Plasma volume expansion for treatment of women with pre-eclampsia

Echocardiographic assessment and critical care management of peri-partum women with unexpected left ventricular failure

Introduction

Cardiac disease remains the largest single cause of maternal death. Whilst uncommon, left ventricular failure during pregnancy and delivery can be devastating to both mother and child. Echocardiography can play a significant role in rapidly establishing a diagnosis, guiding initial therapy and then monitoring response.

Clinical vignettes

The history, presentation and management of three cases of peri-partum left ventricular failure is examined: stress cardiomyopathy in a 34 year old with twins, left ventricular dysfunction secondary to pre-eclampsia in a 22 year old with a singleton pregnancy and a true peri-partum cardiomyopathy in a 42 year old with IVF twins. The defining risk factors, presenting characteristics and echocardiographical findings for each pathology are highlighted.

Conclusion

Echocardiography is playing an increasingly important role in the immediate assessment and management of left ventricular failure. This is especially true in the peri-partum woman, where establishing the correct therapy is both challenging and crucial due to the significant cardiovascular changes that occur around the time of delivery. To this end we believe that echocardiography should be rapidly available to guide the management of these patients by a multidisciplinary team made up of obstetricians, cardiologists, anaesthetists and intensive care physicians.

[Special pathologies of pregnant patients in intensive care medicine]

Da die Inzidenz intensivtherapiepflichtiger Erkrankungen in Schwangerschaft oder Puerperium sehr niedrig ist, werden Intensivmediziner bei der Behandlung dieser Patientinnen vor eine Vielzahl von ungewohnten Herausforderungen gestellt. Die physiologischen und pathophysiologischen Veränderungen während einer Schwangerschaft bedingen einige Besonderheiten bezüglich der intensivmedizinischen Behandlung schwangerer oder kürzlich entbundener Patientinnen. Nachdem im ersten Beitrag dieser CME-Reihe die wichtigsten Prinzipien und aktuellen Empfehlungen zur Versorgung intensivtherapiebedürftiger schwangerer oder frisch entbundener Patientinnen behandelt wurden, fokussiert der zweite Beitrag auf Diagnostik und Therapie spezieller, ausgewählter Krankheitsbilder.

Interventionist versus expectant care for severe pre-eclampsia between 24 and 34 weeks' gestation

BACKGROUND

Severe pre-eclampsia can cause significant mortality and morbidity for both mother and child, particularly when it occurs remote from term, between 24 and 34 weeks' gestation. The only known cure for this disease is delivery. Some obstetricians advocate early delivery to ensure that the development of serious maternal complications, such as eclampsia (fits) and kidney failure are prevented. Others prefer a more expectant approach, delaying delivery in an attempt to reduce the mortality and morbidity for the child that is associated with being born too early.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the comparative benefits and risks of a policy of early delivery by induction of labour or by caesarean section, after sufficient time has elapsed to administer corticosteroids, and allow them to take effect; with a policy of delaying delivery (expectant care) for women with severe pre-eclampsia between 24 and 34 weeks' gestation.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 27 November 2017, and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing the two intervention strategies for women with early onset, severe pre-eclampsia. Trials reported in an abstract were eligible for inclusion, as were cluster-trial designs. We excluded quasi-randomised trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data, and checked them for accuracy. We assessed the quality of the evidence for specified outcomes using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six trials, with a total of 748 women in this review. All trials included women in whom there was no overriding indication for immediate delivery in the fetal or maternal interest. Half of the trials were at low risk of bias for methods of randomisation and allocation concealment; and four trials were at low risk for selective reporting. For most other domains, risk of bias was unclear. There were insufficient data for reliable conclusions about the comparative effects on most outcomes for the mother. Two studies reported on maternal deaths; neither study reported any deaths (two studies; 320 women; low-quality evidence). It was uncertain whether interventionist care reduced eclampsia (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 15.58; two studies; 359 women) or pulmonary oedema (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.00; two studies; 415 women), because the quality of the evidence for these outcomes was very low. Evidence from two studies suggested little or no clear difference between the interventionist and expectant care groups for HELLP (haemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelets) syndrome (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.91; two studies; 359 women; low-quality evidence). No study reported on stroke. With the addition of data from two studies for this update, there was now evidence to suggest that interventionist care probably made little or no difference to the incidence of caesarean section (average RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.12; six studies; 745 women; Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.01; I² = 63%).For the baby, there was insufficient evidence to draw reliable conclusions about the effects on perinatal deaths (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.99; three studies; 343 women; low-quality evidence). Babies whose mothers had been allocated to the interventionist group had more intraventricular haemorrhage (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.15 to 3.29; two studies; 537 women; moderate-quality evidence), more respiratory distress caused by hyaline membrane disease (RR 2.30, 95% CI 1.39 to 3.81; two studies; 133 women), required more ventilation (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.02; two studies; 300 women), and were more likely to have a lower gestation at birth (mean difference (MD) -9.91 days, 95% CI -16.37 to -3.45 days; four studies; 425 women; Heterogeneity: Tau² = 31.74; I² = 76%). However, babies whose mothers had been allocated to the interventionist group were no more likely to be admitted to neonatal intensive care (average RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.60; three studies; 400 infants; Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.05; I² = 84%). Babies born to mothers in the interventionist groups were more likely to have a longer stay in the neonatal intensive care unit (MD 7.38 days, 95% CI -0.45 to 15.20 days; three studies; 400 women; Heterogeneity: Tau² = 40.93, I² = 85%) and were less likely to be small-for-gestational age (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.61; three studies; 400 women). There were no clear differences between the two strategies for any other outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggested that an expectant approach to the management of women with severe early onset pre-eclampsia may be associated with decreased morbidity for the baby. However, this evidence was based on data from only six trials. Further large, high-quality trials are needed to confirm or refute these findings, and establish if this approach is safe for the mother.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Hypertensive Pregnancy Disorders. Guideline of DGGG (S1-Level, AWMF Registry No. 015/018, December 2013)

