Garcés-Burbano YL, Bastidas-Sánchez BE, Ijají-Piamba JÉ, Rodríguez-Gamboa MA, Cajas-Santana DR, Ordoñez-Mosquera OE

Language: Spanish
References: 27
Page: 583-594
PDF size: 224.00 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To determine sociodemographic, clinical and paraclinical factors that could predict maternal complications in pregnant women with hypertensive disorders.
Materials and Methods: Prospective, descriptive and comparative case series study carried out in patients attended for termination of pregnancy between June 15, 2019 and June 15, 2020 in the Gynecobstetrics service of the Hospital San José de Popayán. Inclusion criteria: having 20 or more weeks of pregnancy and diagnosis of hypertensive disorder. Sociodemographic, clinical and paraclinical variables were analyzed.
Results: 198 Patients were admitted to the study, 196 were included and 2 patients were excluded for not fulfill inclusion criteria. The average age was 26.7 (from ±7.9) years. Blood pressure were significantly higher in the group with complications. The area under the curve for aspartate aminotransferase was 0.78 (EE = 0.036; IC95%: 0.71-0.86), for lactate dehydrogenase was 0.73 (EE = 0.040; IC95%: 0.65-0.80), and for proteins in spontaneous urine was 0.60 (EE = 0.043; IC95%: 0.52-0.69), these paraclinics had statistical significance for the group that had complications (p ‹ 0.05).
Conclusion: Liver function tests, followed by the presence of proteins in spontaneous urine are the variables that were best associated with complications in patients with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, his identification would allow interventions and follow-up to reduce maternal adverse events.

REFERENCES

1. Magee LA, Pels A, Helewa M, et al. The hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (29.3). Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2015; 29 (5): 643-57. doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn. 2015.04.001

2. Shah S, Gupta A. Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy. Cardiol Clin 2019; 37 (3): 345-54. doi:10.1016/j. ccl.2019.04.008

3. ACOG. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 202: Gestational Hypertension and Preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol 2019; 133 (1): e1-e25. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000003018

4. Leeman L, Dresang LT, Fontaine P. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Am Fam Physician 2016; 93 (2): 121-27. https:// www.aafp.org/afp/2016/0115/afp20160115p121.pdf

5. Brown MA, Magee LA, Kenny LC, et al. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: ISSHP classification, diagnosis, and management recommendations for international practice. Hypertension 2018; 72 (1): 24-43. doi:10.1161/ HYPERTENSIONAHA.117.10803

6. Von Dadelszen P, Magee LA. Pre-eclampsia: An Update. Curr Hypertens Rep 2014; 16 (8). doi:10.1007/s11906- 014-0454-8

7. Ukah UV, De Silva DA, Payne B, et al. Prediction of adverse maternal outcomes from pre-eclampsia and other hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: A systematic review. Pregnancy Hypertens 2018; 11: 115-23. doi:10.1016/j. preghy.2017.11.006

8. Ukah UV, Payne B, Karjalainen H, et al. Temporal and external validation of the full PIERS model for the prediction of adverse maternal outcomes in women with pre-eclampsia. Pregnancy Hypertens 2019; 15: 42-50. doi: /10.1016/j. preghy.2018.01.004

9. Thangaratinam S, Allotey J, Marlin N, et al. Prediction of complications in early-onset pre-eclampsia (PREP): Development and external multinational validation of prognostic models. BMC Med 2017; 15 (1). doi:10.1186/ s12916-017-0827-3

10. Pasyar S, Wilson LM, Pudwell J, Peng YP, Smith GN. Investigating the diagnostic capacity of uric acid in the occurrence of preeclampsia. Pregnancy Hypertens 2020; 19: 106-11. doi:10.1016/j.preghy.2019.12.010

11. Acestor N, Goett J, Lee A, et al. Towards biomarker-based tests that can facilitate decisions about prevention and management of preeclampsia in low-resource settings. Clin Chem Lab Med 2016; 54 (1): 17-27. doi: 10.1515/ cclm-2015-0069

12. Grupo de Estratificación Socioeconómica Dirección Geoestadística DANE. La estratificación socioeconómica en el régimen de los servicios públicos domiciliarios. https://www.dane.gov.co/files/geoestadistica/Estratificacion_ en_SPD.pdf

13. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Task Force on Hypertension in Pregnancy. Hypertension in pregnancy. Report of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Task Force on Hypertension in Pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 122 (5): 1122-31. doi: 10.1097/01. AOG.0000437382.03963.88.

