ArticleThe American journal of case reports2016
Two Obese Patients with Presumptive Diagnosis of Anaphylactoid Syndrome of Pregnancy Presenting at a Community Hospital.
Article in The American journal of case reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Contemporary local anaesthetic-associated adverse events and mortality: a pharmacovigilance analysis of a US reporting system.British journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnaphylactoid syndrome of pregnancy (ASP) is a rare but extremely serious complication, with an estimated incidence in North America of 1 in 15 200 deliveries. Despite its rarity, ASP is responsible for approximately 10% of all childbirth-associated deaths in the United States. At present, there is no validated biomarker or specific set of risk factors sufficiently predictive of ASP risk to incorporate into clinical practice. Toward the goal of developing a methodology predictive of an impending ASP event for use by obstetricians, anesthesiologists, and other practitioners participating in infant deliveries, physicians encountering an ASP event have been encouraged to report the occurrence of a case and its biologically plausible risk factors. CASE REPORT: Herein, we report on 2 patients who presented with a presumptive diagnosis of ASP to the delivery unit of a community hospital. Patient One was a 21-year-old, obese (5'11" tall, 250 lbs., BMI 34.9) white female, 1 pregnancy, no live births (G1P0), estimated gestational age (EGA) 40.2 weeks. Patient Two was a 29-year-old, obese (5'7" tall, 307 lbs., BMI 48.1) Hispanic female, second pregnancy, with 1 previous live birth via C-section (G2P1-0-0-1). Her pregnancy was at gestational age 38 weeks plus 2 days.
conclusionsPatient One had 2 possible risk factors: administration of Pitocin to induce labor and post-coital spotting from recent intercourse. Patient Two suffered premature rupture of the placental membranes. Both Patient One and Patient Two had very high body mass indices (BMIs), at the 97th and 99th percentiles, respectively. In the relatively few cases of anaphylactoid syndrome of pregnancy described to date, this is the first report of a possible association with high BMI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.