Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Pre Eclampsia Eclampsia and Hypertension
Pre Eclampsia Eclampsia and Hypertension
..................................................
QUESTIONS What are the effects of preventive interventions in women at risk of pre-eclampsia?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 What are the effects of interventions in women who develop mild to moderate hypertension during pregnancy?. . 8 What are the effects of interventions in women who develop severe pre-eclampsia or very high blood pressure during pregnancy?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 What is the best choice of anticonvulsant for women with eclampsia?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 INTERVENTIONS PREVENTION OF PRE-ECLAMPSIA Beneficial Antiplatelet drugs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Calcium supplementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Unknown effectiveness Unknown effectiveness Antioxidants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Glyceryl trinitrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Magnesium supplementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Marine oil (fish oil) and other prostaglandin precursors (evening primrose oil) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Salt restriction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 ECLAMPSIA: ANTICONVULSANTS Unlikely to be beneficial Atenolol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 TREATMENTS FOR MILDMODERATE HYPERTENSION Unknown effectiveness Antihypertensive drugs for mild to moderate hypertension .......................................... 8 Bed rest/admission v day care . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 TREATMENT OF SEVERE EPISODES OF PREECLAMPSIA Beneficial Prophylactic magnesium sulphate in severe preeclampsia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2008. All rights reserved.
Antioxidants in severe pre-eclampsia . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Choice of analgesia during labour with severe preeclampsia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Early delivery for severe early-onset pre-eclampsia . . 1 2 Plasma volume expansion in severe pre-eclampsia . . 1 3
Beneficial Magnesium sulphate for eclampsia (better and safer than other anticonvulsants) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 To be covered in future updates Interventions in women with pre-existing hypertension Treatment of postpartum hypertension Footnote *There is consensus that women with severe hypertension during pregnancy should have antihypertensive treatment, and that women with eclampsia should have an anticonvulsant. Placebo-controlled trials would therefore be unethical.
.................... 1 ....................
INCIDENCE/ PREVALENCE
AETIOLOGY/ The cause of pre-eclampsia is unknown. It is likely to be multifactorial, and may result from deficient [6] RISK FACTORS placental implantation during the first half of pregnancy. Pre-eclampsia is more common among women likely to have a large placenta, such as those with multiple pregnancy, and among women with medical conditions associated with microvascular disease, such as diabetes, hypertension, [7] [8] and collagen vascular disease. Other risk factors include genetic susceptibility, increased [9] [10] parity, and older maternal age. Cigarette smoking seems to be associated with a lower risk of pre-eclampsia, but this potential benefit is outweighed by an increase in adverse outcomes such [11] as low birthweight, placental abruption, and perinatal death. PROGNOSIS The outcome of pregnancy in women with pregnancy-induced hypertension alone is at least as [7] [12] good as that for normotensive pregnancies. However, once pre-eclampsia develops, morbidity and mortality rise for both mother and child. For example, perinatal mortality for women with [7] severe pre-eclampsia is double that for normotensive women. Perinatal outcome is worse with [7] [9] [12] early gestational hypertension. Perinatal mortality also increases in women with severe [13] essential hypertension.
AIMS OF To delay or prevent the development of pre-eclampsia and eclampsia, and to improve outcomes INTERVENTION for women and their children. Once pre-eclampsia has occurred, to minimise morbidity and mortality for women and their children, and to ensure that health service resources are used appropriately.
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2008. All rights reserved.
........................................................... 2
METHODS
QUESTION OPTION
Development of pre-eclampsia Compared with placebo/no antiplatelet drugs Antiplatelet drugs (mainly low-dose aspirin) are more effective at reducing pre-eclampsia in women at risk of pre-eclampsia (high-quality evidence). Preterm birth Compared with placebo/no antiplatelet drugs Antiplatelet drugs (mainly low-dose aspirin) are more effective at reducing the risk of babies being born small for their gestational age to women at risk of pre-eclampsia (high-quality evidence). Perinatal mortality Compared with placebo/no antiplatelet drugs Antiplatelet drugs (mainly low-dose aspirin) are more effective at reducing perinatal mortality (high-quality evidence). For GRADE evaluation of interventions for pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, and hypertension, see table, p 18 . Benefits: We found one systematic review (search date 2006, 59 RCTs, 37,560 women).
