A comparison of first trimester blood pressures obtained at the time of first trimester pre-eclampsia screening and those obtained during prenatal care visits.


Journal

European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology
ISSN: 1872-7654
Titre abrégé: Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol
Pays: Ireland
ID NLM: 0375672

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
May 2020
Historique:
received: 10 12 2019
revised: 04 03 2020
accepted: 06 03 2020
pubmed: 22 3 2020
medline: 4 2 2021
entrez: 22 3 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To determine if enrollment blood pressures in a study on first trimester preeclampsia prediction significantly differed from those obtained during routine prenatal care visits in the first trimester. Women carrying a singleton gestation were prospectively enrolled in a first trimester study on preeclampsia prediction, and had systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP, DBP) measured at the time of enrollment. Blood pressure was also measured with the same technique by clinic nurses during the routine prenatal visits throughout the first trimester of pregnancy (9-14 weeks). The enrollment-BP (E-BP) and average first trimester-BP (aFT-BP) were compared using a paired samples t-test or Wilcoxon test, as appropriate. Smokers and patients on antihypertensive medications were excluded from the analysis. test. 644 women had prenatal care in the primary study center and met study criteria. The mean gestational age at study enrollment was 12.5 weeks. No significant difference was found between E-SBP and aFT-SBP (p = 0.10). Enrollment DBP and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were significantly lower than the aFT- DBP and -MAP (median DPB 67 vs 70 mm Hg and median MAP 83.7 vs 85 mmHg, respectively, p < 0.001). However, the difference was not clinically relevant (3 mmHg for DBP, and 1.3 mmHg for MAP). Blood pressures obtained in a setting of preeclampsia screening are not higher than those obtained during regular prenatal care in the first trimester. This suggests that the setting in which pre-eclampsia screening is performed is unlikely to be a confounder for blood pressure measurements and the risk assessment.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32199296
pii: S0301-2115(20)30126-3
doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.03.018
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

77-80

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors do not have conflicts of interest to disclose.

Auteurs

Viola Seravalli (V)

Department of Health Sciences, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Florence, Largo Brambilla 3, 50134, Florence, Italy. Electronic address: viola.seravalli@unifi.it.

Jena L Miller (JL)

Center for Fetal Therapy, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Miriam G Blitzer (MG)

Department of Pediatrics, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Ahmet A Baschat (AA)

Center for Fetal Therapy, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH