Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are developed to assist health care providers in decision-making. We systematically reviewed existing CPGs on the HDPs (hypertensive disorders of pregnancy) to ...inform clinical practice.
MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessments, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (Ovid interface), Grey Matters, Google Scholar, and personal records were searched for CPGs on the HDPs (Jan/03 to Nov/13) in English, French, Dutch, or German. Of 13 CPGs identified, three were multinational and three developed for community/midwifery use. Length varied from 3-1188 pages and three guidelines did not formulate recommendations. Eight different grading systems were identified for assessing evidence quality and recommendation strength. No guideline scored ≧80% on every domain of the AGREE II, a tool for assessing guideline methodological quality; two CPGs did so for 5/6 domains. Consistency was seen for (i) definitions of hypertension, proteinuria, chronic and gestational hypertension; (ii) pre-eclampsia prevention for women at increased risk: calcium when intake is low and low-dose aspirin, but not vitamins C and E or diuretics; (iii) antihypertensive treatment of severe hypertension; (iv) MgSO4 for eclampsia and severe pre-eclampsia; (v) antenatal corticosteroids at <34 wks when delivery is probable within 7 days; (vi) delivery for women with severe pre-eclampsia pre-viability or pre-eclampsia at term; and (vii) active management of the third stage of labour with oxytocin. Notable inconsistencies were in: (i) definitions of pre-eclampsia and severe pre-eclampsia; (ii) target BP for non-severe hypertension; (iii) timing of delivery for women with pre-eclampsia and severe pre-eclampsia; (iv) MgSO4 for non-severe pre-eclampsia, and (v) postpartum maternal monitoring.
Existing international HDP CPGs have areas of consistency with which clinicians and researchers can work to develop auditable standards, and areas of inconsistency that should be addressed by future research.
Pre-eclampsia Mol, Ben W J, Prof; Roberts, Claire T, Prof; Thangaratinam, Shakila, Prof ...
The Lancet (British edition),
03/2016, Volume:
387, Issue:
10022
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Summary Pre-eclampsia affects 3–5% of pregnancies and is traditionally diagnosed by the combined presentation of high blood pressure and proteinuria. New definitions also include maternal organ ...dysfunction, such as renal insufficiency, liver involvement, neurological or haematological complications, uteroplacental dysfunction, or fetal growth restriction. When left untreated, pre-eclampsia can be lethal, and in low-resource settings, this disorder is one of the main causes of maternal and child mortality. In the absence of curative treatment, the management of pre-eclampsia involves stabilisation of the mother and fetus, followed by delivery at an optimal time. Although algorithms to predict pre-eclampsia are promising, they have yet to become validated. Simple preventive measures, such as low-dose aspirin, calcium, and diet and lifestyle interventions, show potential but small benefit. Because pre-eclampsia predisposes mothers to cardiovascular disease later in life, pregnancy is also a window for future health. A collaborative approach to discovery and assessment of the available treatments will hasten our understanding of pre-eclampsia and is an effort much needed by the women and babies affected by its complications.
Preventing deaths due to the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy von Dadelszen, Peter, MBChB, DPhil, FRCOG; Magee, Laura A., MD, MSc, FRCPC
Baillière's best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology/Baillière's best practice and research in clinical obstetrics and gynaecology,
10/2016, Volume:
36
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
In this chapter, taking a life cycle and both civil society and medically oriented approach, we will discuss the contribution of the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDPs) to maternal, perinatal ...and newborn mortality and morbidity. Here we review various interventions and approaches to preventing deaths due to HDPs and discuss effectiveness, resource needs and long-term sustainability of the different approaches. Societal approaches, addressing sustainable development goals (SDGs) 2.2 (malnutrition), 3.7 (access to sexual and reproductive care), 3.8 (universal health coverage) and 3c (health workforce strengthening), are required to achieve SDGs 3.1 (maternal survival), 3.2 (perinatal survival) and 3.4 (reduced impact of non-communicable diseases (NCDs)). Medical solutions require greater clarity around the classification of the HDPs, increased frequency of effective antenatal visits, mandatory responses to the HDPs when encountered, prompt provision of life-saving interventions and sustained surveillance for NCD risk for women with a history of the HDPs.