[14]
Antiplatelet drugs versus placebo/no antiplatelet drug: The systematic review found that antiplatelet agents (mainly aspirin, but also dipyridamole and ozagrel) significantly reduced pre-eclampsia, premature birth, the proportion of babies born small for gestational age, and infant mortality, in women considered at risk of pre-eclampsia (preeclampsia: 46 RCTs, 1081/16,396 [7%] with antiplatelet v 1292/16,194 [8%] with control; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.89; NNT 72, 95% CI 52 to 119; premature birth: 29 RCTs, 2612/15,629 [17%] with antiplatelet v 2797/15,522 [18%] with control; RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.97; NNT 72, 95% CI 52 to 119; babies born small for gestational age: 36 RCTs, 983/11,904 [8%] with antiplatelet v 1062/11,734 [9%] with control; RR 0.90 95% CI 0.83 to 0.98; infant mortality: 40 RCTs, 414/16,607 [2.5%] with antiplatelet v 475/16,491 [2.9%] with control; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.98; NNT 243, [14] 95% CI 131 to 1666). There were no clear effects on other important outcomes, and no clear benefit from starting treatment before 20 weeks compared with later in pregnancy. The systematic review also found similar relative risk reductions in pre-eclampsia for women at high and moderate risk of pre-eclampsia and its complications for antiplatelets compared with control (women at high risk: 18 RCTs, 323/2070 [16%] with antiplatelet v 425/2051 [21%] with control, RR 0.75, 95% CI BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2008. All rights reserved. ........................................................... 3
Comment:
OPTION
Development of pre-eclampsia Compared with placebo Calcium supplements are more effective at reducing the risk of pre-eclampsia, especially in women with low dietary calcium (high-quality evidence). Preterm birth Compared with placebo Calcium supplementation seems no more effective at reducing preterm birth (moderatequality evidence). Need for further interventions Compared with placebo Calcium supplements seem no more effective at reducing the risk of caesarean delivery (moderate-quality evidence). Maternal or perinatal mortality Compared with placebo Calcium supplements are more effective at reducing the risk of maternal death or serious morbidity (high-quality evidence). Calcium supplements seem no more effective at reducing stillbirth or death of the baby before discharge from hospital (moderate-quality evidence). For GRADE evaluation of interventions for pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, and hypertension, see table, p 18 . Benefits: Calcium supplementation versus placebo: We found one systematic review (search date 2006, 12 RCTs, 15,206 women; see comment below). [17] It found that calcium (mainly 1.52 g daily) significantly reduced the risk of pre-eclampsia compared with placebo (12 RCTs: 368/7578 [5%] with calcium supplementation v480/7628 [6%] with placebo; RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.69). Subgroup analysis found that the greatest reduction in risk of pre-eclampsia was for women with low dietary calcium (low dietary calcium: 198/5058 [4%] with calcium supplementation v 276/5096 [5%] with placebo, RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.70; normal dietary calcium: 169/2505 [7%] with calcium supplementation v 197/2517 [8%] with placebo, RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.20). The review found that, overall, compared with placebo, calcium supplementation significantly reduced the risk of maternal death or serious morbidity (4 RCTs: 167/4856 [3%] with calcium supplementation v 210/4876 [4%] with placebo; RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.97) It found no significant difference between calcium supplements and placebo for the risk of caesarean delivery, preterm birth, stillbirth or death of the baby before discharge from hospital, or birth weight below 2500 g (caesarean delivery: 7 RCTs, 14,710 women, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.01; preterm birth: 10 RCTs, 14,751 women, RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.03; stillbirth or death of the baby before hospital discharge: 10 RCTs, 15,141 women, RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.09; birthweight below 2500 g: 8 RCTs, 14,359 women, RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.03). Follow-up of 514 children at age 7 years in a subset of one trial found that calcium supplementation was associated with fewer children having a distolic blood pressure above the 95th percentile (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.91).
