15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Uterine vascular resistance and other maternal factors associated with the risk of developing hypertension during pregnancy

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia are important causes of perinatal morbidity. The objective of the present study was to determine the increase in relative risk for developing hypertensive disorders of pregnancy based on the evaluation of pregnant women between 20 and 25 weeks of gestation, and to correlate the findings at this period with the outcome of pregnancy. We conducted a prospective cohort study, with a convenience sample of 1417 patients evaluated at this gestational age, of which 1306 were contacted at childbirth. We detected an increased relative risk of 2.69 (95%CI: 1.86 to 3.89) associated with pulsatility index of the uterine arteries, a 2.8 increase (95%CI: 1.58 to 5.03) in relative risk attributed to maternal age above 35 years, a 1.68 increase (95%CI: 1.17 to 2.40) attributed to parity greater than or equal to 3, and a 5.35 increase (95%CI: 4.18 to 6.85) attributed to chronic hypertension and obesity, with a progressive increase in relative risk according to the degree of overweight, i.e., grades 1, 2, 3, and morbid obesity (2.58, 3.06, 5.84, and 7.28, respectively).

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics ( FIGO ) initiative on pre‐eclampsia: A pragmatic guide for first‐trimester screening and prevention

          Pre‐eclampsia (PE) is a multisystem disorder that typically affects 2%–5% of pregnant women and is one of the leading causes of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality, especially when the condition is of early onset. Globally, 76 000 women and 500 000 babies die each year from this disorder. Furthermore, women in low‐resource countries are at a higher risk of developing PE compared with those in high‐resource countries. Although a complete understanding of the pathogenesis of PE remains unclear, the current theory suggests a two‐stage process. The first stage is caused by shallow invasion of the trophoblast, resulting in inadequate remodeling of the spiral arteries. This is presumed to lead to the second stage, which involves the maternal response to endothelial dysfunction and imbalance between angiogenic and antiangiogenic factors, resulting in the clinical features of the disorder. Accurate prediction and uniform prevention continue to elude us. The quest to effectively predict PE in the first trimester of pregnancy is fueled by the desire to identify women who are at high risk of developing PE, so that necessary measures can be initiated early enough to improve placentation and thus prevent or at least reduce the frequency of its occurrence. Furthermore, identification of an “at risk” group will allow tailored prenatal surveillance to anticipate and recognize the onset of the clinical syndrome and manage it promptly. PE has been previously defined as the onset of hypertension accompanied by significant proteinuria after 20 weeks of gestation. Recently, the definition of PE has been broadened. Now the internationally agreed definition of PE is the one proposed by the International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy (ISSHP). According to the ISSHP, PE is defined as systolic blood pressure at ≥140 mm Hg and/or diastolic blood pressure at ≥90 mm Hg on at least two occasions measured 4 hours apart in previously normotensive women and is accompanied by one or more of the following new‐onset conditions at or after 20 weeks of gestation: 1.Proteinuria (i.e. ≥30 mg/mol protein:creatinine ratio; ≥300 mg/24 hour; or ≥2 + dipstick); 2.Evidence of other maternal organ dysfunction, including: acute kidney injury (creatinine ≥90 μmol/L; 1 mg/dL); liver involvement (elevated transaminases, e.g. alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase >40 IU/L) with or without right upper quadrant or epigastric abdominal pain; neurological complications (e.g. eclampsia, altered mental status, blindness, stroke, clonus, severe headaches, and persistent visual scotomata); or hematological complications (thrombocytopenia–platelet count <150 000/μL, disseminated intravascular coagulation, hemolysis); or 3.Uteroplacental dysfunction (such as fetal growth restriction, abnormal umbilical artery Doppler waveform analysis, or stillbirth). It is well established that a number of maternal risk factors are associated with the development of PE: advanced maternal age; nulliparity; previous history of PE; short and long interpregnancy interval; use of assisted reproductive technologies; family history of PE; obesity; Afro‐Caribbean and South Asian racial origin; co‐morbid medical conditions including hyperglycemia in pregnancy; pre‐existing chronic hypertension; renal disease; and autoimmune diseases, such as systemic lupus erythematosus and antiphospholipid syndrome. These risk factors have been described by various professional organizations for the identification of women at risk of PE; however, this approach to screening is inadequate for effective prediction of PE. PE can be subclassified into: 1.Early‐onset PE (with delivery at <34+0 weeks of gestation); 2.Preterm PE (with delivery at <37+0 weeks of gestation); 3.Late‐onset PE (with delivery at ≥34+0 weeks of gestation); 4.Term PE (with delivery at ≥37+0 weeks of gestation). These subclassifications are not mutually exclusive. Early‐onset PE is associated with a much higher risk of short‐ and long‐term maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. Obstetricians managing women with preterm PE are faced with the