Hypertension complicates up to 10% of pregnancies worldwide. Pregnancy hypertension is defined as systolic blood pressure (BP) equal to or greater than 140 mm Hg or diastolic BP equal to or greater ...than 90 mm Hg, usually on the basis of measurements in office/clinic settings and using various BP devices. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are classified into (1) chronic hypertension diagnosed before pregnancy or before 20 weeks' gestation, (2) gestational hypertension diagnosed at equal to or greater than 20 weeks, or (3) preeclampsia, defined restrictively as gestational hypertension with proteinuria or broadly as gestational hypertension with proteinuria or an end-organ manifestation consistent with preeclampsia. Absolute BP values equal to or greater than 140/90 mm Hg are associated with increased maternal and perinatal risks, particularly with preeclampsia. This review focuses on antihypertensive therapy of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy as a specific management strategy. Underpinning this therapy is the need for accurate measurement of BP, agreed-upon classification of pregnancy hypertension, agreed-upon BP thresholds for enhanced surveillance and antihypertensive treatment, and collaborative teamwork in management. Challenges relate to the methodology of studies on which care is based, as well as aspects of the care itself, particularly the unregulated use of home BP monitoring. Pitfalls include the unsubstantiated belief that nifedipine and magnesium sulfate cannot be used together and the perception that severe hypertension and nonsevere hypertension are separate entities rather than lying along a spectrum of BP values. The following must be addressed by future research: guidance for nuanced care as women transition between severe and nonsevere hypertension, personalized antihypertensive therapy, and incorporation of women's values into research priorities and clinical practice when antihypertensive care is chosen.
Safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy is a particular concern affecting vaccination uptake by this vulnerable group. Here we evaluated evidence from 23 studies including ...117,552 COVID-19 vaccinated pregnant people, almost exclusively with mRNA vaccines. We show that the effectiveness of mRNA vaccination against RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection 7 days after second dose was 89·5% (95% CI 69·0-96·4%, 18,828 vaccinated pregnant people, I
= 73·9%). The risk of stillbirth was significantly lower in the vaccinated cohort by 15% (pooled OR 0·85; 95% CI 0·73-0·99, 66,067 vaccinated vs. 424,624 unvaccinated, I
= 93·9%). There was no evidence of a higher risk of adverse outcomes including miscarriage, earlier gestation at birth, placental abruption, pulmonary embolism, postpartum haemorrhage, maternal death, intensive care unit admission, lower birthweight Z-score, or neonatal intensive care unit admission (p > 0.05 for all). COVID-19 mRNA vaccination in pregnancy appears to be safe and is associated with a reduction in stillbirth.
Concerns have been raised regarding a potential surge of COVID-19 in pregnancy, secondary to the rising numbers of COVID-19 in the community, easing of societal restrictions, and vaccine hesitancy. ...Although COVID-19 vaccination is now offered to all pregnant women in the United Kingdom; limited data exist on its uptake and safety.
This study aimed to investigate the uptake and safety of COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women.
This was a cohort study of pregnant women who gave birth at St George’s University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom, between March 1, 2020, and July 4, 2021. The primary outcome was uptake of COVID-19 vaccination and its determinants. The secondary outcomes were perinatal safety outcomes. Data were collected on COVID-19 vaccination uptake, vaccination type, gestational age at vaccination, and maternal characteristics, including age, parity, ethnicity, index of multiple deprivation score, and comorbidities. Further data were collected on perinatal outcomes, including stillbirth (fetal death at ≥24 weeks’ gestation), preterm birth, fetal and congenital abnormalities, and intrapartum complications. Pregnancy and neonatal outcomes of women who received the vaccine were compared with that of a matched cohort of women with balanced propensity scores. Effect magnitudes of vaccination on perinatal outcomes were reported as mean differences or odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Factors associated with antenatal vaccination were assessed with logistic regression analysis.