[17]
Harms:
After follow-up of 514 children to age 7 years, the review found no harms associated with maternal [17] calcium supplements. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2008. All rights reserved. ........................................................... 4
OPTION
Development of pre-eclampsia Compared with placebo/no antioxidant We don't know whether antioxidants are more effective at reducing the risk of pre-eclampsia (low-quality evidence). Preterm birth Compared with placebo/no antioxidant Vitamin C plus E seems no more effective at reducing preterm births (moderatequality evidence). Perinatal mortality Compared with placebo/no antioxidant Vitamin C plus E seems no more effective at reducing perinatal deaths (moderate-quality evidence). For GRADE evaluation of interventions for pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, and hypertension, see table, p 18 . Benefits: We found one systematic review (search date 2004, 7 RCTs, 6082 women) of antioxidant treatment [18] (largely either the combination of vitamins C and E or antioxidant minerals, such as selenium), one systematic review (search date 2006, 4 RCTs, 4680 women) reporting solely on the combination [19] of antioxidant vitamins C plus E, and one small subsequent RCT of multiple antioxidant vitamins [20] and minerals. Antioxidants versus placebo/ no antioxidant: The first systematic review found that, compared with no antioxidant, antioxidants significantly reduced the relative risk of pre-eclampsia, and of having a baby small for gestational age (preeclampsia: 7 RCTs, 134/3034 [4%] with antioxidants v 221/3048 [7%] with no antioxidants; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.75; NNT 34, 95% CI 25 to 50; baby small for gestational age: 3 RCTs, 49/309 [13%] with antioxidants v 81/325 [25%] with no antioxidants; RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.87; [18] NNT 12, 95% CI 7 to 34). The second systematic review included 2 RCTs published subsequent [19] to the first review, and 2 RCTs included in the first review. The second systematic review (4680 women) found no significant difference between vitamin C plus E and placebo in the risk of preeclampsia, preterm birth, having a baby small for gestational age, or of the baby dying (preeclampsia: 4 RCTs, 11.0% with vitamins C and E v 11.4% with placebo; RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.13; absolute numbers not reported, results presented graphically; preterm birth: 4 RCTs: 19.5% with vitamins C and E v 18.0% with placebo; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.20; absolute numbers not reported, results presented graphically; having a baby small for gestational age: 4 RCTs: 20.6% with vitamins C and E v 20.0% with placebo; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.19; absolute numbers not reported, results presented graphically; baby death: 4 RCTs, 2.6% with vitamins C and E v 2.3% with placebo; RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.56; absolute numbers not reported, results presented [19] graphically). The small subsequent RCT (60 women) found that significantly fewer women taking a combination of antioxidants developed pre-eclampsia compared with placebo (2/29 [7%] [20] with antioxidants v 9/31 [29%] with placebo; P = 0.04). Harms: The first systematic review found that antioxidants significantly increased the risk of birth before 37 weeks' gestation (3 RCTs: 76/293 [26%] with antioxidants v 54/290 [19%] with no antioxidants; [18] RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.82). The second systematic review did not report further on adverse [19] effects. The largest trial (5021 women) in the first systematic review was quasi-random, and only three of the seven included trials were rated as high quality. There are insufficient data for reliable conclusions about the effects on other substantive outcomes, such as perinatal death. MARINE OIL (FISH OIL) AND OTHER PROSTAGLANDIN PRECURSORS (EVENING PRIMROSE OIL). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Comment:
OPTION
Development of pre-eclampsia Compared with placebo or no treatment Marine oil seems no more effective at reducing the risk of pre-eclampsia (moderate-quality evidence).
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2008. All rights reserved.
...........................................................
Harms:
Comment:
OPTION
Development of pre-eclampsia Compared with placebo/no treatment Glyceryl trinitrate may be no more effective at reducing the risk of preeclampsia (low-quality evidence). For GRADE evaluation of interventions for pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, and hypertension, see table, p 18 . Benefits: Glyceryl trinitrate versus placebo/no treatment: [24] [25] We found no systematic review, but found two RCTs. The first RCT (40 women) found no significant difference in the risk of pre-eclampsia between glyceryl trinitrate patches and placebo [24] (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.60), but the confidence interval was wide. The second RCT (68 [25] women) reported similar results (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.61 to 3.01). Glyceryl trinitrate versus aspirin and dipyridamole: [26] We found one trial (76 women) that was too small to draw any reliable conclusions. Harms: Glyceryl trinitrate versus placebo/no treatment: The first RCT found similar rates of adverse events with glyceryl trinitrate and placebo (skin rash: 4/21 [19%] with glyceryl trinitrate v 4/19 [21%] with placebo; headache: 2/21 [10%] with glyceryl [24] trinitrate v 1/19 [5%] with placebo; significance not reported). The second RCT gave no infor[25] mation on adverse events. Glyceryl trinitrate versus aspirin and dipyridamole: [26] The RCT was too small to draw any reliable conclusions.
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2008. All rights reserved.
...........................................................
Development of pre-eclampsia Compared with placebo Magnesium supplements seem no more effective at reducing the risk of pre-eclampsia (moderate-quality evidence). For GRADE evaluation of interventions for pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, and hypertension, see table, p 18 . Benefits: We found one systematic review (search date 2001, 2 RCTs, 474 women) comparing magnesium [27] supplements versus placebo. It found no significant difference in pre-eclampsia between groups [27] (34/235 [15%] with magnesium v 40/239 [17%] with placebo; RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.32). There was no significant difference between the groups in the number of reported gastrointestinal [27] side effects (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.05). This review included seven trials with 2689 women, of which only two (474 women) reported data for pre-eclampsia. There is, therefore, also a possibility of bias, in that five trials did not report this outcome. SALT RESTRICTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Harms:
Comment:
OPTION
Development of pre-eclampsia Compared with normal dietary intake A low-salt diet seems no more effective at reducing the risk of pre-eclampsia (moderate-quality evidence). For GRADE evaluation of interventions for pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, and hypertension, see table, p 18 . Benefits: We found one systematic review (search date 2005, 2 RCTs, 603 women) comparing reduced salt [28] (advice to restrict dietary salt intake to 20 or 50 mmol/day) with normal dietary salt intake. It found no significant difference for rates of pre-eclampsia, although the trials may have lacked power to detect clinically important effects (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.66). We found no evidence of harmful effects in the trials.
