Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40836392›Full record

SynthesisActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2025

Antihypertensive therapy for pregnancy hypertension and implications for fetal and neonatal heart rate monitoring: A systematic review of randomized trials and observational studies.

Akalya Ganeshamoorthy, Omiete Fubara Duke, Hiten D Mistry, Jeffrey N Bone, Marianne Vidler, Edgardo Abalos, Katie Badawy, Asma Khalil, Peter von Dadelszen, Laura A Magee

Abstract readNetwork Meta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

10 authors.

Akalya GaneshamoorthyDepartment of Women and Children's Health, King's College London, London, UK.
Omiete Fubara DukeDepartment of Women and Children's Health, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9805-4714
Hiten D MistryDepartment of Women and Children's Health, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2564-7348
Jeffrey N BoneClinical Research Support Unit, British Columbia Children's Hospital Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7704-1677
Marianne VidlerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Edgardo AbalosDepartment of Obstetrics, Maternity Martín Hospital, Rosario, Santa Fe, Argentina.ORCID 0000-0001-6653-429X
Katie BadawyFaculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
Asma KhalilMolecular & Clinical Sciences Research Institute, St. George's, University of London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2802-7670
Peter von DadelszenDepartment of Women and Children's Health, King's College London, London, UK.
Laura A MageeDepartment of Women and Children's Health, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1355-610X

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research 134293NIHR-Wellcome Partnership for Global Health Research Award 217123/Z/19/ZUK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) MR/P027938/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOur objective was to evaluate whether antihypertensives affect fetal (FHR) or neonatal (neoHR) heart rate. MATERIAL AND

methodsElectronic databases and clinical trial registers were searched to August 31, 2024. Eligibility included randomized (RCTs) or observational studies evaluating antihypertensives for pregnancy hypertension. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. Random effects meta-analysis was used to determine risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Network meta-analysis was undertaken in a sensitivity analysis.

resultsFifty-four RCTs (n = 5736 pregnancies) and 28 observational studies (n = 2 283 855) reported FHR (usually visually-interpreted) or neoHR (usually clinically-assessed). FHR: NON-SEVERE HYPERTENSION: Antihypertensives did not increase adverse FHR effects in RCTs of antihypertensives versus placebo/no therapy (RR = 1.08, 95% CI [0.62-1.89]; I NEOHR: SEVERE HYPERTENSION: RCTs of antihypertensives versus placebo/no therapy were not associated with adverse neoHR effects (RR = 1.26 [0.31-5.19]; I

conclusionsEvidence is inadequate to draw reliable conclusions about the impact of antihypertensives on FHR or neoHR. At present, adverse FHR or neoHR effects should be attributed to evolving placental dysfunction.

Indexed as

Antihypertensive AgentsHeart Rate, FetalHypertension, Pregnancy-InducedFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornObservational Studies as TopicPregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntihypertensive Agentsantihypertensivefetal heart rateneonatal heart rateobservational studypregnancyrandomized trial

Identifiers

PMID40836392
PMCPMC12451204

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.