S De Haas1, C Ghossein-Doha1, L Geerts1, S M J van Kuijk2, J van Drongelen3, M E A Spaanderman1. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC+), Maastricht, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC+), Maastricht, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to describe comprehensively the pattern of cardiac remodeling during normotensive human singleton pregnancy and to compare it with that of pregnancy complicated by hypertension. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of the current literature on cardiac remodeling during normotensive and complicated pregnancies. Literature was retrieved from PubMed (NCBI) and EMBASE (Ovid) databases. Included studies needed to report a reference measurement (matched non-pregnant control group, prepregnancy or postpartum) and measurements made during predetermined gestational-age intervals. Mean differences between reference and pregnancy data were calculated using the random-effects model described by DerSimonian and Laird. RESULTS: Forty-eight studies were included in the meta-analysis, with publication dates ranging from 1977 to 2016. During normotensive pregnancy, most geometric indices started to increase in the second trimester. Left ventricular mass (LVM) increased by 28.36 (95% CI, 19.73-37.00) g (24%), and relative wall thickness (RWT) increased by 0.03 (95% CI, 0.02-0.05) (10%) compared with those in the reference group. During hypertensive pregnancy, LVM and RWT increased more than during normotensive pregnancy (92 (95% CI, 75.46-108.54) g (95%) and 0.14 (95% CI, 0.09-0.19) (56%), respectively). CONCLUSIONS: During normotensive pregnancy, most cardiac geometric indices change from the second trimester onwards. Both LVM and RWT increase, by 20% and 10%, respectively, consistent with concentric rather than eccentric remodeling. Cardiac adaptation in hypertensive pregnancy deviates from that in healthy pregnancy by a greater change in LVM (95% increase from reference) and RWT (56% increase from reference).
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to describe comprehensively the pattern of cardiac remodeling during normotensive human singleton pregnancy and to compare it with that of pregnancy complicated by hypertension. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of the current literature on cardiac remodeling during normotensive and complicated pregnancies. Literature was retrieved from PubMed (NCBI) and EMBASE (Ovid) databases. Included studies needed to report a reference measurement (matched non-pregnant control group, prepregnancy or postpartum) and measurements made during predetermined gestational-age intervals. Mean differences between reference and pregnancy data were calculated using the random-effects model described by DerSimonian and Laird. RESULTS: Forty-eight studies were included in the meta-analysis, with publication dates ranging from 1977 to 2016. During normotensive pregnancy, most geometric indices started to increase in the second trimester. Left ventricular mass (LVM) increased by 28.36 (95% CI, 19.73-37.00) g (24%), and relative wall thickness (RWT) increased by 0.03 (95% CI, 0.02-0.05) (10%) compared with those in the reference group. During hypertensive pregnancy, LVM and RWT increased more than during normotensive pregnancy (92 (95% CI, 75.46-108.54) g (95%) and 0.14 (95% CI, 0.09-0.19) (56%), respectively). CONCLUSIONS: During normotensive pregnancy, most cardiac geometric indices change from the second trimester onwards. Both LVM and RWT increase, by 20% and 10%, respectively, consistent with concentric rather than eccentric remodeling. Cardiac adaptation in hypertensive pregnancy deviates from that in healthy pregnancy by a greater change in LVM (95% increase from reference) and RWT (56% increase from reference).
Authors: Laura Ormesher; Suzanne Higson; Matthew Luckie; Stephen A Roberts; Heather Glossop; Andrew Trafford; Elizabeth Cottrell; Edward D Johnstone; Jenny E Myers Journal: Hypertension Date: 2020-10-05 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: James S Castleman; Alena Shantsila; Richard A Brown; Eduard Shantsila; Gregory Y H Lip Journal: J Hum Hypertens Date: 2022-02-25 Impact factor: 3.012
Authors: Martijn F Hoes; Zoltan Arany; Johann Bauersachs; Denise Hilfiker-Kleiner; Mark C Petrie; Karen Sliwa; Peter van der Meer Journal: Nat Rev Cardiol Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 49.421
Authors: Natalie A Bello; C Noel Bairey Merz; Haywood Brown; Melinda B Davis; Neal W Dickert; Stephanie C El Hajj; Cindy Giullian; Odayme Quesada; Ki Park; Rupa M Sanghani; Leslee Shaw; Annabelle Santos Volgman; Nanette K Wenger; Dominique Williams; Carl J Pepine; Kathryn J Lindley Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2021-04-13 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Maya Reddy; Leah Wright; Daniel Lorber Rolnik; Wentao Li; Ben Willem Mol; Andre La Gerche; Fabricio da SilvaCosta; Euan M Wallace; Kirsten Palmer Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2019-11-08 Impact factor: 5.501