[28]
Harms: Comment:
The trials of salt restriction were conducted in the Netherlands, where advice to restrict salt intake during pregnancy has been routine for many years. Such advice is no longer widespread elsewhere. ATENOLOL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
OPTION
Development of pre-eclampsia Compared with placebo Atenolol seems no more effective at reducing the risk of pre-eclampsia in women without hypertension but with a cardiac output of over 7.4 L/minute (moderate-quality evidence). For GRADE evaluation of interventions for pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, and hypertension, see table, p 18 . Benefits: We found one small RCT (68 women without hypertension selected because they had a cardiac output of over 7.4 L/minute), which found no significant reduction in the risk of pre-eclampsia with atenolol 100 mg daily (1/28 [4%] with atenolol v 5/28 [18%] with placebo; RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.02 to [29] 1.60). This single study was too small for reliable estimates of clinically important effects on substantive outcomes. The RCT found that mean birthweight was significantly lower with atenolol for a subgroup of prim[29] iparous women (mean difference: 440 g; P = 0.02). Although the possible benefits of atenolol for prevention of pre-eclampsia remain unclear, the reduction in birthweight may be real. Concerns about the possible harmful effects of atenolol on fetal growth and development have been discussed for some time (see harms of antihypertensive [30] [31] agents, p 8 ).
Harms:
Comment:
...........................................................
OPTION
Development of severe hypertension or pre-eclampsia Compared with placebo/no antihypertensive drug Antihypertensive drugs may be more effective at reducing the risk of severe hypertension, but not of pre-eclampsia (very low-quality evidence). Mortality Compared with placebo/no antihypertensive drug We dont know whether antihypertensive drugs are more effective at reducing fetal or neonatal deaths (very low-quality evidence). For GRADE evaluation of interventions for pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, and hypertension, see table, p 18 . Benefits: We found two systematic reviews. The first systematic review (search date 2006, 46 RCTs, 4282 women with mild to moderate hypertension) included studies that compared any antihyper[32] tensive drug versus placebo or versus another antihypertensive drug. The second systematic review (search date 2004, 29 RCTs, 2500 women with mild to moderate hypertension) included only studies that compared beta-blockers versus no antihypertensive drug or versus another anti[33] hypertensive drug. Antihypertensive drugs versus placebo or no antihypertensive drug: The first review found that antihypertensive drugs significantly and substantially reduced the risk of developing severe hypertension compared with no antihypertensive drugs (19 RCTs, 2409 [32] women: RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.61; NNT 10, 95% CI 8 to 13). It found no significant difference between groups for pre-eclampsia or fetal or neonatal death (pre-eclampsia: 22 RCTs, 2702 women: RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.13; fetal or neonatal death: 26 RCTs, 3081 women: RR 0.73, [32] 95% CI 0.50 to 1.08). The second review found that beta-blockers significantly reduced the development of severe hypertension compared with no beta-blockers (11 RCTs, 1128 women: RR [33] 0.37, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.53). The review found insufficient evidence for other maternal outcomes. Antihypertensive drugs versus other antihypertensive agents: Neither systematic review found any clear difference among any of these drugs for the risk of de[32] [33] veloping severe hypertension or pre-eclampsia. Harms: The antihypertensive agents included in the systematic reviews seem to have been well tolerated during pregnancy, but adverse effects have not been reported in many RCTs. All antihypertensive drugs cross the placenta, but few trials reported possible adverse effects for the baby. The first review found that beta-blockers seem significantly better compared with methyl dopa for [32] reducing the risk of severe hypertension (8 RCTs, 493 women; RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.99). The second review found that beta-blockers significantly increased the baby's risk of being small [33] for its gestational age (13 RCTs, 854 women: RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.79). Meta regression within a systematic review suggested that lowering blood pressure for women with mild or moderate [34] hypertension may increase the risk of having a baby small for its gestational age. One systematic review (search date 1999, 13 small RCTs in women with pre-existing chronic hypertension) found that ACE inhibitors used in the second or third trimester were associated with fetal renal [35] [36] failure. Fetal exposure to these agents during the first trimester is associated with major [37] congenital malformations. If women using ACE inhibitors are contemplating pregnancy, it would seem advisable to switch them to another drug well in advance of conception. The RCTs were too small to exclude beneficial effects of antihypertensive agents. The trials had problems with methods. Many were not placebo controlled, and few attempted to blind blood pressure measurement. Many important outcomes were reported by only a few studies. We found little evidence about adherence to treatment. One systematic review found that the effects of antihypertensive agents in women with pre-existing chronic hypertension were similar to those described above for women with pregnancy-induced hypertension. The review did not establish or exclude [35] [36] benefit from treatment. We found one study in Russian that is awaiting translation and will [38] be included in future if relevant. BED REST/HOSPITAL ADMISSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
[32] [33] [32] [33]
Comment:
OPTION
Development of severe hypertension or pre-eclampsia Compared with no hospital admission We dont know whether some rest in hospital is more effective than normal activity at home at reducing the incidence of severe hypertension in women with non-proteinuric hypertension (lowquality evidence).
