Cited by 60Smoking Behavior and CessationPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsPregnancy and Medication Impact

Transdermal nicotine replacement in pregnancy: Maternal pharmacokinetics and fetal effects

Wright, Lydia N., Thorp, John M., Kuller, Jeffrey A., Shrewsburyb, Robert P., Ananth, Cande, Hartmann, Katherine·1997·American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abstract

Objective Our purpose was to measure any short-term effects that the transdermal nicotine replacement system may have in pregnancy and to verify salivary nicotine and cotinine levels during patch placement. Study design After customary smoking cessation efforts had failed, six prenatal patients between 28 and 37 weeks' gestation who smoked between one and two packs per day were enrolled in this prospective study. The patients were admitted to the General Clinical Research Center for a period of 21 hours. During hospitalization we performed maternal and fetal assessments including vital signs, biophysical profile and electronic fetal monitoring, amniotic fluid index, and umbilical artery Doppler examinations. Salivary samples for cotinine and nicotine levels were collected at standard intervals. Results There were no measurable differences in fetal or maternal well-being. During patch use salivary nicotine levels increased as expected, to a mean value of 19.0 +/- 13.5 micrograms/L at 480 minutes. Salivary cotinine concentrations remained low (approximately 50 micrograms/L) and varied little during the 480-minute period that the patch was worn. Overall, patients were satisfied with the transdermal patches. Conclusion There were no adverse maternal or fetal effects from the transdermal nicotine replacement system over the 6-hour period. Salivary nicotine concentrations were consistent with those seen in nonpregnant adults. Surprisingly, salivary cotinine concentrations were much lower than those seen in smoking nonpregnant adults.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0002-9378(97)70407-1

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wright, L. N., Thorp, J. M., Kuller, J. A., Shrewsburyb, R. P., Ananth, C., & Hartmann, K.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Venue
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1997-05
Volume
176
Issue
5
Pages
1090-1094
ISSN
0002-9378 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1979904972
Cited by
60
References
3
Citations by year
2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
FWCI
2.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Center for Research Resources (RR00046, M01RR000046)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pregnancy and Medication Impact
Keywords
pregnancy, maternal pharmacokinetics, salivary cotinine, smoking cessation, fetal well-being, maternal smoking
MeSH terms
Administration, Cutaneous, Adult, Apgar Score, Birth Weight, Cotinine, Female, Gestational Age, Humans, Hydrogen-Ion Concentration, Maternal-Fetal Exchange, Nicotine, Pregnancy, Prospective Studies, Saliva, Smoking Cessation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review