Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34615491›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2021

Fetal growth restriction as the initial finding of preeclampsia is a clinical predictor of maternal and neonatal prognoses: a single-center retrospective study.

Masaya Takahashi, Shintaro Makino, Kyoko Oguma, Haruka Imai, Ai Takamizu, Akari Koizumi, Koyo Yoshida

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The central role of creatine and polyamines in fetal growth restriction.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Masaya TakahashiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Juntendo University Urayasu Hospital, Tomioka 2-1-1, Urayasu City, Chiba, 279-0021, Japan.
Shintaro MakinoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Juntendo University Urayasu Hospital, Tomioka 2-1-1, Urayasu City, Chiba, 279-0021, Japan. shintaro@juntendo.ac.jp.
Kyoko OgumaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Juntendo University Urayasu Hospital, Tomioka 2-1-1, Urayasu City, Chiba, 279-0021, Japan.
Haruka ImaiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Juntendo University Urayasu Hospital, Tomioka 2-1-1, Urayasu City, Chiba, 279-0021, Japan.
Ai TakamizuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Juntendo University Urayasu Hospital, Tomioka 2-1-1, Urayasu City, Chiba, 279-0021, Japan.
Akari KoizumiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Juntendo University Urayasu Hospital, Tomioka 2-1-1, Urayasu City, Chiba, 279-0021, Japan.
Koyo YoshidaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Juntendo University Urayasu Hospital, Tomioka 2-1-1, Urayasu City, Chiba, 279-0021, Japan.
Juntendo University Urayasu Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPreeclampsia (PE) is a hypertensive disorder specific to pregnancy that can cause severe maternal-neonatal complications. The International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy revised the PE criteria in 2018; a PE diagnosis can be established in the absence of proteinuria when organ or uteroplacental dysfunction occurs. The initial findings of PE (IFsPE) at the first diagnosis can vary considerably across patients. However, the impacts of different IFsPE on patient prognoses have not been reported. Thus, we investigate the predictors of pregnancy complications and adverse pregnancy outcomes based on IFsPE according to the new criteria.

methodsThis retrospective study included 3729 women who delivered at our hospital between 2015 and 2019. All women were reclassified based on the new PE criteria and divided into three groups based on the IFsPE: Classification 1 (C-1), proteinuria (classical criteria); Classification 2 (C-2), damage to other maternal organs; and Classification 3 (C-3), uteroplacental dysfunction. Pregnancy complications and adverse pregnancy outcomes were assessed and compared among the three groups.

resultsIn total, 104 women with PE were included. Of those, 42 (40.4%), 28 (26.9%), and 34 (32.7%) were assigned to C-1, C-2, and C-3 groups, respectively. No significant differences in maternal characteristics were detected among the three groups, except for gestational age at PE diagnosis (C-1, 35.5 ± 3.0 weeks; C-2, 35.2 ± 3.6 weeks; C-3, 31.6 ± 4.6 weeks, p <  0.01). The rates of premature birth at < 37 weeks of gestation, fetal growth restriction (FGR), and neonatal acidosis were significantly higher in the C-3 group compared to the C-1 and C-2 groups. Additionally, the composite adverse pregnancy outcomes of the C-3 group compared with C-1 and C-2 represented a significantly higher number of patients.

conclusionsPE patients with uteroplacental dysfunction as IFsPE had the most unfavorable prognoses for premature birth, FGR, acidosis, and composite adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Indexed as

Guidelines as TopicFemaleHumansPre-EclampsiaPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsPregnancy OutcomePrognosisRetrospective StudiesAdverse pregnancy outcomesCesarean sectionEclampsiaFetal growth restrictionHypertensive disorder of pregnancyNew ISSHP criteriaNonreassuring fetal statusPreeclampsiaPregnancy complications

Identifiers

PMID34615491
PMCPMC8495959
OpenAlexW3125589036

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.