Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31714909›Full record

ArticlePLoS medicine2019

Risk factors, management, and outcomes of amniotic fluid embolism: A multicountry, population-based cohort and nested case-control study.

Kathryn E Fitzpatrick, Thomas van den Akker, Kitty W M Bloemenkamp, Catherine Deneux-Tharaux, Alexandra Kristufkova, Zhuoyang Li, Timme P Schaap, Elizabeth A Sullivan, Derek Tuffnell, Marian Knight

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
9.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Kathryn E FitzpatrickNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6476-5307
Thomas van den AkkerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Kitty W M BloemenkampBirth Centre Wilhelmina Children Hospital, Division of Woman and Baby, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Catherine Deneux-TharauxUniversité de Paris, CRESS, Obstetrical Perinatal and Pediatric Epidemiology Research Team, EPOPé, INSERM, Paris, France.
Alexandra KristufkovaFirst Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Zhuoyang LiAustralian Centre for Public and Population Health Research, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7622-150X
Timme P SchaapBirth Centre Wilhelmina Children Hospital, Division of Woman and Baby, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9772-3592
Elizabeth A SullivanAustralian Centre for Public and Population Health Research, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8718-2753
Derek TuffnellBradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, United Kingdom.
Marian KnightNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1984-4575
University Medical Center Utrecht · NLUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of Technology Sydney · AUBradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBComenius University Bratislava · SKInserm · FRLeiden University · NL

Funding

Department of Health NIHR-RP-011-032
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAmniotic fluid embolism (AFE) remains one of the principal reported causes of direct maternal mortality in high-income countries. However, obtaining robust information about the condition is challenging because of its rarity and its difficulty to diagnose. This study aimed to pool data from multiple countries in order to describe risk factors, management, and outcomes of AFE and to explore the impact on the findings of considering United Kingdom, international, and United States AFE case definitions. METHODS AND

findingsA population-based cohort and nested case-control study was conducted using the International Network of Obstetric Survey Systems (INOSS). Secondary data on women with AFE (n = 99-218, depending on case definition) collected prospectively in population-based studies conducted in Australia, France, the Netherlands, Slovakia, and the UK were pooled along with secondary data on a sample of control women (n = 4,938) collected in Australia and the UK. Risk factors for AFE were investigated by comparing the women with AFE in Australia and the UK with the control women identified in these countries using logistic regression. Factors associated with poor maternal outcomes (fatality and composite of fatality or permanent neurological injury) amongst women with AFE from each of the countries were investigated using logistic regression or Wilcoxon rank-sum test. The estimated incidence of AFE ranged from 0.8-1.8 per 100,000 maternities, and the proportion of women with AFE who died or had permanent neurological injury ranged from 30%-41%, depending on the case definition. However, applying different case definitions did not materially alter findings regarding risk factors for AFE and factors associated with poor maternal outcomes amongst women with AFE. Using the most liberal case definition (UK) and adjusting for the severity of presentation when appropriate, women who died were more likely than those who survived to present with cardiac arrest (89% versus 40%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 10.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.93-28.48, p < 0.001) and less likely to have a source of concentrated fibrinogen (40% versus 56%, aOR 0.44, 95% CI 0.21-0.92, p = 0.029) or platelets given (24% versus 49%, aOR 0.23, 95% CI 0.10-0.52, p < 0.001). They also had a lower dose of tranexamic acid (median dose 0.7 g versus 2 g, p = 0.035) and were less likely to have had an obstetrician and/or anaesthetist present at the time of the AFE (61% versus 75%, aOR 0.38, 95% CI 0.16-0.90, p = 0.027). Limitations of the study include limited statistical power to examine factors associated with poor maternal outcome and the potential for residual confounding or confounding by indication.

conclusionsThe findings of our study suggest that when an AFE is suspected, initial supportive obstetric care is important, but having an obstetrician and/or anaesthetist present at the time of the AFE event and use of interventions to correct coagulopathy, including the administration of an adequate dose of tranexamic acid, may be important to improve maternal outcome. Future research should focus on early detection of the coagulation deficiencies seen in AFE alongside the role of tranexamic acid and other coagulopathy management strategies.

Indexed as

AdultAustraliaCase-Control StudiesCohort StudiesEmbolism, Amniotic FluidFemaleFranceHumansIncidenceLogistic ModelsMaternal MortalityNetherlandsOdds RatioPregnancyRisk FactorsSlovakiaTranexamic Acid

Identifiers

PMID31714909
PMCPMC6850527
OpenAlexW2984636364

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.