Should the definition of preeclampsia include a rise in diastolic blood pressure of >/=15 mm Hg to a level <90 mm Hg in association with proteinuria?
2000 Oct
Journal Article
Authors:
Secondary:
Am J Obstet Gynecol
Volume:
183
Pagination:
787-92
Issue:
4
PMID:
11035314
Keywords:
Birth Weight; blood pressure; body mass index; Body Weight; Cesarean Section; Diastole; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Proteinuria; Reference Values; Terminology as Topic
Abstract:
<p>OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to compare baseline characteristics and pregnancy outcomes between normotensive women who did and those who did not have a rise in diastolic blood pressure of >/=15 mm Hg in association with proteinuria.STUDY DESIGN: We studied 4302 healthy nulliparous women from the Calcium for Preeclampsia Prevention trial who were delivered at >/=20 weeks' gestation. We selected as the study group normotensive women who developed proteinuria within 7 days of a rise in diastolic blood pressure of >/=15 mm Hg with respect to baseline on 2 occasions 4 to 168 hours apart. Baseline blood pressure was the mean of measurements at 2 clinic visits before 22 weeks' gestation. Other normotensive women used for comparison were those who did not develop gestational hypertension or a rise in diastolic blood pressure of >/=15 mm Hg in association with proteinuria.RESULTS: Except for greater weight (P <.001), body mass index (P <.001), and systolic blood pressure (P =.05) the baseline characteristics of the 82 women with a rise in diastolic blood pressure of >/=15 mm Hg in association with proteinuria did not differ significantly from those of the other normotensive women. Although they had a greater rate of weight gain (P <.005), larger babies (P =.06), and a 2-fold increase in abdominal delivery (P <.001), there was little other evidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes among these women.CONCLUSION: During normotensive pregnancy a rise in diastolic blood pressure of >/=15 mm Hg in association with proteinuria appears to be benign and is not a useful clinical construct.</p>