Dihydroergotamine (DHE) Use During Gestation and the Risk of Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dihydroergotamine (DHE) is perceived to be associated with a higher risk of adverse pregnancy events, but it has significantly less vasoconstrictive and uterotonic effects compared with ergotamine, and has demonstrated no teratogenic effect in animals. The objectives of this study were to quantify the risk of major congenital malformations (MCMs), prematurity, low birth weight (LBW), and spontaneous abortions (SAs) associated with gestational use of DHE, triptans, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). METHODS: Four independent case-control analyses were conducted within the Quebec Pregnancy Registry: (1) MCM; (2) prematurity (<37 weeks of gestation); (3) LBW (birth weight <2500 g); (4) clinically detected SA. Exposure was defined dichotomously as use of DHE, triptan, and NSAIDs during pregnancy. RESULTS: Overall, 59,707 pregnant women met the eligibility criteria and were considered (53 [0.08%] used DHE, 139 [0.23%] triptans, and 2990 [5.01%] NSAIDs). Adjusting for potential confounders, gestational use of DHE was not significantly associated with the risk of MCM (odds ratio [OR]: 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.22-4.28), LBW (OR: 1.41; 95%CI: 0.25-7.80), or SA (OR: 1.97; 95% CI: 0.21-18.57). DHE use was, however, increasing the risk of prematurity (OR: 4.18; 95% CI: 1.34-12.99). In users of triptans, the OR for MCM was 1.49 (95% CI: 0.89-2.52), prematurity 0.76 (95% CI: 0.34-1.66), LBW 0.83 (95% CI: 0.31-2.25), and SA 2.65 (95% CI: 1.57-4.48). In users of NSAIDs, the OR for MCM was 1.20 (95% CI: 1.06-1.36), prematurity 1.10 (95% CI: 0.95-1.26), LBW 1.29 (95% CI: 1.08-1.54), and SA 2.97 (95% CI: 2.63-3.36). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that other than for prematurity, DHE use during pregnancy was similar to that of triptan use and was smaller than the risk associated with NSAID use.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".