Indications and diagnosis-specific features of maternal and neonatal peripartum intensive care unit admissions: A retrospective study.
intensive care unit
laboratory
maternal
outcomes
vital signs
Journal
Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica
ISSN: 1399-6576
Titre abrégé: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0370270
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2022
Feb 2022
Historique:
revised:
29
08
2021
received:
04
11
2020
accepted:
02
11
2021
pubmed:
24
11
2021
medline:
27
1
2022
entrez:
23
11
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Although peripartum intensive care unit admission indications are well-reported, clinical and laboratory details rarely are. We described admission indications and categorised laboratory values and vital signs according to admission diagnosis. Retrospective Institutional Review Board approved study. We identified intensive care unit admission diagnosis, laboratory values and vital signs from patient charts. Groups were compared according to admission diagnoses. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. We included 91 general intensive care unit admissions among 56,865 deliveries (2011-2015) with complete data. The most common admission diagnosis was postpartum haemorrhage followed by hypertensive diseases of pregnancy and respiratory complications. Women with postpartum haemorrhage had lower mean (standard deviation) platelet counts (120.2 (45.8) vs. 181.2 (109.9), p = .003) and temperatures (35.7 (1.1) vs. 36.5 (1.2), p = .002). Women with hypertensive diseases of pregnancy had higher mean (standard deviation) blood pressures (systolic 150.4 (29.1) vs. 127.4 (21.0), p = .013, diastolic 100.3 (18.7) vs. 76.1 (16.1), p = .001), creatinine (1.1 (0.6) vs. 0.8 (0.3), p = .003), urea (14.6 (7.7) vs. 10.5 (4.7), p = .005) and liver enzymes, including aspartate transaminase (258.4 (297.0) vs. 41.4 (42.9), p = .000), alanine transaminase (184.4 (199.2) vs. 35.1 (75.9), p = .000), and alkaline phosphatase (166.6 (112.6) vs. 96.0 (60.0), p = .006). Women with respiratory complications had lower mean (standard deviation) oxygen saturations (93.7 (6.1) vs. 98.0 (2.6), p = .000), and higher mean (standard deviation) temperatures (37.1 (0.8) vs. 36.0 (1.2), p = .001). We report differences in laboratory values and vital signs, according to intensive care unit admission diagnosis. Recognising these differences might help individualise patient assessment and care.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Although peripartum intensive care unit admission indications are well-reported, clinical and laboratory details rarely are. We described admission indications and categorised laboratory values and vital signs according to admission diagnosis.
METHODS
METHODS
Retrospective Institutional Review Board approved study. We identified intensive care unit admission diagnosis, laboratory values and vital signs from patient charts. Groups were compared according to admission diagnoses. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We included 91 general intensive care unit admissions among 56,865 deliveries (2011-2015) with complete data. The most common admission diagnosis was postpartum haemorrhage followed by hypertensive diseases of pregnancy and respiratory complications. Women with postpartum haemorrhage had lower mean (standard deviation) platelet counts (120.2 (45.8) vs. 181.2 (109.9), p = .003) and temperatures (35.7 (1.1) vs. 36.5 (1.2), p = .002). Women with hypertensive diseases of pregnancy had higher mean (standard deviation) blood pressures (systolic 150.4 (29.1) vs. 127.4 (21.0), p = .013, diastolic 100.3 (18.7) vs. 76.1 (16.1), p = .001), creatinine (1.1 (0.6) vs. 0.8 (0.3), p = .003), urea (14.6 (7.7) vs. 10.5 (4.7), p = .005) and liver enzymes, including aspartate transaminase (258.4 (297.0) vs. 41.4 (42.9), p = .000), alanine transaminase (184.4 (199.2) vs. 35.1 (75.9), p = .000), and alkaline phosphatase (166.6 (112.6) vs. 96.0 (60.0), p = .006). Women with respiratory complications had lower mean (standard deviation) oxygen saturations (93.7 (6.1) vs. 98.0 (2.6), p = .000), and higher mean (standard deviation) temperatures (37.1 (0.8) vs. 36.0 (1.2), p = .001).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
