Literature DB >> 28892982

Comparison of the Different Definition Criteria for the Diagnosis of Amniotic Fluid Embolism.

Hiroshi Kobayashi1, Juria Akasaka1, Katsuhiko Naruse1, Toshiyuki Sado1, Taihei Tsunemi1, Emiko Niiro1, Kana Iwai1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: There are several sets of criteria for the diagnosis of Amniotic Fluid Embolism (AFE), but little is known about their degree of agreement. AIM: To evaluate the concordance of the Japan criteria for AFE in comparison with two definitions: the US AFE registration entry criteria (the US criteria) and UK Obstetric Surveillance System criteria for defining cases of amniotic fluid embolism (the UK criteria).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted in which the AFE cases registered in the Obstetrical Gynaecological Society of Kinki District in Japan for the period of April 2005 to December 2012 have been analysed by the expert steering obstetric committee, organized by the members of the Obstetric Research group. Cohen's kappa coefficient was used to calculate the agreement among three clinical diagnoses. For inter-group comparison, the Pearson Chi-square test was used (for categorical) and Mann-Whitney test was used (for continuous variables).
RESULTS: Among the 26 cases registered for this period, a total of 18 women were selected as having AFE according to the Japan criteria. Five women died (case fatality rate 27.8%). Agreement between the Japan criteria and the US and UK criteria was k = 0.453 and k = 0.538, respectively, reflecting moderate agreement. However, only 38.9% were given a diagnosis of AFE according to all three criteria. The factor that most often caused disagreement in diagnosis between the Japan criteria and the US criteria was "onset within 30 minutes postpartum". The UK criteria excluded "women with postpartum haemorrhage as the first presenting feature in whom there was no evidence of cardiorespiratory compromise". The case fatality rates in US and UK are higher than in Japan (50.0% and 38.5% vs 27.8%), but this did not result in a significant difference (p=0.497).
CONCLUSION: The groups of subjects identified as having AFE by the Japan criteria had a medium agreement with the US (k=0.453) or UK criteria (k=0.538). These three definition criteria identified different subgroups of patients. Such disagreement has serious implications for research and treatment.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Amniotic fluid embolism; Criteria; Definition; Disagreement

Year:  2017        PMID: 28892982      PMCID: PMC5583832          DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/26746.10283

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res        ISSN: 0973-709X


  22 in total

1.  Amniotic fluid embolism - an update.

Authors:  D Tuffnell; M Knight; F Plaat
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 6.955

2.  Landmark article, Oct. 1941: Maternal pulmonary embolism by amniotic fluid as a cause of obstetric shock and unexpected deaths in obstetrics. By Paul E. Steiner and C. C. Lushbaugh.

Authors:  P E Steiner; C C Lushbaugh
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1986-04-25       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 3.  Incidence, diagnosis and pathophysiology of amniotic fluid embolism.

Authors:  F Ito; J Akasaka; N Koike; C Uekuri; A Shigemitsu; H Kobayashi
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2014-05-27       Impact factor: 1.246

Review 4.  Amniotic Fluid Embolism.

Authors:  Amir A Shamshirsaz; Steven L Clark
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 2.844

5.  Pregnancy-associated Deaths: 31-year Experience.

Authors:  Koichi Yoneyama; Atsuko Sekiguchi; Takashi Matsushima; Rieko Kawase; Akihito Nakai; Hirobumi Asakura; Toshiyuki Takeshita
Journal:  J Nippon Med Sch       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 0.920

6.  Maternal death analysis from the Japanese autopsy registry for recent 16 years: significance of amniotic fluid embolism.

Authors:  Naohiro Kanayama; Junko Inori; Hatsue Ishibashi-Ueda; Makoto Takeuchi; Masahiro Nakayama; Satoshi Kimura; Yoshio Matsuda; Jun Yoshimatsu; Tomoaki Ikeda
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol Res       Date:  2010-11-18       Impact factor: 1.730

7.  Amniotic fluid embolism: analysis of the national registry.

Authors:  S L Clark; G D Hankins; D A Dudley; G A Dildy; T F Porter
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  Proposed diagnostic criteria for the case definition of amniotic fluid embolism in research studies.

Authors:  Steven L Clark; Roberto Romero; Gary A Dildy; William M Callaghan; Richard M Smiley; Arthur W Bracey; Gary D Hankins; Mary E D'Alton; Mike Foley; Luis D Pacheco; Rakesh B Vadhera; J Patrick Herlihy; Richard L Berkowitz; Michael A Belfort
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2016-06-29       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  Amniotic fluid embolism: pathophysiology and new strategies for management.

Authors:  Naohiro Kanayama; Naoaki Tamura
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol Res       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 1.730

10.  Field-Usable Lateral Flow Immunoassay for the Rapid Detection of White Spot Syndrome Virus (WSSV).

Authors:  Prabir Kumar Kulabhusan; Jyutika M Rajwade; Vimal Sugumar; Gani Taju; A S Sahul Hameed; Kishore M Paknikar
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  2 in total

1.  Reversible pulmonary artery perfusion abnormalities in the postpartum period as a precursor to the development of pulmonary arterial hypertension.

Authors:  Devaki O'Riordan; David G Kiely; B Ronan O'Driscoll
Journal:  Pulm Circ       Date:  2018-04-19       Impact factor: 3.017

2.  Summary of clinically diagnosed amniotic fluid embolism cases in Korea and disagreement with 4 criteria proposed for research purpose.

Authors:  Jin-Ha Kim; Hyun-Joo Seol; Won Joon Seong; Hyun-Mee Ryu; Jin-Gon Bae; Joon Seok Hong; Jeong In Yang; Ji-Hee Sung; Suk-Joo Choi; Soo-Young Oh; Cheong-Rae Roh
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Sci       Date:  2020-12-28
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.