Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-15T14:58:00.834Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

SHOULD A FIRST-TRIMESTER RISK ASSESSMENT FOR PRE-ECLAMPSIA BE ROUTINELY OFFERED?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 July 2013

MAURO PARRA-CORDERO
MAURO PARRA-CORDERO*
Affiliation:
Fetal Medicine Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chile Hospital, Santiago, Chile
*
Prof Dr Mauro Parra-Cordero, Fetal Medicine Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chile Clinical Hospital, Santos Dumont 999, Independencia, Santiago 8380456, Chile. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

From a scientific point of view, the answer to the question might be quite straightforward in favour of routinely screening all pregnant women for pre-eclampsia (PE) during the first trimester of pregnancy. However, irrespective of the large amount of good evidence and expert opinion favourable for universally screening for obstetric syndromes, such as PE, public health policies do not always align with pure clinical science.

Type
Opinion
Information
Fetal and Maternal Medicine Review , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , May 2013 , pp. 129 - 133
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1Wilson, JMG, Jungner, G. Principles and practice of screening for disease. Geneva: WHO; 1968.Google ScholarPubMed
2Huppertz, B, Kawaguchi, R. First trimester serum markers to predict preeclampsia. Wien Med Wochenschr 2012; 162 (9–10): 191–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Anderson, UD, Olsson, MG, Kristensen, KH, Akerström, B, Hansson, SR. Review: biochemical markers to predict preeclampsia. Placenta 2012; 33: S42–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Kuc, S, Wortelboer, EJ, van Rijn, BB, Franx, A, Visser, GH, Schielen, PC. Evaluation of 7 serum biomarkers and uterine artery Doppler ultrasound for first-trimester prediction of preeclampsia: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2011; 66 (4): 225–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Cnoseen, J, Ter Riet, G, Willem Mol, B, et al.Are tests for predicting pre-eclampsia good enough to make screening viable? A review of reviews and critical appraisal. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2009; 88: 758–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Brown, MA, Lindheimer, M, de Swiet, M, Van Assche, A, Moutquin, JM. The classification and diagnosis of the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: statement from the International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy (ISSHP). Hypertens Pregnancy 2001; 20 (1): IX–XIV.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Roberts, JM, Cooper, DW. Pathogenesis and genetics of pre-eclampsia. Lancet 2001; 357 (9249): 53–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8Davison, JM, Homuth, V, Jeyabalan, A, et al.New aspects in the pathophysiology of preeclampsia. J Am Soc Nephrol 2004; 15 (9): 2440–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9Redman, CWG, Sargent, IL. Placental stress and pre-eclampsia: a revised view. Placenta 2009; 30 (Suppl A): S38–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10Moldenhauer, JS, Stanek, J, Warshak, C, Khoury, J, Sibai, B. The frequency and severity of placental findings in women with preeclampsia are gestational age dependent. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189 (4): 1173–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11von Dadelszen, P, Magee, LA, Roberts, JM. Subclassification of preeclampsia. Hypertens Pregnancy 2003; 22 (2): 143–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12Witlin, AG. Counseling for women with preeclampsia or eclampsia. Semin Perinatol 1999; 23 (1): 91–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13Parra-Cordero, M, San Martin, A, Valdes, E, et al.Espectro clinico de la preeclampsia: estudio comparativo de sus diversos grados de severidad. Rev Chil Obstet Ginecol 2007; 72 (3): 169–75.Google Scholar
14Conde-Agudelo, A, Villar, J, Lindheimer, M. World Health Organization systematic review of screening tests for preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 104 (6): 1367–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Nicolaides, KH. Some thoughts on the true value of ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007; 30 (5): 671–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16Poon, L, Karagiannis, G, Leal, A, Romero, XC, Nicolaides, KH. Hypertensive disorders in pregnancy: screening by uterine artery Doppler imaging and blood pressure at 11–13 weeks. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009; 34 (5): 497–502.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17Parra, M, Rodrigo, R, Barja, P, et al.Screening test for preeclampsia through assessment of uteroplacental blood flow and biochemical markers of oxidative stress and endothelial dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 193 (4): 1486–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18Yu, CK, Smith, GC, Papageorghiou, AT, Cacho, AM, Nicolaides, KH. An integrated model for the prediction of preeclampsia using maternal factors and uterine artery Doppler velocimetry in unselected low-risk women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 193 (2): 429–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19Bujold, E, Roberge, S, Lacasse, Y, et al.Prevention of preeclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction with aspirin started in early pregnancy: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 116 (2): 402–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20Roberge, S, Giguere, Y, Villa, P, et al.Early administration of low-dose aspirin for the prevention of severe and mild preeclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Perinatol 2012; 29 (7): 551–6.Google ScholarPubMed
21Roberge, S, Villa, P, Nicolaides, KH, et al.Early administration of low-dose aspirin for the prevention of preterm and term preeclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fetal Diagn Ther 2012; 31 (3): 141–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22Martin, AM, Bindra, R, Curcio, P, Cicero, S, Nicolaides, KH. Screening for pre-eclampsia and fetal growth restriction by uterine artery Doppler at 11–14 weeks of gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18 (6): 583–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23Plasencia, W, Maiz, N, Bonino, S, Kaihura, C, Nicolaides, KH. Uterine artery Doppler at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks in the prediction of pre-eclampsia. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007; 30 (5): 742–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24Melchiorre, K, Wormald, B, Leslie, K, Bhide, A, Thilaganathan, B. First-trimester uterine artery Doppler indices in term and preterm pre-eclampsia. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008; 32 (2): 133–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25Poon, LC, Syngelaki, A, Akolekar, R, Lai, J, Nicolaides, KH. Combined screening for preeclampsia and small for gestational age at 11–13 weeks. Fetal Diagn Ther 2013; 33 (1): 16–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26Scazzocchio, E, Figueras, F, Crispi, F, et al.Performance of a first-trimester screening of preeclampsia in a routine care low-risk setting. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 208 (203): e1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27Myatt, L, Clifton, RG, Roberts, JM, et al.The utility of uterine velocimetr in prediction of preeclampsia in a low-risk population. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120 (4): 815–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28Myatt, L, Clifton, RG, Roberts, JM, et al.First-trimester prediction of preeclampsia in nulliparous women at low risk. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 119 (6): 1234–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29Romero, R, Kusanovic, JP, Than, NG, et al.First-trimester maternal serum PP13 in the risk assessment for preeclampsia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199 (2): 122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30Parra-Cordero, M, Rodrigo, R, Barja, P, et al.Prediction of early and late pre-eclampsia from maternal characteristics, uterine artery Doppler and markers of vasculogenesis during the first trimester of pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 41 (5): 538–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31Shmueli, A, Meiri, H, Gonen, R. Economic assessment of screening for pre-eclampsia. Prenat Diagn 2012; 32 (1): 29–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed