Dr. Chapa’s OBGYN Clinical Pearls

Uterine hysterotomy unintended extensions happen. For sure. This has been analyzed over many years, and it is still making news. Look at this mini-timeline: Back in 2018, authors published “Unintended hysterotomy extension during caesarean delivery: risk factors and maternal morbidity”. Moving up the timeline to 2020, others published in J Maternal-Fetal Neonatal Medicine, “Risk factors for uterine incision extension during cesarean delivery”. Then in 2024, in the PINK journal, authors published a related study, “The association between unintended hysterotomy extensions with cesarean delivery and subsequent preterm birth”. In this episode, we will review a new narrative review (in the Green Journal, May 3, 2026) of unintended hysterotomy extension at C-section. We will summarize known risk factors and focus on subsequent uterine rupture risk. Does unintended hysterotomy extension at CS increase TOLAC uterine rupture? It’s complicated. Listen in for details.
1. Giugale LE, Sakamoto S, Yabes J, Dunn SL, Krans EE. Unintended hysterotomy extension during caesarean delivery: risk factors and maternal morbidity. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018 Nov;38(8):1048-1053.
2. Epub: Unintentional Extensions of the Cesarean Hysterotomy Incision. A Review and Proposed Classification System (May 3, 2026)

Genome-wide noninvasive prenatal testing (GW-NIPT) was introduced in 2015 and became widely available in 2019. Nonetheless, we are still learning more about this important prenatal screening test. In January 2026, the ACOG released a new PA on this, which we will also review in this episode. Our main publication ti review, however, will be the AJOG May 2026’s systematic review and meta-analysis on the finding of “genome-wide” cfDNA discordant results and what this may mean for the pregnancy. Although rare, this may lead (over a third of cases) to some adverse perinatal issues. Listen in for details.

1. ACOG PA Jan 2026: Screening for Fetal Chromosomal Abnormalities
2. AJOG May 2026: https://click.notification.elsevier.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Fwww.ajog.org%2Farticle%2FS0002-9378(25)00865-8%2Ffulltext%3Fdgcid=raven_jbs_etoc_email/1/0100019d9ec37d7b-c586438d-021a-4097-8db3-c158e6f97c9b-000000/Vq6ksekOuvTxcv8OEZZ2uBesCg_hG6qlhqU_BlCnAK4=452

There is no denying it, you know of one or MORE individuals or patients currently on a GLP1 agent. Although not FDA approved for PCOS as a stand-alone diagnosis, there is growing evidence supporting their offlabel use in PCOS, and international guidelines now include them as a conditional recommendation. In women, the weight loss associated with these medications may trigger the return of spontaneous ovulation, making mistimed pregnancy a possibility. A key study by Sanz and Blázquez (back in 2011) demonstrated that both GLP-1 and the GLP-1 receptor are present in mouse embryos as early as embryonic day 6 (E6) and continue through the first trimester, as well as in pluripotent mouse embryonic stem cells. In these undifferentiated cells, GLP-1 modified the expression of endodermal, ectodermal, and mesodermal gene markers, as well as critical developmental signaling molecules. So, there is a concern about embryogenesis if inadvertent exposure to these meds occurs in early pregnancy. In this episode, we will summarize 2 recent and separate systematic reviews (March 2026; April 2026) on fetal/OB outcomes after periconceptional exposure. This builds on the Parker data set from 2025. One of these reviews, from April 2026, is also a meta-analysis. Listen in for details.

1. Ozbek L, Shah E, Al-Shiab R, Inal A, Guldan M, Afsar B, Covic A, Kanbay M. Safety of GLP-1 and Dual GLP-1/GIP Receptor Agonists in Preconception, Pregnancy, and Lactation: A Systematic Review of Maternal, Fetal, and Neonatal Outcomes. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2026 Mar 26. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41885132/
2. Hakim J, Rajesh D, Tello J. Neonatal and Obstetric Outcomes Following Periconceptional Exposure to Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. AJOG; April 28, 2026; https://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378(26)00222-X/fulltext
3. Parker CH, et al. Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 (GLP-1) Receptor Agonists' Use During Pregnancy: Safety Data From Regulatory Clinical Trials. Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism. 2025.

The belief that IV dextrose is necessary to clear ketones in hyperemesis gravidarum originated from a logical, and now known to be outdated, extrapolation of basic starvation ketosis physiology and the treatment paradigm for diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). The original experiments that led to this conclusion go back to the 1960s (Foster data). Not only is this outdated, but it is also physiologically incorrect. We’ve learned a lot about IV fluid replacement about hyperemesis gravidarum in the last several years- in the last data review was in January 2026 in Lancet. Even the correction of hyponatremia has evolved. Should we be following urine ketones for patients being treated for HG? Is Dextrose needed? Listen in for details.
1. Nana M, Painter R, Williamson C et al. Hyperemesis gravidarum. The Lancet, Jan 2026; 407, 78-89
2. Clark SM, Zhang X, Goncharov DA. Inpatient Management of Hyperemesis Gravidarum. Obstet Gynecol. 2024 Jun 1;143(6):745-758. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005518. Epub 2024 Feb 1. PMID: 38301258.
3. Ayus JC, et al.Correction rates and clinical outcomes in hospitalized adults with severe hyponatremia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med. 2025;185(1):38-51.
4. ACOG Clinical Epert Series: Inpatient Management of Hyperemesis Gravidarium. Obstet Gynecol; 2024

AUDIO EXCERPT from our recent Instragm post on this Social Media trend. Silly or Science? Listen in for details.