Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Stubert2014 PDF
Stubert2014 PDF
Johannes Stubert*, Stefanie Ullmann, Max Dieterich, Doreen Diedrich and Toralf Reimer
Table 1 Maternal characteristics of patients with severe preeclampsia and differentiation between early and late onset.
Characteristics All severe PE (n = 68) Early onset (n = 44) Late onset (n = 24) P-value
Age (years)
Mean ± SD 28.6 ± 6.2 28.9 ± 6.8 28.0 ± 5.0 0.505a
Minimum–maximum 18–42 18–42 20–38
Gravidity
Median 1 1 1 0.017b
Minimum–maximum 1–5 1–5 1–2
Parity
Median 0 0 0 0.126b
Minimum–maximum 0–3 0–3 0–1
Body mass index (kg/m2)
Mean ± SD 25.6 ± 6.0 24.9 ± 5.4 26.8 ± 7.0 0.214a
Minimum–maximum 15.6–43.1 15.6–42.2 17.2–43.1
Obesity (BMI > 30 kg/m2) 12 (17.6%) 6 (13.6%) 6 (25.0%) 0.321c
Chronic hypertension (n) 19 (27.9%) 15 (34.1%) 4 (16.7%) 0.163c
Thrombophilia (n) 8 (11.8%) 5 (11.4%) 3 (12.5%) 0.887c
Nicotine abuse (n) 8 (11.8%) 6 (13.6%) 2 (8.3%) 0.703c
Diabetes mellitus type 1 (n) 3 (4.4%) 1 (2.3%) 2 (8.3%) 0.545c
Chronic renal disease (n) 5 (7.4%) 4 (9.1%) 1 (4.2%) 0.654c
Highest systolic blood pressure (mm Hg)
Mean ± SD 172.5 ± 19.3 171.4 ± 18.5 174.4 ± 20.9 0.541a
Minimum–maximum 133–230 136–230 133–215
Highest diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg)
Mean ± SD 107.3 ± 12.8 107.5 ± 14.2 106.9 ± 9.7 0.853a
Minimum–maximum 80–160 80–160 90–120
Proteinuria (mg/day)
Mean ± SD 4987 ± 5819 4936 ± 5787 5085 ± 6022 0.804b
Minimum–maximum 122–28,952 122–28,952 263–21,578
Proteinuria > 3–5 g/day (n) 10 (14.7%) 8 (18.2%) 2 (8.3%) 0.802c
Proteinuria > 5 g/day (n) 22 (32.4%) 14 (31.8%) 8 (33.3%)
Missing data (n) 7 (10.3%) 4 (9.1%) 3 (12.5%)
Concomitant HELLP syndrome (n) 16 (23.5%) 11 (25.0%) 5 (20.8%) 0.773c
Platelets ( × 109/L)
Mean ± SD 181.5 ± 85.8 174.8 ± 87.3 193.6 ± 83.4 0.392a
Minimum–maximum 12–475 12–475 35–355
AST (U/L)
Mean ± SD 150.5 ± 290.5 155.3 ± 266.8 142.0 ± 334.8 0.318b
Minimum–maximum 13.2–1645.2 18.8–1461.0 13.2–1645.2
CrP (mg/L)
Mean ± SD 28.3 ± 42.7 32.4 ± 45.0 20.6 ± 37.7 0.393b
Minimum–maximum 0.3–186.8 0.3–186.8 0.3–135.0
Gestational age at delivery
Mean (weeks+days) ± SD (days) 33+6 ± 31 31+5 ± 28 37+5 ± 14 < 0.001b
Minimum–maximum 24+5–41+3 24+5–39+6 34+4–41+3
SD = Standard deviation. Italic emphasis of P-values represents statistical significance with P<0.05.
a
Student’s t-test.
b
Mann-Whitney U-test.
c
Pearson’s χ2-test for homogeneity.
vs. 0.13 ± 0.34) as well as a higher mean rate of elective Neonatal and placental characteristics
terminated pregnancies (0.18 ± 0.49 vs. 0.0) was seen in
the EO preeclampsia group. The short-term maternal Generally, perinatal outcome was more unfavorable in the
outcome was excellent, and we did not observe any cases EO group than in the LO group (Table 2). Preeclampsia
of eclampsia or maternal death in our cohort. ended in preterm parturition ( < 37+0 weeks) in 93.2% of
Table 2 Neonatal characteristics of patients with severe preeclampsia and differentiation between early and late onset.
