Julio Mateus1, Roger B Newman2, Cuilin Zhang3, Sarah J Pugh3, Jagteshwar Grewal3, Sungduk Kim3, William A Grobman4, John Owen5, Anthony C Sciscione6, Ronald J Wapner7, Daniel Skupski8, Edward Chien9, Deborah A Wing10, Angela C Ranzini11, Michael P Nageotte12, Nicole Gerlanc13, Paul S Albert3, Katherine L Grantz3. 1. Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC. Electronic address: juliomateus@hotmail.com. 2. Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC. 3. Division of Intramural Population Health Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD. 4. Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL. 5. Center for Women's Reproductive Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL. 6. Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Christiana Hospital, Newark, DE. 7. Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY. 8. New York Presbyterian Queens, Flushing; Weill Cornell School of Medicine, New York, NY. 9. Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Providence, Rhode Island. 10. University of California, Irvine, and Long Beach Memorial Medical Center/Miller Children's Hospital Irvine, CA. 11. Saint Peter's University Hospital, New Brunswick, NJ; MetroHealth Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH. 12. Miller Children's and Women's Hospital, Long Beach, CA. 13. Prospective Group, Inc, contractor for the Division of Intramural Population Health Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fetal growth patterns in pregnancy-associated hypertensive disorders is poorly understood because prospective longitudinal data are lacking. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare longitudinal fetal growth trajectories between normotensive women and those with pregnancy-associated hypertensive disorders. STUDY DESIGN: This is a study based on data from a prospective longitudinal cohort study of fetal growth performed at 12 US sites (2009-2013). Project gestational age was confirmed by ultrasound between 8 weeks 0 days and 13 weels 6 days, and up to 6 ultrasounds were performed across gestation. Hypertensive disorders were diagnosed based on 2002 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guidelines and grouped hierarchically as severe preeclampsia (including eclampsia or HELLP [hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelet count] syndrome), mild preeclampsia, severe gestational hypertension, mild gestational hypertension, or unspecified hypertension. Women without any hypertensive disorder constituted the normotensive group. Growth curves for estimated fetal weight and individual biometric parameters including biparietal diameter, head circumference, abdominal circumference, and femur and humerus length were calculated for each group using linear mixed models with cubic splines. Global and weekly pairwise comparisons were performed between women with a hypertensive disorder compared with normotensive women to analyze differences while adjusting for confounding variables. Delivery gestational age and birthweights were compared among groups. RESULTS: Of 2462 women analyzed, 2296 (93.3%) were normotensive, 63 (2.6%) had mild gestational hypertension, 54 (2.2%) mild preeclampsia, 32 (1.3%) severe preeclampsia, and 17 (0.7%) unspecified hypertension. Compared with normotensive women, those with severe preeclampsia had estimated fetal weights that were reduced between 22 and 38 weeks (all weekly pairwise values of P < .008). Women with severe preeclampsia compared with those without hypertension also had significantly smaller fetal abdominal circumference between 23-31 and 33-37 weeks' gestation (weekly pairwise values of P < .04). Scattered weekly growth differences were noted on other biometric parameters between these 2 groups. The consistent differences in estimated fetal weight and abdominal circumference were not observed between women with other hypertensive disorders and those who were normotensive. Women with severe preeclampsia delivered significantly earlier (mean gestational age 35.9 ± 3.2 weeks) than the other groups (global P < .0001). Birthweights in the severe preeclampsia group were also significantly lower (mean -949.5 g [95% confidence interval, -1117.7 to -781.2 g]; P < .0001) than in the normotensive group. CONCLUSION: Among women with pregnancy-associated hypertensive disorders, only those destined to develop severe preeclampsia demonstrated a significant and consistent difference in fetal growth (ie, smaller estimated fetal weight and abdominal circumference) when compared with normotensive women.