challenge of balancing the need to achieve fetal maturation in utero with the risks to the mother and fetus of continuing the pregnancy longer. These risks include progression to eclampsia, development of placental abruption and HELLP (hemolysis, elevated liver enzyme, low platelet) syndrome. On the other hand, preterm delivery is associated with higher infant mortality rates and increased morbidity resulting from small for gestational age (SGA), thrombocytopenia, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, cerebral palsy, and an increased risk of various chronic diseases in adult life, particularly type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and obesity. Women who have experienced PE may also face additional health problems in later life, as the condition is associated with an increased risk of death from future cardiovascular disease, hypertension, stroke, renal impairment, metabolic syndrome, and diabetes. The life expectancy of women who developed preterm PE is reduced on average by 10 years. There is also significant impact on the infants in the long term, such as increased risks of insulin resistance, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, and hypertension in infants born to pre‐eclamptic women. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) brought together international experts to discuss and evaluate current knowledge on PE and develop a document to frame the issues and suggest key actions to address the health burden posed by PE. FIGO's objectives, as outlined in this document, are: (1) To raise awareness of the links between PE and poor maternal and perinatal outcomes, as well as to the future health risks to mother and offspring, and demand a clearly defined global health agenda to tackle this issue; and (2) To create a consensus document that provides guidance for the first‐trimester screening and prevention of preterm PE, and to disseminate and encourage its use. Based on high‐quality evidence, the document outlines current global standards for the first‐trimester screening and prevention of preterm PE, which is in line with FIGO good clinical practice advice on first trimester screening and prevention of pre‐eclampsia in singleton pregnancy.1 It provides both the best and the most pragmatic recommendations according to the level of acceptability, feasibility, and ease of implementation that have the potential to produce the most significant impact in different resource settings. Suggestions are provided for a variety of different regional and resource settings based on their financial, human, and infrastructure resources, as well as for research priorities to bridge the current knowledge and evidence gap. To deal with the issue of PE, FIGO recommends the following: Public health focus: There should be greater international attention given to PE and to the links between maternal health and noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) on the Sustainable Developmental Goals agenda. Public health measures to increase awareness, access, affordability, and acceptance of preconception counselling, and prenatal and postnatal services for women of reproductive age should be prioritized. Greater efforts are required to raise awareness of the benefits of early prenatal visits targeted at reproductive‐aged women, particularly in low‐resource countries. Universal screening: All pregnant women should be screened for preterm PE during early pregnancy by the first‐trimester combined test with maternal risk factors and biomarkers as a one‐step procedure. The risk calculator is available free of charge at https://fetalmedicine.org/research/assess/preeclampsia. FIGO encourages all countries and its member associations to adopt and promote strategies to ensure this. The best combined test is one that includes maternal risk factors, measurements of mean arterial pressure (MAP), serum placental growth factor (PLGF), and uterine artery pulsatility index (UTPI). Where it is not possible to measure PLGF and/or UTPI, the baseline screening test should be a combination of maternal risk factors with MAP, and not maternal risk factors alone. If maternal serum pregnancy‐associated plasma protein A (PAPP‐A) is measured for routine first‐trimester screening for fetal aneuploidies, the result can be included for PE risk assessment. Variations to the full combined test would lead to a reduction in the performance screening. A woman is considered high risk when the risk is 1 in 100 or more based on the first‐trimester combined test with maternal risk factors, MAP, PLGF, and UTPI. Contingent screening: Where resources are limited, routine screening for preterm PE by maternal factors and MAP in all pregnancies and reserving measurements of PLGF and UTPI for a subgroup of the population (selected on the basis of the risk derived from screening by maternal factors and MAP) can be considered. Prophylactic measures: Following first‐trimester screening for preterm PE, women identified at high risk should receive aspirin prophylaxis commencing at 11–14+6 weeks of gestation at a dose of ~150 mg to be taken every night until 36 weeks of gestation, when delivery occurs, or when PE is diagnosed. Low‐dose aspirin should not be prescribed to all pregnant women. In women with low calcium intake (<800 mg/d), either calcium replacement (≤1 g elemental calcium/d) or calcium supplementation (1.5–2 g elemental calcium/d) may reduce the burden of both early‐ and late‐onset PE.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Risk factors for pre-eclampsia at antenatal booking: systematic review of controlled studies.