Data were available for 1328 pregnant women of whom 140 received at least 1 dose of the COVID-19 vaccine before giving birth and 1188 women who did not; 85.7% of those vaccinated received their vaccine in the third trimester of pregnancy and 14.3% in the second trimester of pregnancy. Of those vaccinated, 127 (90.7%) received a messenger RNA vaccine and 13 (9.3%) a viral vector vaccine. There was evidence of reduced vaccine uptake in younger women (P=.001), women with high levels of deprivation (ie, fifth quintile of the index of multiple deprivation; P=.008), and women of Afro-Caribbean or Asian ethnicity compared with women of White ethnicity (P<.001). Women with prepregnancy diabetes mellitus had increased vaccine uptake (P=.008). In the multivariable model the fifth deprivation quintile (most deprived) (adjusted odds ratio, 0.10; 95% confidence interval, 0.02–0.10; P=.003) and Afro-Caribbean ethnicity (adjusted odds ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.06–0.85; P=.044) were significantly associated with lower antenatal vaccine uptake, whereas prepregnancy diabetes mellitus was significantly associated with higher antenatal vaccine uptake (adjusted odds ratio, 10.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.74–83.2; P=.014). In a propensity score–matched cohort, the rates of adverse pregnancy outcomes of 133 women who received at least 1 dose of the COVID-19 vaccine in pregnancy were similar to that of unvaccinated pregnant women (P>.05 for all): stillbirth (0.0% vs 0.2%), fetal abnormalities (2.2% vs 2.5%), postpartum hemorrhage (9.8% vs 9.0%), cesarean delivery (30.8% vs 34.1%), small for gestational age (12.0% vs 12.8%), maternal high-dependency unit or intensive care admission (6.0% vs 4.0%), or neonatal intensive care unit admission (5.3% vs 5.0%). Intrapartum pyrexia (3.7% vs 1.0%; P=.046) was significantly increased but the borderline statistical significance was lost after excluding women with antenatal COVID-19 infection (P=.079). Mixed-effects Cox regression showed that vaccination was not significantly associated with birth at <40 weeks’ gestation (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.71–1.23; P=.624).
Of pregnant women eligible for COVID-19 vaccination, less than one-third accepted COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, and they experienced similar pregnancy outcomes with unvaccinated pregnant women. There was lower uptake among younger women, non-White ethnicity, and lower socioeconomic background. This study has contributed to the body of evidence that having COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy does not alter perinatal outcomes. Clear communication to improve awareness among pregnant women and healthcare professionals on vaccine safety is needed, alongside strategies to address vaccine hesitancy. These strategies include postvaccination surveillance to gather further data on pregnancy outcomes, particularly after first-trimester vaccination, and long-term infant follow-up.
This study aimed to review pregnancy hypertension clinical practice guidelines to inform international clinical practice and research priorities.
Relevant national and international clinical practice ...guidelines, 2009-19, published in English, French, Dutch or German.
Following published methods and prospective registration (CRD42019123787), a literature search was updated. CPGs were identified by 2 authors independently who scored quality and usefulness for practice (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument), abstracted data, and resolved any disagreement by consensus.