14. Bauer ME, Bauer ST, Rajala B, MacEachern MP, Polley LS, et al. Maternal physiologic parameters in relationship to systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria. Obstetrics & Gynecology 2014;124 (3): 535-41. doi:10.1097/ AOG.0000000000000423

15. Martin JN Jr, Rinehart BK, May WL, Magann EF, Terrone DA, Blake PG. The spectrum of severe preeclampsia: comparative analysis by HELLP (hemolysis, elevated liver enzyme levels, and low platelet count) syndrome classification. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 180: 1373-84. doi.10.1016/ S0002-9378(99)70022-0

16. Cárdenas Riveros C.J. Trastornos hipertensivos del embarazo, en Emergencias en ginecobstetricia y reanimación avanzada en obstetricia 1ª. ed. Santiago de Cali. Fundación, 2014; 63-73. https://biblioteca.salamandra.edu.co/ MATERIAL%20ACADEMICO/Emergencias%20en%20Ginecobstetricia% 20y%20Reanimaci%A2n%20Avanzada%20 Obst%82trica.pdf

17. Rodríguez SJE, Salmon CA, Quintero SS, et al. Gestantes con índice de pulsatilidad alterado en ecografía Doppler. MediSan 2020; 24 (01): 65-75. http://scielo.sld.cu/pdf/san/ v24n1/1029-3019-san-24-01-65.pdf

18. Wallace K, Harris S, Addison A, Bean C. HELLP Syndrome: Pathophysiology and Current Therapies. Curr Pharm Biotechnol 2018; 19 (10): 816-26. https://doi.org/10.2174/1 389201019666180712115215

19. Von Dadelszen P. Magee LA. Pre-eclampsia: An Update. Curr Hypertens Rep 2014; 16 (8). doi:10.1007/s11906- 014-0454-8

20. Garg R, Kumar N, Malhotra H. Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome in eclampsia. Neurol India 2018; 66 (5):1316-23. doi:10.4103/0028-3886.241364

21. von Dadelszen P, Payne B, Li J, Ansermino JM, Broughton Pipkin F, Côté AM, et al. Prediction of adverse maternal outcomes in pre-eclampsia: development and validation of the fullPIERS model. Lancet 2011; 377 (9761): 219-27. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61351-7.

22. Rendón-Becerra CA, Ortiz-Martínez RA. Comparación de dos protocolos de manejo en preeclampsia severa, lejos del término, y resultados maternos y neonatales: una cohorte histórica Hospital Universitario San José, Popayán (Colombia). Rev Col Obstet Ginecol 2016; 67: 26-35. https://www. redalyc.org/pdf/1952/195245729004.pdf

23. Thangaratinam S, Gallos ID, Meah N, Usman S ’ada, Ismail KMK, Khan KS, et al. How accurate are maternal symptoms in predicting impending complications in women with preeclampsia? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2011; 90 (6): 564-73. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2011.01111.x

24. 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.

25. Payne B, Hutcheon JA, Qu Z, Haniff F, Bhutta Z, Biryabarema C, et al. OS037. Minipiers (pre-eclampsia integrated estimate of risk): Development of a clinical prediction model for use in low and middLeincome countries (LMIC) Vol. 2, Pregnancy Hypertension: An International Journal of Women’s Cardiovascular Health 2012; 95-96. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pmed.1001589

26. Thangaratinam S, Allotey J, Marlin N, Dodds J, Cheong-See F, von Dadelszen P, et al. Prediction of complications in early-onset pre-eclampsia (PREP): development and external multinational validation of prognostic models. BMC Med 2017; 15 (1): 68. doi. 10.1186/s12916-017-0827-3

27. Luis T, Elizabeth C, Luisa C, Adriana. Liver diseases and pregnancy, Rev Colomb Gastroenterol 2019; 34 (4): 381-93. http://www.scielo.org.co/pdf/rcg/v34n4/en_0120-9957- rcg-34-04-00385.pdf