Purpose: Official guideline published and coordinated by the German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG). Hypertensive pregnancy disorders contribute significantly to perinatal as well as maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide. Also in Germany these diseases are a major course for hospitalization during pregnancy, iatrogenic preterm birth and long-term cardiovascular morbidity. Methods: This S1-guideline is the work of an interdisciplinary group of experts from a range of different professions who were commissioned by DGGG to carry out a systematic literature search of positioning injuries. Members of the participating scientific societies develop a consensus in an informal procedure. Afterwards the directorate of the scientific society approves the consensus. Recommendations: This guideline summarizes the state-of-art for classification, risk stratification, diagnostic, treatment of hypertensive pregnancy disorders.

Maternal mortality secondary to acute respiratory failure in Colombia: a population-based analysis

PURPOSE

To estimate the mortality rate and trends of respiratory failure in the pregnant and postpartum population of Colombia.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the national registry of mortality in Colombia was performed from 1998 to 2009. Maternal death was defined as death that occurred during pregnancy or up to 42 days postpartum. Two independent investigators reviewed maternal deaths to determine deaths caused by respiratory failure. Inter-rater agreement was assessed by kappa correlation coefficient. Causes of respiratory failure were identified according to the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10).

RESULTS

During the study period, 8,637,486 live births were reported with 6,676 maternal deaths for an overall maternal mortality rate (MMR) of 82.9 per 100,000 live births. Of these, a total of 835 cases were related to respiratory failure, with a specific MMR of 9.69 per 100,000 live births. The main causes of maternal deaths due to respiratory failure included pulmonary sepsis (284 cases, or 3.58 per 100,000 live births), pulmonary embolism (119 cases or 1.50 per 100,000 live births), and preeclampsia-related pulmonary edema (112 cases or 1.41 per 100,000 live births). All-cause maternal mortality ratio decreased yearly from 1998 to 2009 by -3.76% (95% CI -4.83 to -2.67), while the trend of mortality secondary to respiratory failure remained stable over time (P = 0.449).

CONCLUSIONS

Respiratory failure is an important cause of mortality in the obstetric population in Colombia, with pulmonary sepsis as the lead cause of respiratory failure among maternal deaths. While overall maternal mortality rates have decreased in the last decade, respiratory failure-related deaths have remained stable over time.

Postpartum acute renal failure: a multicenter study of risk factors in patients admitted to ICU

Background

Even in developed countries, severe specific pregnancy complications may occur in the immediate postpartum period and require admission to the ICU. The characteristics and risk factors of acute renal failure (ARF) induced by these complications and their treatments are not well known.

