Impact of fetal growth restriction on pregnancy outcome in women undergoing expectant management for preterm pre-eclampsia.
Cesarean section
delivery
fetal growth restriction
induction
latency
neonatal morbidity
neonatal mortality
pre-eclampsia
preterm pre-eclampsia
Journal
Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology
ISSN: 1469-0705
Titre abrégé: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9108340
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2023
Nov 2023
Historique:
revised:
18
05
2023
received:
23
01
2023
accepted:
24
05
2023
medline:
3
11
2023
pubmed:
8
6
2023
entrez:
8
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To assess whether coexisting fetal growth restriction (FGR) influences pregnancy latency among women with preterm pre-eclampsia undergoing expectant management. Secondary outcomes assessed were indication for delivery, mode of delivery and rate of serious adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. We conducted a secondary analysis of the Pre-eclampsia Intervention (PIE) and the Pre-eclampsia Intervention 2 (PI2) trial data. These randomized controlled trials evaluated whether esomeprazole and metformin could prolong gestation of women diagnosed with pre-eclampsia between 26 and 32 weeks of gestation undergoing expectant management. Delivery indications were deteriorating maternal or fetal status, or reaching 34 weeks' gestation. FGR (defined by Delphi consensus) at the time of pre-eclampsia diagnosis was examined as a predictor of outcome. Only placebo data from PI2 were included, as the trial showed that metformin use was associated with prolonged gestation. All outcome data were collected prospectively from diagnosis of pre-eclampsia to 6 weeks after the expected due date. Of the 202 women included, 92 (45.5%) had FGR at the time of pre-eclampsia diagnosis. Median pregnancy latency was 6.8 days in the FGR group and 15.3 days in the control group (difference 8.5 days; adjusted 0.49-fold change (95% CI, 0.33-0.74); P < 0.001). FGR pregnancies were less likely to reach 34 weeks' gestation (12.0% vs 30.9%; adjusted relative risk (aRR), 0.44 (95% CI, 0.23-0.83)) and more likely to be delivered for suspected fetal compromise (64.1% vs 36.4%; aRR, 1.84 (95% CI, 1.36-2.47)). More women with FGR underwent a prelabor emergency Cesarean section (66.3% vs 43.6%; aRR, 1.56 (95% CI, 1.20-2.03)) and were less likely to have a successful induction of labor (4.3% vs 14.5%; aRR, 0.32 (95% CI, 0.10-1.00)), compared to those without FGR. The rate of maternal complications did not differ significantly between the two groups. FGR was associated with a higher rate of infant death (14.1% vs 4.5%; aRR, 3.26 (95% CI, 1.08-9.81)) and need for intubation and mechanical ventilation (15.2% vs 5.5%; aRR, 2.97 (95% CI, 1.11-7.90)). FGR is commonly present in women with early preterm pre-eclampsia and outcome is poorer. FGR is associated with shorter pregnancy latency, more emergency Cesarean deliveries, fewer successful inductions and increased rates of neonatal morbidity and mortality. © 2023 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Substances chimiques
Metformin
9100L32L2N
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
660-667Subventions
Organisme : Peter Joseph Pappas research program
Organisme : Preeclampsia Foundation
Organisme : Swedish Medical Society
ID : SLS-934559
Organisme : The Geoff and Helen Handbury Foundation
Organisme : The Kilvington Trust
Organisme : The Mercy Health Foundation
Organisme : The Norman Beischer Medical Research Foundation
Organisme : The South African Medical Research Council self-initiated research grants program
Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Références
BJOG. 2000 Oct;107(10):1252-7
pubmed: 11028577
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Sep;199(3):262.e1-6
pubmed: 18771976
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jan;220(1):100.e1-100.e9
pubmed: 30273585
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Sep;48(3):333-9
pubmed: 26909664
Fetal Diagn Ther. 2014;36(2):86-98
pubmed: 24457811
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000 Oct;183(4):853-8
pubmed: 11035325
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Oct;42(4):400-8
pubmed: 24078432
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Mar;214(3):395.e1-7
pubmed: 26767794
J Perinatol. 2017 Jun;37(6):636-640
pubmed: 28358381
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Feb;226(2S):S1157-S1170
pubmed: 32946849
BMJ Open. 2019 Apr 24;9(4):e025809
pubmed: 31023758
Hypertens Pregnancy. 2009;28(3):312-47
pubmed: 19277923
BMJ Open. 2015 Oct 28;5(10):e008211
pubmed: 26510725
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Sep;205(3):191-8
pubmed: 22071049
J Biomed Inform. 2009 Apr;42(2):377-81
pubmed: 18929686
BMJ. 2021 Sep 22;374:n2103
pubmed: 34551918
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998 Nov;179(5):1210-3
pubmed: 9822502
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Oct;219(4):388.e1-388.e17
pubmed: 30055127
Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Apr;93(4):485-8
pubmed: 10214819
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985 Feb 1;151(3):333-7
pubmed: 3881966
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2006 Sep-Oct;128(1-2):169-74
pubmed: 16446026