BACKGROUND: Fetal growth patterns in pregnancy-associated hypertensive disorders is poorly understood because prospective longitudinal data are lacking. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare longitudinal fetal growth trajectories between normotensive women and those with pregnancy-associated hypertensive disorders. STUDY DESIGN: This is a study based on data from a prospective longitudinal cohort study of fetal growth performed at 12 US sites (2009-2013). Project gestational age was confirmed by ultrasound between 8 weeks 0 days and 13 weels 6 days, and up to 6 ultrasounds were performed across gestation. Hypertensive disorders were diagnosed based on 2002 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guidelines and grouped hierarchically as severe preeclampsia (including eclampsia or HELLP [hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelet count] syndrome), mild preeclampsia, severe gestational hypertension, mild gestational hypertension, or unspecifiedhypertension. Women without any hypertensive disorder constituted the normotensive group. Growth curves for estimated fetal weight and individual biometric parameters including biparietal diameter, head circumference, abdominal circumference, and femur and humerus length were calculated for each group using linear mixed models with cubic splines. Global and weekly pairwise comparisons were performed between women with a hypertensive disorder compared with normotensive women to analyze differences while adjusting for confounding variables. Delivery gestational age and birthweights were compared among groups. RESULTS: Of 2462 women analyzed, 2296 (93.3%) were normotensive, 63 (2.6%) had mild gestational hypertension, 54 (2.2%) mild preeclampsia, 32 (1.3%) severe preeclampsia, and 17 (0.7%) unspecifiedhypertension. Compared with normotensive women, those with severe preeclampsia had estimated fetal weights that were reduced between 22 and 38 weeks (all weekly pairwise values of P < .008). Women with severe preeclampsia compared with those without hypertension also had significantly smaller fetal abdominal circumference between 23-31 and 33-37 weeks' gestation (weekly pairwise values of P < .04). Scattered weekly growth differences were noted on other biometric parameters between these 2 groups. The consistent differences in estimated fetal weight and abdominal circumference were not observed between women with other hypertensive disorders and those who were normotensive. Women with severe preeclampsia delivered significantly earlier (mean gestational age 35.9 ± 3.2 weeks) than the other groups (global P < .0001). Birthweights in the severe preeclampsia group were also significantly lower (mean -949.5 g [95% confidence interval, -1117.7 to -781.2 g]; P < .0001) than in the normotensive group. CONCLUSION: Among women with pregnancy-associated hypertensive disorders, only those destined to develop severe preeclampsia demonstrated a significant and consistent difference in fetal growth (ie, smaller estimated fetal weight and abdominal circumference) when compared with normotensive women.
Authors: Jagteshwar Grewal; Katherine L Grantz; Cuilin Zhang; Anthony Sciscione; Deborah A Wing; William A Grobman; Roger B Newman; Ronald Wapner; Mary E D'Alton; Daniel Skupski; Michael P Nageotte; Angela C Ranzini; John Owen; Edward K Chien; Sabrina Craigo; Paul S Albert; Sungduk Kim; Mary L Hediger; Germaine M Buck Louis Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: E Struwe; G Berzl; R Schild; H Blessing; L Drexel; B Hauck; A Tzschoppe; M Weidinger; M Sachs; C Scheler; E Schleussner; J Dötsch Journal: Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) Date: 2009-06-22 Impact factor: 3.478
Authors: Jasmine Tay; Lin Foo; Giulia Masini; Phillip R Bennett; Carmel M McEniery; Ian B Wilkinson; Christoph C Lees Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Samrawit F Yisahak; Stefanie N Hinkle; Sunni L Mumford; Mengying Li; Victoria C Andriessen; Katherine L Grantz; Cuilin Zhang; Jagteshwar Grewal Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2021-03-03 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Dana E Goin; Sylvia Sudat; Corinne Riddell; Rachel Morello-Frosch; Joshua S Apte; M Maria Glymour; Deborah Karasek; Joan A Casey Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2021-10-14 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: Samrawit F Yisahak; Stefanie N Hinkle; Sunni L Mumford; Jessica L Gleason; Katherine L Grantz; Cuilin Zhang; Jagteshwar Grewal Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2022-09-01 Impact factor: 17.152
Authors: Jung Ho Han; So Jin Yoon; Hye Sun Lee; Goeun Park; Joohee Lim; Jeong Eun Shin; Ho Seon Eun; Min Soo Park; Soon Min Lee Journal: Yonsei Med J Date: 2022-07 Impact factor: 3.052
Authors: Jan S Erkamp; Vincent W V Jaddoe; Liesbeth Duijts; Irwin K M Reiss; Annemarie G M G J Mulders; Eric A P Steegers; Romy Gaillard Journal: Prenat Diagn Date: 2020-04-07 Impact factor: 3.050