Methods

We performed a retrospective multicenter study in three intensive care departments linked to level III maternity wards in the north of France. All patients admitted to ICU for postpartum complications over a 5-year period (2008 to 2012) were included. Clinical and biological data, delivery characteristics, type of complications, and treatments were compared by univariate and multivariate analyses according to the occurrence and severity of ARF.

Results

One hundred eighty-two patients admitted to ICU for postpartum complications were included in the study. Sixty-eight patients (37%) developed an ARF: 49 with a low or medium severity and 19 with a severe ARF requiring renal replacement therapy. Hemolysis, elevated liver enzyme, and low platelet count (HELLP) syndrome on its own (p = 0.047) or combined with postpartum haemorrhage (p = 0.003), previous treatment by hyperoncotic albumin infusion (p = 0.001) and blockade of fibrinolysis by tranexamic acid (p = 0.03), was associated with secondary ARF. By multivariate analysis, the only independent factors were the association of HELLP syndrome with postpartum haemorrhage and the use of hyperoncotic albumin infusion.

Conclusions

HELLP syndrome associated with postpartum haemorrhage induces a high risk of ARF in the complicated postpartum setting. A particular attention should be given to treatments that could worsen the kidney function in that situation.

Antenatal interventions to reduce preterm birth: an overview of Cochrane Systematic Reviews

BACKGROUND

Several factors are associated with an increased risk of preterm birth (PTB); therefore, various interventions might have the potential to influence it. Due to the large number of interventions that address PTB, the objective of this overview is to summarise evidence from Cochrane reviews regarding the effects and safety of these different interventions.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Included reviews should be based on randomised controlled trials comparing antenatal non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions that directly or indirectly address PTB with placebo/no treatment or routine care in pregnant women at less than 37 completed weeks of gestation without signs of threatened preterm labour. We considered PTB at less than 37 completed weeks of gestation as the primary outcome.

RESULTS

We included 56 Cochrane systematic reviews. Three interventions increased PTB risk significantly. Twelve interventions led to a statistically significant lower incidence of PTBs. However, this reduction was mostly observed in defined at-risk subgroups of pregnant women. The remaining antenatal interventions failed to prove a significant effect on PTB < 37 weeks, but some of them at least showed a positive effect in secondary outcomes (e.g., reduction in early PTBs). As an unintended result of this review, we identified 28 additional Cochrane reviews which intended to report on PTB < 37 weeks, but were not able to find any RCTs reporting appropriate data.

CONCLUSIONS

The possible effects of a diverse range of interventions on PTB have been evaluated in Cochrane systematic reviews. Few interventions have been demonstrated to be effective and a small number have been found to be harmful. For around half of the interventions evaluated, the Cochrane review concluded that there was insufficient evidence to provide sound recommendations for clinical practice. No RCT evidence is available for a number of potentially relevant interventions.

Drugs for treatment of very high blood pressure during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Very high blood pressure during pregnancy poses a serious threat to women and their babies. The aim of antihypertensive therapy is to lower blood pressure quickly but safety, to avoid complications. Antihypertensive drugs lower blood pressure but their comparative effectiveness and safety, and impact on other substantive outcomes is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To compare different antihypertensive drugs for very high blood pressure during pregnancy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (9 January 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were randomised trials. Participants were women with severe hypertension during pregnancy. Interventions were comparisons of one antihypertensive drug with another.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and assessed trial quality. Two review authors extracted data and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-five trials (3573 women) with 15 comparisons were included. Women allocated calcium channel blockers were less likely to have persistent high blood pressure compared to those allocated hydralazine (six trials, 313 women; 8% versus 22%; risk ratio (RR) 0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21 to 0.66). Ketanserin was associated with more persistent high blood pressure than hydralazine (three trials, 180 women; 27% versus 6%; RR 4.79, 95% CI 1.95 to 11.73), but fewer side-effects (three trials, 120 women; RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.53) and a lower risk of HELLP (haemolysis, elevated liver enzymes and lowered platelets) syndrome (one trial, 44 women; RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.81).Labetalol was associated with a lower risk of hypotension compared to diazoxide (one trial 90 women; RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.99) and a lower risk of caesarean section (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.02), although both were borderline for statistical significance.Both nimodipine and magnesium sulphate were associated with a high incidence of persistent high blood pressure, but this risk was lower for nimodipine compared to magnesium sulphate (one trial, 1650 women; 47% versus 65%; RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.93). Nimodipine was associated with a lower risk of respiratory difficulties (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.99), fewer side-effects (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.85) and less postpartum haemorrhage (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.92) than magnesium sulphate. Stillbirths and neonatal deaths were not reported.There are insufficient data for reliable conclusions about the comparative effects of any other drugs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Until better evidence is available the choice of antihypertensive should depend on the clinician's experience and familiarity with a particular drug; on what is known about adverse effects; and on women's preferences. Exceptions are nimodipine, magnesium sulphate (although this is indicated for women who require an anticonvulsant for prevention or treatment of eclampsia), diazoxide and ketanserin, which are probably best avoided.

