DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20204786

Prediction of adverse effects of preeclampsia

Khushboo Tongaria, Ashok Kumar, Simar Kaur

Abstract


Background: To predict the adverse maternal, perinatal and combined (both maternal and perinatal) outcome in preeclampsia by using various clinical and laboratory variables.

Methods: Five hundred fifty women diagnosed with preeclampsia were included and twenty-four women were excluded from the study due to exclusion criteria, six women decline to participate, twenty women were lost to follow up, three women withdrew consent, so a total of 497 women were followed up in the study.

Results: Mean age of study population was 26.82±4.48 years. Majority of women with preeclampsia delivered vaginally. Forty-five (9.05%) developed neurological complication. Mean gestational age at delivery (weeks) in patients who developed adverse outcome was 34.58±3.74 weeks and in patients with normal outcome is 38.62±1.59 weeks. Mean birth weight of newborns were 2.1±0.73 kg and 1.85±0.61 kg for newborns with adverse outcomes. Majority of perinatal complication was small for gestational age 267 (54.37%) followed by prematurity 262 (53.36%). Total number of adverse perinatal events was six hundred seventy-seven as multiple neonates had more than one perinatal outcome. In combined (both maternal and perinatal) adverse outcome-374 (75%) developed adverse outcome, 123 (25%) developed normal pregnancy outcome.

Conclusion: This study found out simple clinical, biochemical tools for monitoring pregnant women and accurately identifying who was at greatest risk of severe complications. By identifying those women at highest risk of adverse maternal outcomes well before that outcome occurs, transportation and treatment can be targeted to those women most in need. This clinical prediction tool found to be an important contributor as it offers the potential to improve health outcomes of women for a condition that is at the root of a large amount of morbidity and mortality in the developing world.


Keywords


Prediction, Preeclampsia, Adverse effects

Full Text:

PDF

References


Sibai B, Dekker G, Kupferminc M. Pre-eclampsia. Lancet. 2005;365:785-99.

Menzies J, Magee L, Li J, Ying C, Nab M, Ruihua Y et al. Instituting surveillance guidelines and adverse outcomes in preeclampsia. Am Coll Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;110:121-7.

Androes P, Kalbaugh A, Taylor S, Blackhurst D, McClary E, Gray J et al. Does a standardization tool to direct invasive therapy for symptomatic lower extremity peripheral arterial disease improve outcomes. Vasc Surg. 2010;40:907-15.

North A, Taylor S, Schellenberg C. Evaluation of a definition of pre-eclampsia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2009;106:767-73.

Yun W, Tom T, Thomas A, Tore H. The impact of advanced maternal age and parity on obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011;284:31-7.

Payne B, Hodgson S, Hutcheon J, Joseph K, Li J, Lee T et al. Performance of the full PIERS model in predicting adverse maternal outcomes in pre-eclampsia using patient data from the PIERS (Pre-eclampsia Integrated Estimate of Risk) cohort, collected on admission. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;120:113-8.

Silva LM, Coolman M, Steegers EA, Jaddoe VW, Moll HA, Hofman A et al. Low socioeconomic status is a risk factor for preeclampsia: The Generation R Study. J Hypertens. 2008;26:1200-8.

Agarwal S, Maitra N. Prediction of adverse maternal outcomes in preeclampsia using a risk prediction model. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2016;66:104-11.

Thangaratinam S, Coomarasamy A, Sharp S, Mahony OF, Obrien S. Tests for predicting complications of preeclampsia: a protocol for systematic reviews. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2008;8:38.

Mudd LM, Owe KM, Mottola MF, Pivarnik JM. Health benefits of physical activity during pregnancy: an international perspective. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2013;45:268-77.

Martin JN Jr, May WL, Magann EF, Terrone DA, Rinehart BK, Blake PG. Early risk assessment of severe preeclampsia: admission battery of symptoms and laboratory tests to predict likelihood of subsequent significant maternal morbidity. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180:1407-14.

Yen TW, Payne B, Qu Z, Hutcheon JA, Lee T, Magee LA et al. Using clinical symptoms to predict adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes in women with preeclampsia: data from the PIERS (pre-eclampsia integrated estimate of risk) study. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2011;33:803-9.

Millman A, Payne B, von Dadelszen P, PIERS (Pre-eclampsia Integrated Estimate of RiSk) Study Group. Oxygen saturation as a predictor of outcomes in women with pre-eclampsia. Pregnancy Hypertens. 2010;1:58.

Cnossen SJ, Vollebregt KC, deVrieze N, Franx A, Khan KS, Mol BW et al. Accuracy of mean arterial pressure and blood pressure measurements in predicting pre-eclampsia: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Br Med J. 2008;336:1117-20.

Chan P, Brown M, Simpson JM, Davis G. Proteinuria in pre-eclampsia: how much matters? Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2005;112:280-5.

Srivastava S, Parihar BC, Jain N. PIERS calculator- predicting adverse maternal outcome in preeclampsia. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2017;6:1200-5.

Kozic JR, Benton SJ, Hutcheon JA, Payne BA, Magee LA, von Dadelszen P et al. Abnormal liver function tests as predictors of adverse maternal outcomes in women with preeclampsia. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2011;33:995-1004.

Thangaratinam S, Ismail K, Sharp S. Accuracy of serum uric acid in predicting complications of pre-eclampsia: a systematic review. Br J Obstet Gynaeco.l 2006;113:369-78.

Hawkins T, Roberts J, Mangos G. Plasma uric acid remains a marker of poor outcome in hypertensive pregnancy: a retrospective cohort study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;119:484-92.