UApH = Umbilical artery pH. Italic emphasis of P-values represents statistical significance with P<0.05.
a
Student’s t-test.
b
Mann-Whitney U-test.
c
Pearson’s χ2-test for homogeneity.
the EO and in 41.7% of the LO cases (P < 0.001). The rate hypotrophic with a birth weight < 10th percentile. In con-
of birth weight below the 10th percentile was significantly trast, if birth weight/placental weight ratios were ana-
higher (34.1% vs. 20.8%, P = 0.017) and 5-min Apgar scores lyzed, 61.9% of all LO cases and only 39.5% (P = 0.112) in
were significantly lower (8 vs. 9, P < 0.001) in EO diseases. the EO group showed a ratio > 90th percentile. Further-
We found no differences between pH of the UA (7.27 more, all SGA infants with a LO preeclampsia displayed
vs. 7.31, P = 0.097) and the rate of neonatal acidosis with a placental weight < 10th percentile, whereas only 71.4% of
pH < 7.20 (11.4% vs. 4.2%, P = 0.413). the cases with an EO preeclampsia did so. In our study,
Lower 5-min Apgar scores were significantly corre- 28.6% (4/14) of the SGA newborns had a normal-weight
lated to lower gestational age at birth (r = 0.61, P < 0.001). placenta, but even so fulfilled the criteria of an IUGR. For
Abnormal UtADV (r = 0.40, P = 0.002), use of general anes- these cases, placental hypotrophy alone was not exclusive
thesia (r = 0.31, P = 0.014) and redistribution of circulation for the development of a SGA neonate. None of these pla-
in the MCA (r = 0.29, P = 0.042) were less strong, but also centas was a diabetic one. Furthermore, in both groups,
significantly correlated with lower 5-min Apgar values. about half of all appropriate-weight newborns had a
SGA birth weight was observed in 29.4% (20/68) of all placental weight < 10th percentile (Supplementary Table).
newborns, and 85.0% (17/20) of those fulfilled the criteria
of IUGR. Therefore the majority of SGA infants could be
regarded as IUGRs. Management of delivery
No differences between EO and LO preeclampsia
were found with respect to percentiles of placental weight Maternal as well as fetal situation was considered for indi-
(Table 3). In both groups, about half of all placentas were cation of delivery. Compromise of maternal well-being
Table 3 Placental characteristics of patients with severe preeclampsia and differentiation between early and late onset.
was responsible for 67.9% of preterm births < 34+0 weeks. with an EO preeclampsia. Ten of the remaining 11 patients
Predominantly fetal indications for delivery were found with EO preeclampsia were delivered after ≥ 34 weeks of
in the remaining 32.1%. Overall, about 22% of deliveries gestation. About one third of all patients with EO preec-
were predominantly indicated by fetal threat without dif- lampsia were delivered after > 34+0 weeks.
ferences between EO and LO preeclampsia (Table 4). Mode of delivery was a cesarean section in almost
Induction of lung maturation using betamethasone all cases (94.1%). Mode of anesthesia did not differ
(2 × 12 mg/48 h) was performed in 75.0% (33/44) of patients between EO and LO preeclampsia. General anesthesia was
Table 4 Management of pregnancy and delivery of patients with severe preeclampsia and differentiation between early and late onset.