Interventionist versus expectant care for severe pre-eclampsia between 24 and 34 weeks' gestation

BACKGROUND

Severe pre-eclampsia can cause significant mortality and morbidity for both mother and child, particularly when it occurs remote from term, between 24 and 34 weeks' gestation. The only known cure for this disease is delivery. Some obstetricians advocate early delivery to ensure that the development of serious maternal complications, such as eclampsia (fits) and kidney failure are prevented. Others prefer a more expectant approach delaying delivery in an attempt to reduce the mortality and morbidity for the child associated with being born too early.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the review was to compare the effects of a policy of interventionist care and early delivery with a policy of expectant care and delayed delivery for women with early onset severe pre-eclampsia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (28 February 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing the two intervention strategies for women with early onset severe pre-eclampsia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Data were checked for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

Four trials, with a total of 425 women are included in this review. Trials were at low risk of bias for methods of randomisation and allocation concealment; high risk for blinding; unclear risk for incomplete outcome data and other bias; and low risk for selective reporting. There are insufficient data for reliable conclusions about the comparative effects on most outcomes for the mother. For the baby, there is insufficient evidence for reliable conclusions about the effects on stillbirth or death after delivery (risk ratio (RR) 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 1.71; four studies; 425 women). Babies whose mothers had been allocated to the interventionist group had more intraventricular haemorrhage (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.14; one study; 262 women), more hyaline membrane disease (RR 2.30, 95% CI 1.39 to 3.81; two studies; 133 women), require more ventilation (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.02; two studies; 300 women) and were more likely to have a lower gestation at birth in days (average mean difference (MD) -9.91, 95% CI -16.37 to -3.45; four studies; 425 women), more likely to be admitted to neonatal intensive care (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.58) and have a longer stay in the neonatal intensive care unit (average MD 11.14 days, 95% CI 1.57 to 20.72 days; two studies; 125 women) than those allocated an expectant policy. Nevertheless, babies allocated to the interventionist policy were less likely to be small-for-gestational age (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.65; two studies; 125 women). Women who had been allocated to the interventionist group were more likely to have a caesarean section (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.18; four studies; 425 women) than those allocated an expectant policy. There were no statistically significant differences between the two strategies for any other outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that an expectant approach to the management of women with severe early onset pre-eclampsia may be associated with decreased morbidity for the baby. However, this evidence is based on data from only four trials. Further large trials are needed to confirm or refute these findings and establish if this approach is safe for the mother.

How to manage hypertension in pregnancy effectively

The hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) are a leading cause of maternal mortality and morbidity in both well and under-resourced settings. Maternal, fetal, and neonatal complications of the HDP are concentrated among, but not limited to, women with pre-eclampsia. Pre-eclampsia is a systemic disorder of endothelial cell dysfunction and as such, blood pressure (BP) treatment is but one aspect of its management. The most appropriate BP threshold and goal of antihypertensive treatment are controversial. Variation between international guidelines has more to do with differences in opinion rather than differences in published data. For women with severe hypertension [defined as a sustained systolic BP (sBP) of ≥160 mmHg and/or a diastolic BP (dBP) of ≥110 mmHg], there is consensus that antihypertensive therapy should be given to lower the maternal risk of central nervous system complications. The bulk of the evidence relates to parenteral hydralazine and labetalol, or to oral calcium channel blockers such as nifedipine capsules. There is, however, no consensus regarding management of non-severe hypertension (defined as a sBP of 140-159 mmHg or a dBP of 90-109 mmHg), because the relevant randomized trials have been underpowered to define the maternal and perinatal benefits and risks. Although antihypertensive therapy may decrease the occurrence of BP values of 160-170/100-110 mmHg, therapy may also impair fetal growth. The potential benefits and risks do not seem to be associated with any particular drug or drug class. Oral labetalol and methyldopa are used most commonly, but many different β-adrenoceptor blockers and calcium channel blockers have been studied in clinical trials.