Of note, 15 of 17 identified clinical practice guidelines (4 international) were deemed “clinically useful” and had recommendations abstracted. The highest Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II scores were from government organizations, and scores have improved over time. The following were consistently recommended: (1) automated blood pressure measurement with devices validated for pregnancy and preeclampsia, reflecting increasing recognition of the prevalence of white-coat hypertension and the potential usefulness of home blood pressure monitoring; (2) use of dipstick proteinuria testing for screening followed by quantitative testing by urinary protein-to-creatinine ratio or 24-hour urine collection; (3) key definitions and most aspects of classification, including a broad definition of preeclampsia (which includes proteinuria and maternal end-organ dysfunction, including headache and visual symptoms and laboratory abnormalities of platelets, creatinine, or liver enzymes) and a recognition that it can worsen after delivery; (4) preeclampsia prevention with aspirin; (5) treatment of severe hypertension, most commonly with intravenous labetalol, oral nifedipine, or intravenous hydralazine; (6) treatment for nonsevere hypertension when undertaken, with oral labetalol (in particular), methyldopa, or nifedipine, with recommendations against the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitors; (7) magnesium sulfate for eclampsia treatment and prevention among women with “severe” preeclampsia; (8) antenatal corticosteroids for preterm birth but not hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelet count syndrome; (9) delivery at term for preeclampsia; (10) a focus on usual labor and delivery care but avoidance of ergometrine; and (11) an appreciation that long-term health complications are increased in incidence, mandating lifestyle change and risk factor modification. Lack of uniformity was seen in the following areas: (1) the components of a broad preeclampsia definition (specifically respiratory and gastrointestinal symptoms, fetal manifestations, and biomarkers), what constitutes severe preeclampsia, and whether the definition has utility because at present what constitutes severe preeclampsia by some guidelines that mandate proteinuria now defines any preeclampsia for most other clinical practice guidelines; (2) how preeclampsia risk should be identified early in pregnancy, and aspirin administered for preeclampsia prevention, because multivariable models (with biomarkers and ultrasonography added to clinical risk markers) used in this way to guide aspirin therapy can substantially reduce the incidence of preterm preeclampsia; (3) the value of calcium added to aspirin for preeclampsia prevention, particularly for women with low intake and at increased risk of preeclampsia; (4) emerging recommendations to normalize blood pressure with antihypertensive agents even in the absence of comorbidities; (5) fetal neuroprotection as an indication for magnesium sulfate in the absence of “severe” preeclampsia; and (6) timing of birth for chronic and gestational hypertension and preterm preeclampsia.
Consistent recommendations should be implemented and audited. Inconsistencies should be the focus of research.
Any definition of preeclampsia should identify women and babies at greatest risk of adverse outcomes.
This study aimed to investigate the ability of the American College of Obstetricians and ...Gynecologists and International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy definitions of preeclampsia at term gestational age (≥37 0/7 weeks) to identify adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes.
In this prospective cohort study at 2 maternity hospitals in England, women attending a routine hospital visit at 35 0/7 to 36 6/7 weeks’ gestation underwent assessment that included history; ultrasonographic estimated fetal weight; Doppler measurements of the pulsatility index in the uterine, umbilical, and fetal middle cerebral arteries; and serum placental growth factor–to–soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 ratio. Obstetrical records were examined for all women with chronic hypertension and those who developed new-onset hypertension, with preeclampsia (de novo or superimposed on chronic hypertension) defined in 5 ways: traditional, based on new-onset proteinuria; American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists 2013 definition; International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal factors definition; International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal factors plus fetal death or fetal growth restriction definition, defined according to the 35 0/7 to 36 6/7 weeks’ gestation scan as either estimated fetal weight <3rd percentile or estimated fetal weight at the 3rd to 10th percentile with any of uterine artery pulsatility index >95th percentile, umbilical artery pulsatility index >95th percentile, or middle cerebral artery pulsatility index <5th percentile; and International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal-fetal factors plus angiogenic imbalance definition, defined as placental growth factor <5th percentile or soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1–to–serum placental growth factor >95th percentile. Detection rates for outcomes of interest (ie, severe maternal hypertension, major maternal morbidity, perinatal mortality or major neonatal morbidity, neonatal unit admission ≥48 hours, and birthweight <10th percentile) were compared using the chi-square test, and P<.05 was considered significant.