Table 5 Adjusted odds ratios for perinatal outcome parameters using logistic regression analysis.
performed in 48.4% of all cesarean deliveries. Neonates 11.8% of the LO preeclampsias (P < 0.001). Therefore, only
delivered using general anesthesia had an increased risk 53.6% of all severe preeclampsias revealed an abnormal
of a 5-min Apgar score ≤ 7, but the effect was no longer sig- UtADV.
nificant after adjustment for gestational age (Table 5). An increased impedance of the UA, regarding the
evaluable cases, was observed in 42.5% of EO and 11.8%
of LO preeclampsias (P = 0.032). A similar trend was found
Doppler flow characteristics for a decreased PI in the MCA. Pathological uterine flow
curves were not correlated to an increased PI of the umbil-
We found significant differences between both groups con- ical artery (r = 0.14, P = 0.337). Of all patients with reduced
sidering maternal as well as fetal flow patterns (Table 6). or absent flow in the UA, 33.3% did not reveal an abnor-
With respect to the evaluable cases, Doppler flow analysis mal UtADV. In contrast, pathological flow patterns of the
revealed abnormal UtADV in 71.8% of the EO, but only in UA and the MCA were significantly correlated (r = 0.34,
Table 6 Results of Doppler measurements on patients with severe preeclampsia and differentiation between early and late onset.
P = 0.017). Uterine flow pathology was significantly corre- low 5-min Apgar values. After adjustment, only preterm
lated to lower 5-min Apgar values (r = 0.40, P = 0.002) and birth < 34+0 weeks remained a significant risk factor.
to chronic hypertension (r = 0.30, P = 0.027). Moreover, an abnormal UtADV was a significant risk factor
Surprisingly, uterine artery blood flow was not corre- for preterm delivery < 34+0 weeks (OR 17.9, 95% CI 4.3–75.1,
lated to birth weight (r = 0.22, P = 0.112) as well as to placen- P < 0.001). Chronic hypertension (OR 5.7, 95% CI 1.8–18.1,
tal weight percentiles (r = 0.17, P = 0.247), although 68.8% P = 0.003) and abnormal MCA velocimetry (OR 8.7, 95%CI
of the SGA newborns were associated with an abnormal 1.6–46.1, P = 0.011) were also associated with an increased
UtADV. In contrast, flow patterns of the UA were sig- risk of a preterm birth < 34+0 weeks. Placental hypotro-
nificantly correlated to birth weight percentiles (r = 0.36, phy (weight < 10th percentile) did not increase the risk of
P = 0.006) and SGA newborns showed more frequently a preterm birth (OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.5–3.8, P = 0.550). Therefore,
pathological UA Doppler (58.8% vs. 22.5%, P = 0.08). low 5-min Apgar values mainly resulted from premature
parturition and the remaining risk factors were predomi-
nantly predictors of preterm birth with the highest OR for
Risk factor analysis for perinatal outcome abnormal UtADV.
All significant risk factors for the delivery of SGA new-
Table 7 shows the ORs of potential explanatory variables borns were typical indicators of placental insufficiency,
with respect to the three perinatal outcome parameters: which is demonstrated by the high proportion of IUGRs in
low 5-min Apgar score ( ≤ 7), SGA and neonatal acidosis this group. In contrast, manifestation of SGA infants was
(UApH < 7.20). If a significant difference was observed, not correlated with the grade of severity of preeclampsia
further analysis by logistic regression with adjustment (systolic and diastolic blood pressure, proteinuria, HELLP
for gestational age, maternal body mass index (BMI) and syndrome). Also, neither preterm birth < 34+0 weeks nor
maternal age was performed (Table 5). Preterm birth was abnormal UtADV was a risk factor for the development
adjusted only for BMI and maternal age. Preterm birth, of SGA. Neonatal acidosis was generally rare, and only
chronic hypertension, abnormal UtADV and placenta chronic hypertension was identified as a significant risk
weight < 10th percentile were significant risk factors for factor.
uterine factor for the development of EO preeclampsia As our study is a retrospective analysis, it has some
may exist. An iatrogenic damage of the endometrium by notable limitations. Criteria for delivery were not always
curettage could be a possible risk factor for the develop- clearly evaluable, especially if a combination of fetal
ment of EO preeclampsia. abnormalities (e.g., non-reassuring fetal heart rate) and
Recent studies showed that the presence of an abnor- severe maternal symptoms was often co-incident. More-
mal UtADV was predictive for an impaired perinatal over, Doppler measurements were not available for all
outcome in cases of manifest EO as well as LO preeclamp- patients. However, our data represented the current clini-
sias [9, 12, 16, 19]. cal practice out of study conditions.
