Predicting complications from pregnancy-related high blood pressure

Publicly released:
International
CC-0. https://pixabay.com/photos/pregnant-woman-belly-mother-parent-6178270/
CC-0. https://pixabay.com/photos/pregnant-woman-belly-mother-parent-6178270/

The existing prediction methods for severe complications of pregnancy-related high blood pressure (preeclampsia) are most accurate in the two days after hospital admission, with the accuracy of predictions deteriorating over time, according to UK and Dutch researchers. Two existing PIERS (Pre-eclampsia Integrated Estimate of RiSk) methods, PIERS Machine Learning (PIERS-ML) and fullPIERS, are designed to predict the risk of adverse maternal outcomes in the 48 hours following hospital admission for preeclampsia, but both methods are regularly used for ongoing assessment beyond the first 48 hours, the experts say. The team used data from 8,843 women diagnosed with preeclampsia at an average gestational age of 36 weeks between 2003 and 2016 for whom PIERS-ML and fullPIERS assessments and health outcomes were available. The study found that neither the PIERS-ML nor fullPIERS method maintained good performance over time. The researchers say there are currently no better options, so clinicians should continue using these two methods, but the predictions should be treated with increasing caution as the pregnancy progresses.

Media release

From: PLOS

Study probes how to predict complications from preeclampsia

Data from 8,843 women diagnosed with preeclampsia during pregnancy showed that existing risk prediction models are most accurate only in the days after diagnosis

The existing prediction models for severe complications of preeclampsia are most accurate only in the two days after hospital admission, with deteriorating performance over time, according to a new study published February 4th in the open-access journal PLOS Medicine by Henk Groen of University of Groningen, the Netherlands, and colleagues.

Preeclampsia is a potentially life-threatening condition that can occur during pregnancy; of women diagnosed with preeclampsia, 5-20% will develop severe complications. Two existing PIERS (Pre-eclampsia Integrated Estimate of RiSk) models, PIERS Machine Learning (PIERS-ML) and the logistic-regression-based fullPIERS, are designed to identify individuals at greatest or least risk of adverse maternal outcomes in the 48 hours following hospital admission for preeclampsia. However, both models are regularly used for ongoing assessment beyond the first 48 hours.

In the new study, researchers used data from 8,843 women diagnosed with preeclampsia at a median gestational age of 36 weeks between 2003 and 2016. Data included PIERS-ML and fullPIERS assessments as well as health outcomes.

The study found that neither the PIERS-ML nor fullPIERS model maintained good performance over time for repeated risk stratification in women with preeclampsia. The PIERS-ML remained generally good at identifying the very high-risk and very-low risk groups over time, but performance of the larger high-risk and low-risk groups deteriorated significantly after 48 hours. The fullPIERS model underperformed compared to the PIERS-ML model.

“Since there are no better options, clinicians may still use these two models for ongoing assessments after the first admission with pre-eclampsia, but the predictions should be treated with increasing caution as the pregnancy progresses,” the authors say. More prediction models are needed that perform well over time, they add.

The authors add, “Pregnancy hypertension outcome prediction models were designed and validated for initial assessment of risks for mothers; this study shows that such ‘static’ models if used repeatedly over days yield increasingly inaccurate predictions.”

Attachments

Note: Not all attachments are visible to the general public. Research URLs will go live after the embargo ends.

Research PLOS, Web page The URL will go live after the embargo ends
Journal/
conference:
PLOS Medicine
Research:Paper
Organisation/s: King’s College London, UK
Funder: TM-C is funded by the University of Strathclyde, through the STRADDLE (University of Strathclyde Diversity in Data Linkage) Centre for Doctoral Training. The PIERS datasets were primarily funded by operating grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (Human development, Child and Youth Health) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Institute for Population and Reproductive Health.
Media Contact/s
Contact details are only visible to registered journalists.