Magnesium sulphate versus diazepam for eclampsia

BACKGROUND

Eclampsia, the occurrence of a seizure in association with pre-eclampsia, remains a rare but serious complication of pregnancy. A number of different anticonvulsants are used to control eclamptic fits and to prevent further fits.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of magnesium sulphate compared with diazepam when used for the care of women with eclampsia. Magnesium sulphate is compared with phenytoin and with lytic cocktail in other Cochrane reviews.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 September 2010) and CENTRAL (2010, Issue 3).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing magnesium sulphate (intravenous or intramuscular administration) with diazepam for women with a clinical diagnosis of eclampsia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors assessed and extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

We have included seven trials, involving 1396 women. Three trials (1030 women) were good quality. Magnesium sulphate was associated with a reduction in maternal death (seven trials;1396 women; risk ratio (RR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 0.92) and recurrence of seizures (seven trials;1390 women; RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.55) compared to diazepam. There were no clear differences in other measures of maternal morbidity.There was no clear difference in perinatal mortality (four trials; 788 infants; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.34) or neonatal mortality (four trials; 759 infants; RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.84). In the magnesium sulphate group, fewer liveborn babies had an Apgar score less than seven at one minute (two trials; 597 babies; RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.87) or at five minutes (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.90), and fewer appeared to need intubation at the place of birth (two trials; 591 infants; RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.00). There was no difference in admission to a special care nursery (four trials; 834 infants; RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.05), but fewer babies in the magnesium sulphate group had a length of stay more than seven days (three trials 631 babies; RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.96).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Magnesium sulphate for women with eclampsia reduces the risk ratio of maternal death and of recurrence of seizures, compared with diazepam.

Magnesium sulphate and other anticonvulsants for women with pre-eclampsia

BACKGROUND

Eclampsia, the occurrence of a seizure (fit) in association with pre-eclampsia, is rare but potentially life-threatening. Magnesium sulphate is the drug of choice for treating eclampsia. This review assesses its use for preventing eclampsia.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of magnesium sulphate, and other anticonvulsants, for prevention of eclampsia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (4 June 2010), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 3).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing anticonvulsants with placebo or no anticonvulsant, or comparisons of different drugs, for pre-eclampsia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors assessed trial quality and extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 trials. Six (11,444 women) compared magnesium sulphate with placebo or no anticonvulsant: magnesium sulphate more than a halved the risk of eclampsia (risk ratio (RR) 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 0.58; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 100, 95% CI 50 to 100), with a non-significant reduction in maternal death (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.10) but no clear difference in serious maternal morbidity (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.32). It reduced the risk of placental abruption (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.83; NNTB 100, 95% CI 50 to 1000), and increased caesarean section (RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.10). There was no clear difference in stillbirth or neonatal death (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.15). Side effects, primarily flushing, were more common with magnesium sulphate (24% versus 5%; RR 5.26, 95% CI 4.59 to 6.03; number need to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 6, 95% CI 5 to 6).Follow-up was reported by one trial comparing magnesium sulphate with placebo: for 3375 women there was no clear difference in death (RR 1.79, 95% CI 0.71 to 4.53) or morbidity potentially related to pre-eclampsia (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.26) (median follow-up 26 months); for 3283 children exposed in utero there was no clear difference in death (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.84) or neurosensory disability (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.58) at age 18 months.Magnesium sulphate reduced eclampsia compared to phenytoin (three trials, 2291 women; RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.60) and nimodipine (one trial, 1650 women; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.77).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Magnesium sulphate more than halves the risk of eclampsia, and probably reduces maternal death. There is no clear effect on outcome after discharge from hospital. A quarter of women report side effects with magnesium sulphate.