Our data supported these results as abnormal UtADV In conclusion, patients with EO and LO preeclamp-
was associated with an increased risk of lower 5-min sia showed differences even if only severe manifesta-
Apgar values. When data were adjusted for gestational tions were analyzed. EO patients had more frequently
age, the increase in risk was no longer significant. This abnormal flow patterns of maternal and fetal perfusion
may suggest that abnormal UtADV is mostly predictive with increased rate of SGA newborns. However, about
for EO preeclampsia and consecutive preterm birth with one third of patients with severe preeclampsia developed
subsequently adverse fetal outcome. This is in accordance symptoms after 34+0 weeks and the rate of SGA infants
with a study analyzing data from a prospective trial on was also high in this group despite the low incidence
patients with severe EO preeclampsia [11]. In a multivari- of Doppler abnormalities. Perinatal outcome was unfa-
ate analysis, gestational age was the unique significant vorable in EO diseases and mainly seemed to be related
parameter influencing the risk of adverse fetal outcome. to premature birth as well as to a higher incidence of
Nonetheless, in practice, abnormal UtADV is a helpful growth restriction. In contrast, severity of preeclamp-
predictive parameter for pregnancy complications and for sia was not directly relevant for perinatal outcome. An
recognition of an increased fetal risk [5, 8]. In contrast, abnormal UtADV was predictive for lower 5-min Apgar
severity of preeclampsia did not reveal good prediction of values and preterm birth, but was not indicative for
fetal outcome [20, 24] and if fetal outcome was compared SGA. The presence of an abnormal UA Doppler, with
between patients with preeclampsia and normotensive increased resistance, was a significant risk factor for the
IUGR after adjustment for gestational age differences were development of SGA neonates. The short-term maternal
neither significant for stay on neonatal intensive care unit outcome was excellent in both groups, although our
nor for neonatal death [35]. study did not evaluate the long-term risks of preeclamp-
An interesting new approach for prediction of adverse tic mothers including the assessment of cardiovascular
pregnancy outcome including perinatal parameters was diseases.
recently reported by Rana et al. [27]. By analyzing the
antiangiogenic soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase 1 and Author contributions: Johannes Stubert: Study concep-
the angiogenic placental growth factor, they reported tion, manuscript writing and statistical analysis. Ste-
increased risk for maternal and fetal adverse outcome if fanie Ullmann: Data assessment, data analysis and proof
the ratio of both factors was increased. Unfortunately, they reading. Max Dieterich: Manuscript writing and proof
only reported of combined adverse outcome and the most reading. Doreen Diedrich: Statistical analysis. Toralf
common event was the parameter “indicated delivery”. Reimer: Study conception and proof reading.
Finally, the ratio was predictive for the remaining dura-
tion of pregnancy with only short interval if the ratio was
high. In cases of early onset disease, the parameter may be Received October 21, 2013. Accepted January 6, 2014. Previously
useful for the estimation of risk for premature birth. published online April 26, 2014.
References
[1] ACOG practice bulletin. Diagnosis and management of of Doppler ultrasonography in obstetrics. Ultrasound Obstet
preeclampsia and eclampsia. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;99: Gynecol. 2013;41:233–9.
159–67. [3] Brosens I, Kong TY. Defective spiral artery remodeling.