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2008. All rights reserved.
...........................................................
Comment:
QUESTION
OPTION
Seizures Compared with placebo/no anticonvulsants Prophylactic magnesium sulphate is more effective at reducing the risk of eclampsia (high-quality evidence). Compared with phenytoin, nimodipine, or diazepam Magnesium sulphate is more effective than phenytoin and nimodipine at reducing the risk of eclampsia (high-quality evidence). Need for further interventions Compared with placebo/no anticonvulsants Magnesium sulphate increases the need for a caesarean section (highquality evidence). Maternal or perinatal mortality Compared with placebo/no anticonvulsants Prophylactic magnesium sulphate is no more effective at reducing stillbirths, maternal mortality, neonatal mortality, or neurosensory disability or mortality in children at 18 months (high-quality evidence). Adverse effects Compared with placebo/no anticonvulsants Magnesium sulphate causes more adverse effects, such as flushing, and respiratory depression (moderate-quality evidence). For GRADE evaluation of interventions for pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, and hypertension, see table, p 18 . Benefits: We found one systematic review (search date 2002, 13 RCTs, 15,558 women).
[41]
...........................................................
OPTION Seizures
..........................................................
10
Harms:
Comment:
OPTION
We found no direct information about whether a combination of vitamin E plus vitamin C plus allopurinol is better than no active treatment. For GRADE evaluation of interventions for pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, and hypertension, see table, p 18 . Benefits: We found no systematic review. We found one RCT (56 women with severe pre-eclampsia at [52] 2432 weeks' gestation) comparing vitamin E plus vitamin C plus allopurinol versus placebo. It was too small for reliable conclusions to be drawn. We found insufficient evidence to draw reliable conclusions. None.
Harms: Comment:
..........................................................
11
Harms:
Comment:
The drug used for patient-controlled intravenous analgesia was not reported in the first RCT. [54] Pethidine was used in the second RCT.
OPTION
Perinatal mortality Compared with expectant management We dont know whether interventionist management is more effective at reducing stillbirths or perinatal deaths in babies born to mothers with severe early-onset pre-eclampsia (low-quality evidence). Neonatal morbidity Compared with expectant management Interventionist management may increase the risk of respiratory distress syndrome, necrotising enterocolitis, and rates of admission to neonatal intensive care in babies born to mothers with severe pre-eclampsia (low-quality evidence). For GRADE evaluation of interventions for pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, and hypertension, see table, p 18 . Benefits: We found one systematic review (search date 2006, 2 RCTs, 133 women at 2834 weeks' gestation), which compared a policy of early elective delivery by induction or caesarean section depending on individual obstetric circumstances (interventionist management) versus a policy of delayed delivery to allow more time for fetal maturation (expectant management) in women with severe pre[55] eclampsia. It found that, for the baby, there was no significant difference in rates of stillbirth or death after delivery for interventionist management compared with expectant care (RR of death or stillbirth for interventional v expectant care 1.50, 95% CI 0.42 to 5.41). Babies of mothers in the interventionist-management group were significantly less likely to be small for gestational age than those in the expectant group (RR for interventionist v expectant management 0.36, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.90). The review found insufficient evidence about effects on maternal outcomes. The review found that interventionist management significantly increased risks of respiratory distress syndrome (34/66 [52%] babies with interventionist management v 15/67 [22%] babies with expectant care; RR 2.30, 95% CI 1.39 to 3.81), necrotising enterocolitis (RR 5.5, 95% CI 1.04 to 29.56), and rate of admission to neonatal intensive care (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.55) in babies born to [55] mothers with severe pre-eclampsia. We found insufficient evidence for reliable conclusions about effects of expectant management on maternal morbidity. None. .......................................................... 12
Harms:
Comment:
Harms:
Comment:
QUESTION OPTION
Seizures Compared with diazepam Magnesium sulphate is more effective at reducing further fits (high-quality evidence). Compared with phenytoin Magnesium sulphate is more effective at reducing further fits (high-quality evidence). Compared with lytic cocktail Magnesium sulphate seems more effective at reducing further fits (moderate-quality evidence). Neonatal morbidity Compared with diazepam Magnesium sulphate is more effective at reducing the proprotion of babies with Apgar scores less than 7 at 5 minutes, and at reducing the proportion of babies with a length of stay in a special-care baby unit for more than 7 days (high-quality evidence). Compared with phenytoin Magnesium sulphate seems more effective at reducing pneumonia, requirement for ventilation, and admission to an intensive-care unit, and at reducing the proportion of babies with a composite outcome of death or staying in a special-care baby unit for more than 7 days (moderate-quality evidence). Compared with lytic cocktail Magnesium sulphate is more effective at reducing pneumonia and respiratory depression (high-quality evidence). .......................................................... 13
Comment:
..........................................................
