Suppr超能文献

临床实践指南中子痫前期的危险因素:与证据的比较。

Risk factors for pre-eclampsia in clinical practice guidelines: Comparison with the evidence.

机构信息

Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.

Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.

出版信息

BJOG. 2024 Jan;131(1):46-62. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.17320. Epub 2022 Nov 22.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare pre-eclampsia risk factors identified by clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) with risk factors from hierarchical evidence review, to guide pre-eclampsia prevention.

DESIGN

Our search strategy provided hierarchical evidence of relationships between risk factors and pre-eclampsia using Medline (Ovid), searched from January 2010 to January 2021.

SETTING

Published studies and CPGs.

POPULATION

Pregnant women.

METHODS

We evaluated the strength of association and quality of evidence (GRADE). CPGs (n = 15) were taken from a previous systematic review.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Pre-eclampsia.

RESULTS

Of 78 pre-eclampsia risk factors, 13 (16.5%) arise only during pregnancy. Strength of association was usually 'probable' (n = 40, 51.3%) and the quality of evidence was low (n = 35, 44.9%). The 'major' and 'moderate' risk factors proposed by 8/15 CPGs were not well aligned with the evidence; of the ten 'major' risk factors (alone warranting aspirin prophylaxis), associations with pre-eclampsia were definite (n = 4), probable (n = 5) or possible (n = 1), based on moderate (n = 4), low (n = 5) or very low (n = 1) quality evidence. Obesity ('moderate' risk factor) was definitely associated with pre-eclampsia (high-quality evidence). The other ten 'moderate' risk factors had probable (n = 8), possible (n = 1) or no (n = 1) association with pre-eclampsia, based on evidence of moderate (n = 1), low (n = 5) or very low (n = 4) quality. Three risk factors not identified by the CPGs had probable associations (high quality): being overweight; 'prehypertension' at booking; and blood pressure of 130-139/80-89 mmHg in early pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-eclampsia risk factors in CPGs are poorly aligned with evidence, particularly for the strongest risk factor of obesity. There is a lack of distinction between risk factors identifiable in early pregnancy and those arising later. A refresh of the strategies advocated by CPGs is needed.

摘要

目的

比较临床实践指南(CPG)确定的子痫前期危险因素与分层证据综述中的危险因素,以指导子痫前期的预防。

设计

我们的搜索策略利用 Medline(Ovid)提供了从 2010 年 1 月至 2021 年 1 月分层证据,以研究危险因素与子痫前期之间的关系。

设置

出版研究和 CPG。

人群

孕妇。

方法

我们评估了关联的强度和证据的质量(GRADE)。CPG(n=15)来自先前的系统综述。

主要结局测量

子痫前期。

结果

在 78 个子痫前期危险因素中,有 13 个(16.5%)仅在怀孕期间出现。关联强度通常为“可能”(n=40,51.3%),证据质量低(n=35,44.9%)。15 个 CPG 中提出的“主要”和“中度”危险因素与证据不符;在 10 个“主要”危险因素中(仅阿司匹林预防治疗有必要),与子痫前期的关联是明确的(n=4)、可能的(n=5)或可能的(n=1),基于中等质量(n=4)、低质量(n=5)或极低质量(n=1)证据。肥胖(“中度”危险因素)与子痫前期有明确的关联(高质量证据)。其他 10 个“中度”危险因素与子痫前期的关系是可能的(n=8)、可能的(n=1)或没有(n=1),基于中等质量(n=1)、低质量(n=5)或极低质量(n=4)证据。CPG 未确定的 3 个危险因素与子痫前期有明确的关联(高质量):超重;初诊时“高血压前期”;以及妊娠早期血压 130-139/80-89mmHg。

结论

CPG 中的子痫前期危险因素与证据不符,尤其是肥胖这一最强危险因素。早期妊娠和后期出现的危险因素之间没有区别。CPG 所倡导的策略需要更新。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验