[2] Bhide A, Acharya G, Bilardo CM, Brezinka C, Cafici D, In: Pijnenborg R, Brosens I, Romero R, editors. Placental
Hernandez-Andrade E, et al. ISUOG practice guidelines: use bed disorders: basic science and its translation to
obstetrics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010. [19] Meler E, Figueras F, Bennasar M, Gomez O, Crispi F, Gratacos E.
p. 11–21. The prognostic role of uterine artery Doppler investigation in
[4] Churchill D, Duley L, Thornton JG, Jones L. Interventionist patients with severe early-onset preeclampsia. Am J Obstet
versus expectant care for severe pre-eclampsia between Gynecol. 2010;202:559–4.
24 and 34 weeks’ gestation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. [20] Meler E, Figueras F, Mula R, Crispi F, Benassar M, Gomez O,
2013;7:CD003106. et al. Prognostic role of uterine artery Doppler in patients with
[5] Cnossen JS, Morris RK, ter RG, Mol BW, van der Post JA, preeclampsia. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2010;27:8–13.
Coomarasamy A, et al. Use of uterine artery Doppler [21] Muntefering H, Wysocki M, Rastorguev E, Gerein V. Placenta in
ultrasonography to predict pre-eclampsia and intrauterine gestational hypertension. Pathologe. 2004;25:262–8.
growth restriction: a systematic review and bivariable [22] Nelson DB, Ziadie MS, McIntire DD, Rogers BB, Leveno KJ.
meta-analysis. Can Med Assoc J. 2008;178:701–11. Placental pathology suggesting that preeclampsia is more
[6] Dolea C, AbouZahr C. Global burden of hypertensive disorders than one disease. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;210:66e1–7.
of pregnancy in the year 2000. Evidence and Information for [23] Ness RB, Sibai BM. Shared and disparate components
Policy (EIP). Geneva: World Health Organization; July 2003. of the pathophysiologies of fetal growth restriction and
http://www.who.int/evidence/bod. preeclampsia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195:40–9.
[7] Eskild A, Vatten LJ. Do pregnancies with pre-eclampsia have [24] Newman MG, Robichaux AG, Stedman CM, Jaekle RK,
smaller placentas? A population study of 317 688 pregnancies Fontenot MT, Dotson T, et al. Perinatal outcomes in
with and without growth restriction in the offspring. Br J Obstet preeclampsia that is complicated by massive proteinuria.
Gynaecol. 2010;117:1521–6. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;188:264–8.
[8] Espinoza J, Kusanovic JP, Bahado-Singh R, Gervasi MT, [25] Odegard RA, Vatten LJ, Nilsen ST, Salvesen KA, Austgulen R.
Romero R, Lee W, et al. Should bilateral uterine artery Preeclampsia and fetal growth. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96:
notching be used in the risk assessment for preeclampsia, 950–5.
small-for-gestational-age, and gestational hypertension? [26] Odegard RA, Vatten LJ, Nilsen ST, Salvesen KA, Austgulen R.
J Ultrasound Med. 2010;29:1103–15. Risk factors and clinical manifestations of pre-eclampsia. Br J
[9] Frusca T, Soregaroli M, Platto C, Enterri L, Lojacono A, Obstet Gynaecol. 2000;107:1410–6.
Valcamonico A. Uterine artery velocimetry in patients with [27] Rana S, Powe CE, Salahuddin S, Verlohren S, Perschel FH,
gestational hypertension. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102: Levine RJ, et al. Angiogenic factors and the risk of adverse
136–40. outcomes in women with suspected preeclampsia. Circulation.
[10] Gaillard R, Arends LR, Steegers EA, Hofman A, Jaddoe VW. 2012;125:911–9.