14
SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES
Anticonvulsants for women with eclampsia One RCT including 199 women added comparing magnesium sulphate [64] versus lytic cocktail. Categorisation of magnesium sulphate for eclampsia (better and safer than other anticonvulsants) unchanged (Beneficial). Antihypertensive agents (under question in women who develop mildmoderate hypertension during pregnancy) One already-included systematic review comparing antihypertensive drug versus placebo/no antihypertensive [32] drug or versus other antihypertensives updated, and six new RCTs added to its analysis. The overall conclusions [32] of the review unchanged, in that it found antihypertensive drugs significantly reduced the risk of developing severe hypertension compared with no antihypertensive drugs, but it found no significant difference between antihypertensive drugs and no hypertensive drugs in pre-eclampsia or fetal or neonatal death. Categorisation of antihypertensive drugs for mild to moderate hypertension unchanged (Unknown effectiveness). [49] Antihypertensive drugs for very high blood pressure One already-included systematic review updated and [50] [51] two subsequent RCTs added. All the additional data compares different antihypertensives versus each other. Categorisation of antihypertensive drugs for very high blood pressure unchanged (Likely to be beneficial). Antioxidents (under question on the effects of preventative interventions in women at risk of pre-eclampsia) [19] One systematic review comparing the combination of vitamin C and E versus placebo and one small subsequent [20] RCT comparing the effects of a combination of different antioxidents versus placebo added to an already reported [19] systematic review comparing antioxidents versus no antioxidents. The new review found no significant difference between vitamin C plus E and placebo in the risk of pre-eclampsia, preterm birth, having a baby small for gestational age, or in the risk of the baby dying. Categorisation of antioxidants unchanged (Unknown effectiveness). Antiplatelet drugs One already reported systematic review updated and 8 RCTs added to the review and its analysis. [14] Overall conclusions of the review unchanged: antiplatelet drugs still categorised as Beneficial. Calcium supplementation One already-included systematic review updated with one large RCT added to its anal[17] ysis. Overall conclusions of the review unchanged: calcium supplementation still categorised as Beneficial. Interventionist care for severe early-onset pre-eclampsia Option title changed to Interventionist care, which involves a policy of early elective delivery by induction of caesarean section depending on individual obstetric circumstances. [55] One already-reported systematic review updated. No new data added. Categorisation of early delivery for severe early-onset pre-eclampsia unchanged (Unknown effectiveness). Marine oil (fish oil), and other prostaglandin precursors (evening primrose oil) Option title clarified and changed from 'Fish oil, evening primrose oil, or both' to 'marine oil (fish oil), and other prostaglandin precursors (evening [22] [21] primrose oil)'. Two systematic reviews added and benefits and harms data enhanced. Categorisation of marine oil (fish oil), and other prostaglandin precursors (evening primrose oil) unchanged (Unknown effectiveness). [57] Plasma volume expansion (in severe pre-eclampsia) One RCT including 216 women added. Benefits and harms data enhanced, categorisation unchanged (Unknown effectiveness). Prophylactic anticonvulsants for women with severe pre-eclampsia Two long-term follow-up studies in women [42] [43] and children from one large already-included RCT added. Categorisation of prophylactic magnesium sulphate in severe pre-eclampsia unchanged (Beneficial).