Magnesium sulphate versus phenytoin for eclampsia

BACKGROUND

Eclampsia, the occurrence of a seizure in association with pre-eclampsia, remains a rare but serious complication of pregnancy. A number of different anticonvulsants have been used to control eclamptic fits and to prevent further seizures.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of magnesium sulphate compared with phenytoin when used for the care of women with eclampsia. Magnesium sulphate is compared with diazepam and with lytic cocktail in other Cochrane reviews.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 April 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing magnesium sulphate (intravenous or intramuscular administration) with phenytoin for women with a clinical diagnosis of eclampsia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We have included data from seven trials, involving 972 women. One large trial (775 women) was of good quality. Magnesium sulphate was associated with a substantial reduction in the recurrence of seizures, when compared to phenytoin (six trials, 972 women; risk ratio (RR) 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24 to 0.49). The trend in maternal mortality favours magnesium sulphate, but the difference does not reach statistical significance (three trials, 847 women; RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.05). There were reductions in the risk of pneumonia (one trial, RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.79), ventilation (one trial, RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.91) and admission to an intensive care unit (one trial, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.89) associated with the use of magnesium sulphate rather than phenytoin.For the baby, magnesium sulphate was associated with fewer admissions to a special care baby unit (SCBU) (one trial, 518 babies; RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.91) and fewer babies who died or were in SCBU for more than seven days (one trial, 643 babies; RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.95) than phenytoin. There was no clear difference in perinatal deaths (two trials, 665 babies; (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.09).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Magnesium sulphate, rather than phenytoin, for women with eclampsia reduces the risk ratio of recurrence of seizures, probably reduces the risk of maternal death, and improves outcome for the baby. Magnesium sulphate is the drug of choice for women with eclampsia. The use of phenytoin should be abandoned.

Magnesium sulphate versus lytic cocktail for eclampsia

BACKGROUND

Eclampsia, the occurrence of a seizure in association with pre-eclampsia, is a rare but serious complication of pregnancy. A number of different anticonvulsants have been used to control eclamptic fits and to prevent further seizures.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of magnesium sulphate compared with lytic cocktail (usually chlorpromazine, promethazine and pethidine) when used for the care of women with eclampsia. Magnesium sulphate is compared with diazepam and with phenytoin in other Cochrane reviews.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (July 2010) and the Cochrane Central Register of Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 2).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing magnesium sulphate (intravenous or intramuscular administration) with lytic cocktail for women with a clinical diagnosis of eclampsia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (L Duley and D Chou) assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three small trials (total 397 women) of average quality in the review. Magnesium sulphate was associated with fewer maternal deaths (risk ratio (RR) 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.59; 3 trials, 397 women) and was better at preventing further seizures (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.12; 3 trials, 397 women) than lytic cocktail. Magnesium sulphate was also associated with less respiratory depression (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.91; 2 trials, 198 women), less coma (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.74; 1 trial, 108 women), and less pneumonia (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.67; 2 trials, 307 women). There was no clear difference in the RR for any death of the baby (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.05 to 2.38, random effects; 2 trials, 177 babies).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Magnesium sulphate, rather than lytic cocktail, for women with eclampsia reduces the RR of maternal death, of further seizures and of serious maternal morbidity (respiratory depression, coma, pneumonia). Magnesium sulphate is the anticonvulsant of choice for women with eclampsia; the use of lytic cocktail should be abandoned.

Evidence for perinatal and child health care guidelines in crisis settings: can Cochrane help?

BACKGROUND

It is important that healthcare provided in crisis settings is based on the best available research evidence. We reviewed guidelines for child and perinatal health care in crisis situations to determine whether they were based on research evidence, whether Cochrane systematic reviews were available in the clinical areas addressed by these guidelines and whether summaries of these reviews were provided in Evidence Aid.

METHODS

Broad internet searches were undertaken to identify relevant guidelines. Guidelines were appraised using AGREE and the clinical areas that were relevant to perinatal or child health were extracted. We searched The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify potentially relevant reviews. For each review we determined how many trials were included, and how many were conducted in resource-limited settings.

RESULTS

Six guidelines met selection criteria. None of the included guidelines were clearly based on research evidence. 198 Cochrane reviews were potentially relevant to the guidelines. These reviews predominantly addressed nutrient supplementation, breastfeeding, malaria, maternal hypertension, premature labour and prevention of HIV transmission. Most reviews included studies from developing settings. However for large portions of the guidelines, particularly health services delivery, there were no relevant reviews. Only 18 (9.1%) reviews have summaries in Evidence Aid.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not identify any evidence-based guidelines for perinatal and child health care in disaster settings. We found many Cochrane reviews that could contribute to the evidence-base supporting future guidelines. However there are important issues to be addressed in terms of the relevance of the available reviews and increasing the number of reviews addressing health care delivery.