Second- and third-trimester placental hemodynamics and the [28] Rempen A, Chaoui R, Kozlowski P, Häusler M, Terinde R,
risks of pregnancy complications: the Generation R Study. Am J Wisser J. Standards zur Ultraschalluntersuchung in der
Epidemiol. 2013;177:743–54. Frühschwangerschaft AWMF 015/32 Leitlinie (S1). 2010;
[11] Ganzevoort W, Rep A, de Vries JI, Bonsel GJ, Wolf H. Prediction http://www.awmf.org/uploads/tx_szleitlinien/015-032_
of maternal complications and adverse infant outcome at S1_Ultraschalluntersuchung_in_der_Fruehschwange
admission for temporizing management of early-onset severe rschaft_07-2008_09-2012.pdf.
hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. [29] Report of the National High Blood Pressure Education Program
2006;195:495–503. Working Group on High Blood Pressure in Pregnancy. Am J
[12] Ghi T, Youssef A, Piva M, Contro E, Segata M, Guasina F, Obstet Gynecol. 2000;183:S1–22.
et al. The prognostic role of uterine artery Doppler studies in [30] Schaffer H. Doppler-Referenzkurven. In: Steiner H, Schneider
patients with late-onset preeclampsia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. KTM, editors. Dopplersonographie in Geburtshilfe und
2009;201:36–5. Gynäkologie. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Verlag; 2000.
[13] Huppertz B. Placental origins of preeclampsia: challenging the p. 292–3.
current hypothesis. Hypertension. 2008;51:970–5. [31] Sibai BM. Evaluation and management of severe preeclampsia
[14] Iams JD. Small for gestational age (SGA) and fetal growth before 34 weeks’ gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol.
restriction (FGR). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202:513. 2011;205:191–8.
[15] Kucukgoz GU, Ozgunen FT, Buyukkurt S, Guzel AB, Urunsak IF, [32] Steegers EA, von DP, Duvekot JJ, Pijnenborg R. Pre-eclampsia.
Demir SC, et al. Comparison of clinical and laboratory findings Lancet. 2010;376:631–44.
in early- and late-onset preeclampsia. J Matern Fetal Neonatal [33] Thompson JM, Irgens LM, Skjaerven R, Rasmussen S. Placenta
Med. 2013;26:1228–33. weight percentile curves for singleton deliveries. Br J Obstset
[16] Li H, Gudnason H, Olofsson P, Dubiel M, Gudmundsson S. Gynaecol. 2007;114:715–20.
Increased uterine artery vascular impedance is related to [34] Trogstad L, Magnus P, Moffett A, Stoltenberg C. The effect
adverse outcome of pregnancy but is present in only one-third of recurrent miscarriage and infertility on the risk of
of late third-trimester pre-eclamptic women. Ultrasound Obstet pre-eclampsia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2009;116:108–13.
Gynecol. 2005;25:459–63. [35] Villar J, Carroli G, Wojdyla D, Abalos E, Giordano D, Ba’aqeel H,
[17] Lisonkova S, Joseph KS. Incidence of preeclampsia: risk et al. Preeclampsia, gestational hypertension and intrauterine
factors and outcomes associated with early- versus late-onset growth restriction, related or independent conditions? Am J
disease. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209:544e1–e12. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194:921–31.
[18] MacKay AP, Berg CJ, Atrash HK. Pregnancy-related mortality [36] Voigt M, Rochow N, Hesse V, Olbertz D, Schneider KT, Jorch G.
from preeclampsia and eclampsia. Obstet Gynecol. Short communication about percentile values of body measures
2001;97:533–8. of newborn babies. Z Geburtshilfe Neonatol. 2010;214:24–9.
[37] von Dadelszen P, Magee LA, Roberts JM. Subclassification of [39] Zhang J, Merialdi M, Platt LD, Kramer MS. Defining normal and
preeclampsia. Hypertens Pregnancy. 2003;22:143–8. abnormal fetal growth: promises and challenges. Am J Obstet
[38] Zhang WH, Alexander S, Bouvier-Colle MH, Macfarlane A. Gynecol. 2010;202:522–8.
Incidence of severe pre-eclampsia, postpartum haemorrhage
and sepsis as a surrogate marker for severe maternal
morbidity in a European population-based study: the MOMS-B The authors stated that there are no conflicts of interest regarding
survey. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2005;112:89–96. the publication of this article.