            To determine the risk of pre-eclampsia associated with factors that may be present at antenatal booking. Systematic review of controlled studies published 1966-2002. Unadjusted relative risks were calculated from published data. Controlled cohort studies showed that the risk of pre-eclampsia is increased in women with a previous history of pre-eclampsia (relative risk 7.19, 95% confidence interval 5.85 to 8.83) and in those with antiphospholipids antibodies (9.72, 4.34 to 21.75), pre-existing diabetes (3.56, 2.54 to 4.99), multiple (twin) pregnancy (2.93, 2.04 to 4.21), nulliparity (2.91, 1.28 to 6.61), family history (2.90, 1.70 to 4.93), raised blood pressure (diastolic > or = 80 mm Hg) at booking (1.38, 1.01 to 1.87), raised body mass index before pregnancy (2.47, 1.66 to 3.67) or at booking (1.55, 1.28 to 1.88), or maternal age > or = 40 (1.96, 1.34 to 2.87, for multiparous women). Individual studies show that risk is also increased with an interval of 10 years or more since a previous pregnancy, autoimmune disease, renal disease, and chronic hypertension. These factors and the underlying evidence base can be used to assess risk at booking so that a suitable surveillance routine to detect pre-eclampsia can be planned for the rest of the pregnancy.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The rising prevalence of obesity: part A: impact on public health

              Excessive fat accumulation in the body may impair health leading to a significant long-term health consequences including the development of diabetes, coronary heart disease, and osteoarthritis as well as increasing the risk of developing certain cancers and influencing their outcomes. England has some of the worst figures and trends in obesity compared with the rest of the Europe. In the majority of European countries the trend has increased from 10% to 40% in the last 10 years, whereas in England prevalence has more than doubled. This article outlines the public health impact of rising obesity levels.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Braz J Med Biol Res
                Braz J Med Biol Res
                bjmbr
                Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research
                Associação Brasileira de Divulgação Científica
                0100-879X
                1414-431X
                18 November 2020
                2021
                : 54
                : 1
                : e10118
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Faculdade de Ciências da Saúde de Barretos Dr. Paulo Prata, Barretos, SP, Brasil
                [2 ]Departamento de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia, Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brasil
                [3 ]Departamento de Odontologia II, Universidade Federal do Maranhão, São Luís, MA, Brasil
                [4 ]Departamento de Saúde Pública, Universidade Federal do Maranhão, São Luís, MA, Brasil
                [5 ]Departamento de Puericultura e Pediatria, Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brasil
                Author notes
                Correspondence: E.C.A. Veiga: < eduardo.veiga@ 123456fm.usp.br >
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8893-7900
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0167-861X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0041-7618
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8351-1348
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2677-5600
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8744-4373
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2057-9104
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5010-4914
                Article
                00603
                10.1590/1414-431X202010118
                7679108
                33237124
                e1db1e70-ee73-4eb6-bf8e-35b4fb61b45b

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 6 April 2020
                : 27 August 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 4, Equations: 0, References: 25
                Categories
                Research Article

                gestational hypertension,risk factors,relative risk
                gestational hypertension, risk factors, relative risk

                Comments

                Comment on this article