The diagnosis and treatment of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: new findings for antenatal and inpatient care

BACKGROUND

Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) are among the leading causes of maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality. New guidelines and findings from clinical trials must be taken into account so that the diagnosis and treatment of HDP can be optimized.

METHODS

Current guidelines, Cochrane reviews, metaanalyses, and randomized, controlled trials were retrieved by a search in PubMed and the Cochrane Library for reports published from 2006 to March 2009. These publications were then analyzed and evaluated for their evidence levels (EL).

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Aside from hypertension and proteinuria, the definition of preeclampsia (PE) should also take organ dysfunction into account. Important aspects of antenatal care include the following: the early recognition of risk factors, measurement of the uterine arteries in the 1st and 2nd trimesters with Doppler ultrasonography (A diagnostic tool which is now well established), prophylactic oral administration of 100 mg of acetylsalicylic acid daily from the beginning of pregnancy, particularly in high-risk patients (EL I++), and appropriate measurement of blood pressure and urinary protein. Patients should be hospitalized whenever indicated. Therapeutic goals are adequate treatment of hypertension, as well as seizure prophylaxis with magnesium sulphate in severe preeclampsia to prevent maternal cerebrovascular complications (EL I++). If delivery is indicated, it should be performed, regardless of the gestational age (EL IV). Careful monitoring during the puerperium and a general medical review six weeks after delivery are essential. Women with preeclampsia have a significantly elevated long-term risk of developing cardiovascular diseases in later life (EL I++).

[Anesthetic management of parturients with pre-eclampsia and eclampsia]

Preeclampsia is a pregnancy-associated illness affecting multiple organ systems. Symptoms typically occur after the 20th week of gestation and consist of hypertension (>140/90 mmHg) and proteinuria (>300 mg/day). It is one of the leading causes of premature birth worldwide and early diagnosis and treatment are essential for both fetal and maternal health. Therapy is aimed at lowering blood pressure sufficiently to prevent the most severe complications such as intracranial hemorrhages. At the same time attention must be paid to the possible untoward effects of blood pressure medications on uteroplacental perfusion and fetal well being. Magnesium is the cornerstone for both prevention and control of eclamptic cerebrovascular events. In cases of severe preeclampsia and eclampsia prompt delivery is indicated, often carried out by Cesarean section (>34 weeks of gestation). Compared to general anesthesia, regional anesthesia techniques offer certain advantages to both mother and fetus and in the absence of contraindications are the methods of choice.

Drugs for treatment of very high blood pressure during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Very high blood pressure during pregnancy poses a serious threat to women and their babies. Antihypertensive drugs lower blood pressure. Their comparative effects on other substantive outcomes, however, is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To compare different antihypertensive drugs for very high blood pressure during pregnancy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (28 February 2006) and CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 2).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were randomised trials. Participants were women with severe hypertension during pregnancy. Interventions were comparisons of one antihypertensive drug with another.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-four trials (2949 women) with 12 comparisons were included. Women allocated calcium channel blockers rather than hydralazine were less likely to have persistent high blood (five trials, 263 women; 6% versus 18%; relative risk (RR) 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 0.70). Ketanserin was associated with more persistent high blood pressure than hydralazine (four trials, 200 women; 27% versus 6%; RR 4.79, 95% CI 1.95 to 11.73), but fewer side-effects (three trials, 120 women; RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.53) and a lower risk of HELLP (Haemolysis, Elevated Liver enzymes and Lowered Platelets) syndrome (one trial, 44 women, RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.81). Labetalol was associated with a higher risk of hypotension (one trial 90 women; RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.99) and caesarean section (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.02) than diazoxide. Data were insufficient for reliable conclusions about other outcomes. The risk of persistent high blood pressure was greater for nimodipine compared to magnesium sulphate (two trials 1683 women; 47% versus 65%; RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.93). Nimodipine was also associated with a higher risk of eclampsia (RR 2.24, 95% CI 1.06 to 4.73) and respiratory difficulties (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.99), but fewer side-effects (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.86) and less postpartum haemorrhage (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.92) than magnesium sulphate. Stillbirths and neonatal deaths were not reported. There are insufficient data for reliable conclusions about the comparative effects of any other drugs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Until better evidence is available, the choice of antihypertensive should depend on the clinician's experience and familiarity with a particular drug, and on what is known about adverse effects. Exceptions are diazoxide, ketanserin, nimodipine and magnesium sulphate, which are probably best avoided.

