School of Medicine and Health Sciences TecSalud ITESM (Escuela de Medicina y Ciencias de la Salud del Tecnológico de Monterrey), Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Monterrey, México.
Genetics Department (Departamento de Genética Facultad de Medicina y Hospital, Universitario "Dr José Eleuterio González" Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León), Monterrey, México.
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2022 Aug;42(6):1722-1727. doi: 10.1080/01443615.2022.2035331. Epub 2022 Feb 21.
This study aims to compare the accuracy of risk prediction for preeclampsia (PE) of three calculators during the second trimester of gestation: American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (ACOG), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), and Foetal Medicine Foundation (FMF). Complete medical history, mean uterine artery Doppler pulsatile index were performed (PI) and venous blood samples for placental growth factor (PIGF), soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFLT-1), and Endoglin measurements were obtained from 214 women between 20-24 weeks gestation. PE frequency was 8.4% (18/214). Sensitivity and specificity were 94.4% and 37.2% and 44.4% and 74.5% for ACOG and NICE respectively. Sensitivity for FMF was 66.7% and 44.4% at <32 weeks and <36 weeks respectively and specificity was 97.2% and 98.1%. The highest positive likelihood ratio, 22, was obtained for FMF as compared to 1.49 and 1.76 for ACOG and NICE. These findings suggest that the addition of US and serum biomarkers in the FMF calculator increases accuracy for prediction of PE.Impact Statement Several strategies have been implemented to evaluate risk for PE. The ACOG and NICE calculators, based on medical and anthropomorphic data, and the FMF calculator, which includes ultrasound and serum biomarkers, have been used for the prediction of PE risk in the first trimester of gestation. Although the identification of markers for the prediction of PE during the first trimester of pregnancy has been of major clinical interest, in many countries women attend their first prenatal visit up until the second trimester of pregnancy. This is the first multicentre study in Latin American population to compare the three risk prediction systems including serum biomarkers during the second trimester of pregnancy. We propose the FMF calculator (including PI and serum biomarkers) as a useful tool for PE risk detection during the second trimester of pregnancy. However, as this study is limited by its small sample size, larger multicenter studies are needed to confirm our findings and assert the usefulness of the FMF calculator.
本研究旨在比较三种妊娠中期子痫前期(PE)风险预测计算器的准确性:美国妇产科医师学会(ACOG)、英国国家卫生与保健优化研究所(NICE)和胎儿医学基金会(FMF)。214 名 20-24 周妊娠的女性进行了完整的病史记录、子宫动脉多普勒搏动指数(PI)检测和胎盘生长因子(PIGF)、可溶性 fms 样酪氨酸激酶-1(sFLT-1)和内格林(Endoglin)静脉血样采集。PE 的发生率为 8.4%(18/214)。ACOG 和 NICE 的敏感性和特异性分别为 94.4%和 37.2%、44.4%和 74.5%。FMF 的敏感性分别为<32 周和<36 周时的 66.7%和 44.4%,特异性分别为 97.2%和 98.1%。与 ACOG 和 NICE 的 1.49 和 1.76 相比,FMF 的阳性似然比最高,为 22。这些发现表明,与 ACOG 和 NICE 相比,在 FMF 计算器中添加 US 和血清生物标志物可提高预测 PE 的准确性。
影响
陈述
已经实施了几种策略来评估 PE 的风险。ACOG 和 NICE 计算器基于医学和人体测量数据,而 FMF 计算器则包含超声和血清生物标志物,已用于预测妊娠早期的 PE 风险。尽管在妊娠早期预测 PE 的标志物的鉴定具有重要的临床意义,但在许多国家,女性直到妊娠中期才进行第一次产前检查。这是拉丁美洲人群中首次比较包括妊娠中期血清生物标志物在内的三种风险预测系统的多中心研究。我们提出 FMF 计算器(包括 PI 和血清生物标志物)是妊娠中期检测 PE 风险的有用工具。然而,由于本研究样本量较小,需要更大规模的多中心研究来证实我们的发现,并确定 FMF 计算器的有用性。