REFERENCES
1. Gifford RW, August PA, Cunningham G, et al. Report of the national high blood pressure education program working group on high blood pressure in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000;183(suppl):122. WHO international collaborative study of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Geographic variation in the incidence of hypertension in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1988;158:8083.[PubMed] Douglas K, Redman C. Eclampsia in the United Kingdom. BMJ 1994;309:13951400.[PubMed] Crowther CA. Eclampsia at Harare maternity hospital. An epidemiological study. S Afr Med J 1985;68:927929.[PubMed] Bergstrom S, Povey G, Songane F, et al. Seasonal incidence of eclampsia and its relationship to meteorological data in Mozambique. J Perinat Med 1992;20:153158.[PubMed] Roberts JM, Redman CWG. Pre-eclampsia: more than pregnancy-induced hypertension. Lancet 1993;341:14471451.[PubMed] Taylor DJ. The epidemiology of hypertension during pregnancy. In: Rubin PC, ed. Hypertension in pregnancy. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, 1988:223240. Sibai BM, Caritis S, Hauth J. Risks of preeclampsia and adverse neonatal outcomes among women with pregestational diabetes mellitus. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Network of Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000;182:364369.[PubMed] MacGillivray I. Pre-eclampsia. The hypertensive disease of pregnancy. London: WB Saunders, 1983. 15. 12. 13. 10. 11. Duckitt K, Harrington D. Risk factors for pre-eclampsia at antenatal booking: systematic review of controlled studies. BMJ 2005;330:565. Conde-Agudelo A, Althabe F, Belizan JM, et al. Cigarette smoking during pregnancy and risk of preeclampsia: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;181:10261035. Search date 1998; primary sources Medline, Embase, Popline, Cinahl, Lilacs, and hand searches of proceedings of international meetings on pre-eclampsia and reference lists of retrieved articles.[PubMed] Chamberlain GVP, Philip E, Howlett B, et al. British births. London: Heinemann, 1970. Sibai B, Lindheimer M, Hauth J, et al. Risk factors for preeclampsia, abruptio placentae, and adverse neonatal outcomes among women with chronic hypertension. N Engl J Med 1998;339:667671.[PubMed] Duley L, Henderson-Smart DJ, Knight M, et al. Antiplatelet agents for preventing pre-eclampsia and its complications. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2007. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Search date 2006. Grant A, Farrell B, Heineman J, et al. Low dose aspirin in pregnancy and early childhood development: follow up of the collaborative low dose aspirin study in pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1995;102:861868.[PubMed] Parazzini F, Bortolus R, Chatenoud L, et al. Follow-up of children in the Italian study of aspirin in pregnancy. Lancet 1994;343:1235. Atallah AN, Hofmeyr GJ, Duley L. Calcium supplementation during pregnancy for preventing hypertensive disorders and related problems. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2007. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Search date 2006. 2.
3. 4. 5.
14.
6. 7. 8.
16. 17.
9.
..........................................................
15
20.
43.
21.
44.
45.
22.
46. 47.
23.
24.
48.
25. 26.
49.
50.
27.
51.
28.
52.
29.
53.
54.
55.
56.
33.
57.
34.
58.
35.
59.
36.
60.
37.
61.
38. 39.
62.
63.
40.
64.
..........................................................
16
Disclaimer
The information contained in this publication is intended for medical professionals. Categories presented in Clinical Evidence indicate a judgement about the strength of the evidence available to our contributors prior to publication and the relevant importance of benefit and harms. We rely on our contributors to confirm the accuracy of the information presented and to adhere to describe accepted practices. Readers should be aware that professionals in the field may have different opinions. Because of this and regular advances in medical research we strongly recommend that readers' independently verify specified treatments and drugs including manufacturers' guidance. Also, the categories do not indicate whether a particular treatment is generally appropriate or whether it is suitable for a particular individual. Ultimately it is the readers' responsibility to make their own professional judgements, so to appropriately advise and treat their patients. To the fullest extent permitted by law, BMJ Publishing Group Limited and its editors are not responsible for any losses, injury or damage caused to any person or property (including under contract, by negligence, products liability or otherwise) whether they be direct or indirect, special, incidental or consequential, resulting from the application of the information in this publication.
..........................................................