A randomized trial of plasma volume expansion in hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: influence on the pulsatility indices of the fetal umbilical artery and middle cerebral artery

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of plasma volume expansion on the pulsatility indices of the fetal umbilical and middle cerebral arteries.

STUDY DESIGN

Two hundred sixteen patients with severe preeclampsia, HELLP (hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelet count) syndrome, eclampsia, hypertension-related fetal growth restriction, and gestational ages between 24 and 34 completed weeks of gestation were assigned randomly for temporizing treatment with plasma volume expansion (n = 111 patients; 250 mL hydroxyethyl starch 6% twice daily in 4 hours, and NaCl 0.9% between doses of hydroxyethyl starch and with intravenous medication) or without plasma volume expansion (n = 105; only NaCl 0.9% when necessary with medication). Measurements of the pulsatility index of the umbilical and middle cerebral arteries were performed at admission, after 16 to 48 hours, 60 to 120 hours, and 7 to 11 days.

RESULTS

Median gestational age was 30 weeks in both groups. Infused volumes of plasma volume expansion in the treatment group (total median, 813 mL/d) were associated with a significant decrease of hemoglobin concentration. Changes from baseline measurements of the umbilical and middle cerebral arteries were not different between the groups nor within subgroups during the first 7 to 11 days.

CONCLUSION

Plasma volume expansion did not influence the pulsatility indices of the umbilical and middle cerebral arteries.

Interventionist versus expectant care for severe pre-eclampsia before term

BACKGROUND

Severe pre-eclampsia can cause significant mortality and morbidity for both mother and child, particularly when it occurs well before term. The only known cure for this disease is delivery. Some obstetricians advocate early delivery to prevent the development of serious maternal complications, such as eclampsia (fits) and kidney failure. Others prefer a more expectant approach in an attempt to delay delivery and, hopefully, reduce the mortality and morbidity for the child associated with being born too early.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the review was to compare the effects of a policy of interventionist care and early delivery with a policy of expectant care and delayed delivery for women with early onset severe pre-eclampsia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We search the register of trials maintained by the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group (April 2002) and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2002).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing the two intervention strategies for women with early onset severe pre-eclampsia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial quality was assessed using the criteria set out in the Cochrane Reviewers' Handbook. Data were extracted and checked independently by both reviewers.

MAIN RESULTS

Two trials (133 women) are included in this review. There are insufficient data for reliable conclusions about the comparative effects on outcome for the mother. For the baby, there is insufficient evidence for reliable conclusions about the effects on stillbirth or death after delivery (relative risk (RR) 1.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 to 5.41). Babies whose mothers had been allocated to the interventionist group had more hyaline membrane disease (RR 2.3, 95% CI 1.39 to 3.81), more necrotising enterocolitis (RR 5.5, 95% CI 1.04 to 29.56) and were more likely to need admission to neonatal intensive care (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.55) than those allocated an expectant policy. Nevertheless, babies allocated to the interventionist policy were less likely to be small for gestational age (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.90). There were no statistically significant differences between the two strategies for any other outcomes.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There are insufficient data for any reliable recommendation about which policy of care should be used for women with severe early onset pre-eclampsia. Further large trials are needed.

Plasma volume expansion for treatment of women with pre-eclampsia

BACKGROUND

Plasma volume is reduced amongst women with pre-eclampsia. This association has led to the suggestion that expanding the plasma volume might improve maternal and uteroplacental circulation, and so potentially improve outcome for both the woman and her baby.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to assess the effects of plasma volume expansion for the treatment of women with pre-eclampsia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The register of trials maintained by the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register Issue 1 1999 were searched for trials meeting the selection criteria.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials were included. Quasi-random designs were excluded. Participants were women with hypertension during pregnancy, with or without proteinuria. Women who were postpartum at trial entry were excluded. Interventions were any comparison of plasma volume expansion with no expansion, or of one plasma volume expander with another.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two reviewers. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion. There was no blinding of authorship or results.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials involving 61 women were included in this review. All compared a colloid solution with no plasma volume expansion. For every outcome reported, the confidence intervals are very wide and cross the no effect line.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence for any reliable estimates of the effects of plasma volume expansion for women with pre-eclampsia.