Among 15,248 singleton pregnancies, the identification of women with preeclampsia varied by definition: traditional, 15 of 281 (1.8%; 248); American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 15 of 326 (2.1%; 248); International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal factors, 15 of 400 (2.6%; 248); International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal-fetal factors, 15 of 434 (2.8%; 248); and International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal-fetal factors plus angiogenic imbalance, 15 of 500 (3.3%; 248). Compared with the traditional definition of preeclampsia, the International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal-fetal factors plus angiogenic imbalance best identified the adverse outcomes: severe hypertension (40.6% traditional vs 66.9% International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal-fetal factors plus angiogenic imbalance, P<.0001, 59.2% International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal-fetal factors, P=.004, 56.2% International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal factors, P=.013, 46.1% American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, P=.449); P<.0001); composite maternal severe adverse event (72.2% traditional vs 100% for all others; P=.046); composite of perinatal mortality and morbidity (46.9% traditional vs 71.1% International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal-fetal factors plus angiogenic imbalance, P=.002, 62.2% International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal-fetal factors, P=.06, 59.8% International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal factors, P=.117, 49.4% American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, P=.875); neonatal unit admission for ≥48 hours (51.4% traditional vs 73.4% International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal-fetal factors plus angiogenic imbalance, P=.001, 64.5% International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal-fetal factors, P=.070, 60.7% International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal factors, P=.213, 53.3% American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, P=.890); birthweight <10th percentile (40.5% traditional vs 78.7% International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal-fetal factors plus angiogenic imbalance, P<.0001, 70.1% International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal-fetal, P<.0001, 51.3% International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy maternal factors, P=.064, 46.3% American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, P=.349).
Our findings present an evidence base for the broad definition of preeclampsia. Our data suggest that compared with a traditional definition, a broad definition of preeclampsia can better identify women and babies at risk of adverse outcomes. Compared with the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists definition, the more inclusive International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy definition of maternal end-organ dysfunction seems to be more sensitive. The addition of uteroplacental dysfunction to the broad definition optimizes the identification of women and babies at risk, particularly when angiogenic factors are included.
Perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and pregnancy.
Databases (Medline, Embase, Clinicaltrials.gov, Cochrane Library) were searched electronically on 6th April and ...updated regularly until 8th June 2020. Reports of pregnant women with reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) confirmed COVID-19 were included. Meta-analytical proportion summaries and meta-regression analyses for key clinical outcomes are provided.
86 studies were included, 17 studies (2567 pregnancies) in the quantitative synthesis; other small case series and case reports were used to extract rarely-reported events and outcome. Most women (73.9%) were in the third trimester; 52.4% have delivered, half by caesarean section (48.3%). The proportion of Black, Asian or minority ethnic group membership (50.8%); obesity (38.2%), and chronic co-morbidities (32.5%) were high. The most commonly reported clinical symptoms were fever (63.3%), cough (71.4%) and dyspnoea (34.4%). The commonest laboratory abnormalities were raised CRP or procalcitonin (54.0%), lymphopenia (34.2%) and elevated transaminases (16.0%). Preterm birth before 37 weeks’ gestation was common (21.8%), usually medically-indicated (18.4%). Maternal intensive care unit admission was required in 7.0%, with intubation in 3.4%. Maternal mortality was uncommon (~1%). Maternal intensive care admission was higher in cohorts with higher rates of co-morbidities (beta=0.007, p<0.05) and maternal age over 35 years (beta=0.007, p<0.01). Maternal mortality was higher in cohorts with higher rates of antiviral drug use (beta=0.03, p<0.001), likely due to residual confounding. Neonatal nasopharyngeal swab RT-PCR was positive in 1.4%.
The risk of iatrogenic preterm birth and caesarean delivery was increased. The available evidence is reassuring, suggesting that maternal morbidity is similar to that of women of reproductive age. Vertical transmission of the virus probably occurs, albeit in a small proportion of cases.
N/A
PDF
