Clinical and anamnestic risk factors for developing preeclampsia

Authors

  • Sh.B. Kosmuratova НАО «Медицинский университет Астана»
  • Sh.K. Bitemirova
  • Sh.S. Zhakieva
  • G.M. Zhylkaidar
  • G.A. Kaysazhanova

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37800/RM.2.2024.80-87

Keywords:

pregnancy, risk factors, preeclampsia

Abstract

Relevance: Preeclampsia is one of the most important problems in modern obstetrics. Despite many studies, the etiological factors of preeclampsia remain unknown. The main risk factors for the development of preeclampsia are chronic kidney disease (58.6%), vascular pathology
(51.7%), endocrine pathology (38.0%), metabolic syndrome (24.0%), heart disease (22.0% ), and diseases of the gastrointestinal tract (20.7%). The significant frequency of this complication dictates the need for active preventive and therapeutic measures in patients at risk of developing
preeclampsia.
The study aimed to assess the risk of developing preeclampsia based on clinical and anamnestic factors.
Materials and Methods: A case-control study was conducted, which included 218 women (117 controls and 101 cases). An analysis of clinical and anamnestic indicators and gynecological examination data was conducted. To build a prognosis model for preeclampsia with risk
calculation, multivariate analysis (logistic regression) was used.
Results: According to the somatic and gynecological history analysis, the chronic extragenital diseases included pyelonephritis and myopia in Group I; myopia, mastopathy, pyelonephritis, and chronic arterial hypertension in Group II. Varicose veins of the lower extremities occurred with a frequency of 6.9% in Group I and 4.3% in Group II (p>0.05). Of gynecological diseases, cervical erosion was the most common in both groups – 5.9% and 15% of patients. Ovarian cysts and uterine fibroids were detected in 1% of cases each in Group I; polycystic ovary syndrome and an endometrial polyp were detected in 1% of cases in Group II (p<0.05). 

Conclusion: The assessment of the association of anamnestic and clinical data with the risk of developing preeclampsia revealed a statistically significant relation with the subjects’ age, the age of menarche, and systolic and diastolic arterial pressure at admission.

References

Агаева К.В. Проблема преэклампсии в современном акушерстве. Вicник ВДНЗУ «Українська медична стоматологічна академія». 2018;18,(61):288-291.

Agaeva KV. The problem of preeclampsia in modern obstetrics. Vicnik VDNZU «Ukraїns'ka medichna stomatologіchna akademіya». 2018;18,(61):288-291. (in Russ.).

https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/problema-preeklampsii-v-sovremennom-akusherstve/viewer

Andersgaard AB, Acharya G, Mathiesen EB, Johnsen SH, Straume B, Øian P. Recurrence and long-term maternal health risks of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: a population-based study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(2):143.e1-8.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2011.09.032

Barton JR, Barton LA, Istwan NB, Desch CN, Rhea DJ, Stanziano GJ, Sibai BM. Elective delivery at 340/7 to 366/7 weeks' gestation and its impact on neonatal outcomes in women with stable mild gestational hypertension. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;204(1):44.e1-44.e5.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2010.08.030

Частова Е.Н. Преэклампсия: современный взгляд на проблему. БМИК. 2013;№3(3):656.

Chastova EN. Preeclampsia: a modern view of the problem. BMIK. 2013;№3(3):656. (in Russ.).

https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/preeklampsiya-sovremennyy-vzglyad-na-problemu

Sibai BM. Etiology and management of postpartum hypertension-preeclampsia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(6):470-475.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2011.09.002

Ananth CV, Basso O. Impact of pregnancy-induced hypertension on stillbirth and neonatal mortality in first and higher order births: A population-based study. Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass). 2010;21(1):118-123.

https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181c297af

Курочка М.П. Анализ факторов риска преэклампсии и эклампсии в случаях материнских смертей. Саратов Науч-Мед Журн. 2013;9,2:230-234.

Kurochka M.P. Analysis of risk factors for preeclampsia and eclampsia in cases of maternal deaths. Saratov Nauch-Med Zhurn. 2013;9,2:230-234. (in Russ.).

https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/analiz-faktorov-riska-preeklampsii-i-eklampsii-v-sluchayah-materinskih-smertey/viewer

Trogstad L, Magnus P, Stoltenberg C. Pre-eclampsia: risk factors and causal models. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;25(3):329-342.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2011.01.007

Gunnarsdóttir SS, Guðmundsdóttir A, Hardardottir H, Geirsson RT. Diabetes of type 1, pregnancy, and glycemic control. Laeknabladid. 2013;99(7-8):339-344.

https://doi.org/10.17992/lbl.2013.0708.505

Leitner Y, Harel S, Geva R, Eshel R, Yaffo A, Many A. The neurocognitive outcome of IUGR children born to mothers with and without preeclampsia. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012;25(11):2206-2208.

https://doi.org/10.3109/14767058.2012.684164

Díaz Martínez LA, Díaz Pedraza N, Del M, Serrano Díaz NC., Colmenares Mejía CC. The prognosis for children of mothers with preeclampsia. Part 2: long-term effects. Arch. Argent Pediatr. 2011;109(6):519-524.

https://doi.org/10.1590/S0325-00752011000600009

Буштырева И.О., Курочка М.П., Гайда О.В. Прогностические критерии преэклампсии. Российский вестник акушера-гинеколога. 2017;2:59-63.

Bushtyreva IO, Kurochka MP, Gajda OV. Prognostic criteria for preeclampsia. Rossijskij vestnik akushera-ginekologa. 2017;2:59-63. (in Russ.).

https://doi.org/10.17116/rosakush201717259-63.

Published

2024-06-30

How to Cite

[1]
Kosmuratova Ш. , Bitemirova Ш. , Zhakieva Ш., Zhylkaidar Г. and Kaysazhanova Г. 2024. Clinical and anamnestic risk factors for developing preeclampsia. Reproductive Medicine. 2 (Jun. 2024), 80–87. DOI:https://doi.org/10.37800/RM.2.2024.80-87.

Issue

Section

Статьи