took a daily dose of 4000 UI vitamin D and 43 (68.3%) in those who took a 2000 UI dose of vitamin D, compared to just 32 (54.2%) in those who did not take vitamin D at all. Regarding the blood pressure of pregnant women measured at 32 weeks, it was observed that 20.3% were hypertensive in the no supplementation group, compared to only 11.1% and 6.6% in those who were taking vitamin D during pregnancy (p-value = 0.049). Serum vitamin D levels at 32 weeks were measured at an average value of 23.9 ng/mL, compared with 28.4 ng/mL in the group taking a 2000 UI daily dose and 33.6 in those who supplemented with 4000 UI daily (p-value < 0.001). Proteinuria was identified more often in the group at risk for preeclampsia who did not take vitamin D supplements, while systolic blood pressure (p-value = 0.036) as well as diastolic blood pressure (p-value = 0.012), were all identified to have significantly higher values in the pregnant women with a history of preeclampsia that did not take vitamin D during the current pregnancy. The significant risk factors for preeclampsia development in pregnant patients at risk are: insufficient vitamin D serum levels (<20 ng/mL), OR = 2.52; no vitamin D supplementation, OR = 1.46; more than two pregnancies, OR = 1.89; gestational diabetes mellitus, OR = 1.66; and cardiovascular comorbidities, OR = 2.18. These findings imply that vitamin D has a role in the preservation of placental function and, therefore, in the prevention of the development of late preeclampsia. Pregnant mothers who supplemented their diets with vitamin D were protected against preeclampsia recurrence. Vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy may aid in the prevention of gestational hypertension and preeclampsia.

Aims: To assess the quality of real time elastography as a differential diagnosis tool for breast nodules and to compare it with standard ultrasonography. Material and methods: In this prospective study we enrolled 174 patients in which 174 dominant breast nodules were considered for the final diagnosis. The results of ultrasonography and real time elastography, both qualitative and quantitative, were compared with pathology findings from the biopsy specimens. Results: Pathology examinations determined 102 nodules were benign and 72 malignant. Qualitative elastography had a better diagnostic performance (82.4% sensitivity and 81.9% specificity) than ultrasonography plus Doppler evaluation (70.3% sensitivity and 73.5% specificity). Quantitative elastography, assessed using the fat-to-lesion ratio, was a good discriminant for malignancy (AUROC = 0.93, p < 0.001). Our results pointed to an optimal threshold for malignancy of > 4.88; by using this threshold, the diagnostic reliability of the fat-to-lesion ratio was better than both ultrasonography and qualitative elastography (86.5% sensitivity and 90.4% specificity). Conclusion: Real time elastography is superior to ultrasonography in diagnosing malignant breast nodules. The evaluation of nodules using a fat-to-lesion ratio was a better discriminant for malignancy than qualitative elastography.

Anemia is a very common occurrence during pregnancy, with important variations during each trimester. Anemia was also considered as a risk factor for severity and negative outcomes in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. As the COVID-19 pandemic poses a significant threat for pregnant women in terms of infection risk and access to care, we developed a study to determine the impact of nutritional supplementation for iron deficiency anemia in correlation with the status of SARS-CoV-2 infection. In a case-control design, we identified 446 pregnancies that matched our inclusion criteria from the hospital database. The cases and controls were stratified by SARS-CoV-2 infection history to observe the association between exposure and outcomes in both the mother and the newborn. A total of 95 pregnant women were diagnosed with COVID-19, having a significantly higher proportion of iron deficiency anemia. Low birth weight, prematurity, and lower APGAR scores were statistically more often occurring in the COVID-19 group. Birth weight showed a wide variation by nutritional supplementation during pregnancy. A daily combination of iron and folate was the optimal choice to normalize the weight at birth. The complete blood count and laboratory studies for iron deficiency showed significantly decreased levels in association with SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Puerperal infection, emergency c-section, and small for gestational age were strongly associated with anemia in patients with COVID-19. It is imperative to screen for iron and folate deficiency in pregnancies at risk for complications, and it is recommended to supplement the nutritional intake of these two to promote the normal development and growth of the newborn and avoid multiple complications during pregnancy in the COVID-19 pandemic setting.

Background: Postpartum depression represents an increasingly recognized psychiatric condition in new mothers, and even more so in recent years as its detection has improved. Aims: This study aimed to reveal those maternal and perinatal parameters that are significantly associated with increased likelihood of postpartum depression in delivering mothers from our region. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 163 women between 6 and 8 weeks after delivery. Postnatal depression was assessed by the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) using a cut-off of >12. Results: Postnatal depression was detected in 39 (23.93%) new mothers. The preterm delivery [odds ratio (OR) 7.233; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.631–32.078; p = 0.009], presence of complications during pregnancy (OR 4.579; 95% CI 1.314–15.953; p = 0.017) and being primiparous (OR 3.388; 95% CI 1.430–8.025; p = 0.006) have been associated with an increased likelihood of subsequent postpartum depression. Anxiety traits of personality were the most represented in depressive mothers. Conclusions: Postpartum depression is a frequent psychiatric condition in new mothers from our region. These results outline the critical role of mother’s profile of personality which in a particular context of perinatal events could result in an increased likelihood of postpartum depression requiring a multidisciplinary approach.

The Pap test plays a significant role worldwide in the early diagnosis of and high curability rates for cervical cancer. However, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic necessitated the use of multiple drastic measures to stop the spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, limiting women’s access to essential invasive and non-invasive investigations for cervical cancer diagnosis. Therefore, we aimed to determine the impact the COVID-19 pandemic had on cancer diagnosis and management in western Romania. A retrospective study design allowed us to compare the last 24 months of the pre-pandemic period with the first 24 months of the COVID-19 pandemic to determine the change in volume of cervical screening tests, the number of newly diagnosed cases and their severity, and the access to cancer care. A drastic 75.5% decrease in the volume of tests was observed in April 2020 during the first lockdown, after which the volume of cases decreased by up to 36.1% in December 2021. The total volume loss of tests during the first 24 months of the pandemic was 49.9%. The percentage of late-stage cervical cancers (III–IV) rose by 17%, while the number of newly diagnosed cancers in our outpatient clinic was significantly lower than the baseline, with a 45% drop. The access to cancer care was negatively influenced, with 9.2% more patients waiting longer to receive test results over four weeks, while taking longer to seek cancer care after diagnosis (6.4 months vs. 4.1 months pre-pandemic) and missing significantly more appointments. The COVID-19 pandemic had a significantly negative impact on cervical cancer diagnosis and management during the first 24 months compared with the same period before the pandemic. Although the numbers are now recovering, there is still a big gap, meaning that many cervical cancer cases were potentially missed. We recommend further interventions to reduce the gap between the pre-pandemic and pandemic period.