17
Outcome
Comparison
Quality
GRADE
Comment
What are the effects of preventive interventions in women at risk of pre-eclampsia? at least 46 RCTs (at least [14] 32,590 women) 29 (31,151) 40 (33,098) 12 (15,206) 4 (9722)
[17] [17] [14]
Development of preeclampsia Preterm birth Perinatal mortality Development of preeclampsia Maternal mortality Perinatal mortality Preterm birth Need for other interventions Development of preeclampsia Preterm birth Perinatal mortality
Antiplatelet drugs v placebo/no antiplatelet drugs Antiplatelet drugs v placebo/no antiplatelet drugs Antiplatelet drugs v placebo/no antiplatelet drugs Calcium supplementation v placebo Calcium supplementation v placebo Calcium supplementation v placebo Calcium supplementation v placebo Calcium supplementation v placebo Antioxidants v placebo/no antioxidant
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 +1 0 0 0 0 0
High High High High High Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results Quality point deducted for methodological weaknesses. Consistency point deducted for conflicting results Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results Quality point deducted for uncertainty about blinding Quality point deducted for uncertainty about blinding Quality points deducted for sparse data and incomplete reporting of results Quality point deducted for uncertainty about bias Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results Quality point deducted for sparse data Effect-size point added for RR less than 0.5
[14]
[17]
[17]
[17]
4 (?) 4 (?)
[19]
Antioxidants v placebo/no antioxidant Antioxidants v placebo/no antioxidant Marine oil and other prostaglandin precursors v placebo/no treatment Marine oil and other prostaglandin precursors v placebo/no treatment Glyceryl trinitrate v placebo/no treatment Magnesium supplementation v placebo Salt restriction v normal dietary salt intake Atenolol v placebo
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
[20]
[21]
[21]
[24]
[27]
[28]
[29]
What are the effects of interventions in women who develop mildmoderate hypertension during pregnancy?
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2008. All rights reserved.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
26 (3081)
[32]
Very low
1 (218)
[39]
Bed rest/hospital admission v no hospital admission Bed rest/hospital admission v no hospital admission
Low
1 (218)
[39]
Moderate
What are the effects of interventions in women who develop severe pre-eclampsia or very high blood pressure during pregnancy? 6 (11,444) We found two reports of long-term [42] follow-up for women 1 (3283)
[43] [41]
Seizures
Magnesium sulphate v placebo/no anticonvulsant Magnesium sulphate v placebo/no anticonvulsant Magnesium sulphate v placebo/no anticonvulsant Magnesium sulphate v placebo/no anticonvulsant Magnesium sulphate v phenytoin, nimodipine, or diazepam Magnesium sulphate v placebo/no anticonvulsant Magnesium sulphate v placebo/no anticonvulsant Antihypertensive drugs v each other
+1
High
Effect-size point added for RR less than 0.5 Quality point deducted for poor follow-up
Child development Maternal mortality Perinatal mortality Seizures Need for further interventions Adverse effects Seizures
4 4 4 4 4 4 4
1 0 0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 +1 0 0 0
[41]
[41]
[41]
at least 1 RCT (at least [41] 10,108 women) at least 1 RCT (9092 [41] women) 3 (505)
[49] [50] [51]
Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Directness point deducted for no direct comparison between drugs Quality points deducted for incomplete reporting of results and for sparse data Quality points deducted for incomplete reporting of results and for sparse data Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Directness point deducted for differences in disease severities
[55]
Interventionist management v expectant management Interventionist management v expectant management Plasma volume expansion v control
4 4 4
2 2 1
0 0 0
0 0 1
0 0 0
[55]
[56]
Seizures
............................................................................................................
19
Development of pre-eclampsia, seizures, morbidity, prematurity, use of resources, mortality, adverse effects Type of evidence 4 Consistency 0 Directness 1 Effect size 0
Quality 1
GRADE Low
Comment Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Directness point deducted for differences in disease severities Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Directness point deducted for differences in disease severities
4 (277)
[56]
[57]
Maternal morbidity
Low
What is the best choice of anticonvulsant for women with eclampsia? 7 (1441) 2 (597) 3 (631)
[60]
Seizures Neonatal morbidity Duration of hospital stay Maternal mortality Seizures Need for further interventions Maternal mortality Perinatal mortality
[64]
Magnesium sulphate v diazepam Magnesium sulphate v diazepam Magnesium sulphate v diazepam Magnesium sulphate v diazepam Magnesium sulphate v phenytoin Magnesium sulphate v phenytoin Magnesium sulphate v phenytoin Magnesium sulphate v phenytoin Magnesium sulphate v lytic cocktail Magnesium sulphate v lytic cocktail Magnesium sulphate v lytic cocktail
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
High High High High High Moderate High Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results Consistency point deducted for conflicting results Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results
6 (1336)
5 RCTs (at least 895 [62] women) 1 (775) 2 (797) 1 (643) 2 (397) 2 (397) 2 (397)
[61]
[62] [62]
[63]
[63]
[64]
[63]
[64]
Type of evidence: 4 = RCT; 2 = Observational Consistency: similarity of results across studies Directness: generalisability of population or outcomes Effect size: based on relative risk or odds ratio
............................................................................................................
20