We report differences in laboratory values and vital signs, according to intensive care unit admission diagnosis. Recognising these differences might help individualise patient assessment and care.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
256-264Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Tunçalp O, Hindin MJ, Souza JP, Chou D, Say L. The prevalence of maternal near miss: a systematic review. BJOG. 2012;119(6):653-661. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03294.x
Pattinson R, Say L, Souza JP, Nv B, Rooney C; WHO Working Group on Maternal Mortality and Morbidity Classifications. WHO maternal death and near-miss classifications. Bull World Health Organ. 2009;87(10):734. doi:10.2471/blt.09.071001
Einav S, Leone M. Epidemiology of obstetric critical illness. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2019;40:128-139. doi:10.1016/j.ijoa.2019.05.010
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine; Kilpatrick SK, Ecker JL. Severe maternal morbidity: screening and review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(3):B17-B22. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2016.07.050
Pollock W, Rose L, Dennis CL. Pregnant and postpartum admissions to the intensive care unit: a systematic review. Intensive Care Med. 2010;36(9):1465-1474. doi:10.1007/s00134-010-1951-0
Martin SR, Foley MR. Intensive care in obstetrics: an evidence-based review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195(3):673-689. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2006.05.042
Lucas DN, Yentis SM, Kinsella SM, et al. Urgency of caesarean section: a new classification. J R Soc Med. 2000;93(7):346-350. doi:10.1177/014107680009300703
Levy N, Goren O, Cattan A, Weiniger CF, Matot I. Neuraxial block for delivery among women with low platelet counts: a retrospective analysis. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2018;35:4-9. doi:10.1016/j.ijoa.2018.01.006
Porreco RP, Barkey R. Peripartum intensive care. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2010;23(10):1136-1138. doi:10.3109/14767058.2010.490890
Gilbert TT, Smulian JC, Martin AA, et al. Obstetric admissions to the intensive care unit: outcomes and severity of illness. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102(5 Pt 1):897-903. doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(03)00767-1
Oliveira Neto AF, Parpinelli MA, Costa ML, Souza RT, Ribeiro do Valle C, Cecatti JG. Exploring epidemiological aspects, distribution of WHO maternal near miss criteria, and organ dysfunction defined by SOFA in cases of severe maternal outcome admitted to obstetric ICU: a cross-sectional study. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:1-8. doi:10.1155/2018/5714890
Zieleskiewicz L, Chantry A, Duclos G, et al. Intensive care and pregnancy: epidemiology and general principles of management of obstetrics ICU patients during pregnancy. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2016;35(Suppl 1):S51-S57. doi:10.1016/j.accpm.2016.06.005
Jackson DL, DeLoughery TG. Postpartum hemorrhage: management of massive transfusion. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2018;73(7):418-422. doi:10.1097/OGX.0000000000000582
Muirhead B, Weiss ADH. Massive hemorrhage and transfusion in the operating room. L’hémorragie massive et la transfusion en salle d’opération. Can J Anaesth. 2017;64(9):962-978. doi:10.1007/s12630-017-0925-x
Lier H, Krep H, Schroeder S, Stuber F. Preconditions of hemostasis in trauma: a review. The influence of acidosis, hypocalcemia, anemia, and hypothermia on functional hemostasis in trauma. J Trauma. 2008;65(4):951-960. doi:10.1097/TA.0b013e318187e15b
Mol BWJ, Roberts CT, Thangaratinam S, Magee LA, de Groot CJM, Hofmeyr GJ. Pre-eclampsia. Lancet. 2016;387(10022):999-1011. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00070-7
Paxton JL, Presneill J, Aitken L. Characteristics of obstetric patients referred to intensive care in an Australian tertiary hospital. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014;54(5):445-449. doi:10.1111/ajo.12211
Padilla C, Markwei M, Easter SR, Fox KA, Shamshirsaz AA, Foley MR. Critical care in obstetrics: a strategy for addressing maternal mortality. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;S0002-9378(20):32592-32598. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2020.12.1208