Fetal cardiac remodeling and dysfunction is associated with both preeclampsia and fetal growth restriction
Forskningsoutput: Tidskriftsbidrag › Artikel i vetenskaplig tidskrift
Background: Preeclampsia and fetal growth restriction share some pathophysiologic features and are both associated with placental insufficiency. Fetal cardiac remodeling has been described extensively in fetal growth restriction, whereas little is known about preeclampsia with a normally grown fetus. Objective: To describe fetal cardiac structure and function in pregnancies complicated by preeclampsia and/or fetal growth restriction as compared with uncomplicated pregnancies. Study design: This was a prospective, observational study including pregnancies complicated by normotensive fetal growth restriction (n=36), preeclampsia with a normally grown fetus (n=35), preeclampsia with fetal growth restriction (preeclampsia with a normally grown fetus–fetal growth restriction, n=42), and 111 uncomplicated pregnancies matched by gestational age at ultrasound. Fetal echocardiography was performed at diagnosis for cases and recruitment for uncomplicated pregnancies. Cord blood concentrations of B-type natriuretic peptide and troponin I were measured at delivery. Univariate and multiple regression analysis were conducted. Results: Pregnancies complicated by preeclampsia and/or fetal growth restriction showed similar patterns of fetal cardiac remodeling with larger hearts (cardiothoracic ratio, median [interquartile range]: uncomplicated pregnancies 0.27 [0.23–0.29], fetal growth restriction 0.31 [0.26–0.34], preeclampsia with a normally grown fetus 0.31 [0.29–0.33), and preeclampsia with fetal growth restriction 0.28 [0.26–0.33]; P<.001) and more spherical right ventricles (right ventricular sphericity index: uncomplicated pregnancies 1.42 [1.25–1.72], fetal growth restriction 1.29 [1.22–1.72], preeclampsia with a normally grown fetus 1.30 [1.33–1.51], and preeclampsia with fetal growth restriction 1.35 [1.27–1.46]; P=.04) and hypertrophic ventricles (relative wall thickness: uncomplicated pregnancies 0.55 [0.48–0.61], fetal growth restriction 0.67 [0.58–0.8], preeclampsia with a normally grown fetus 0.68 [0.61–0.76], and preeclampsia with fetal growth restriction 0.66 [0.58–0.77]; P<.001). Signs of myocardial dysfunction also were observed, with increased myocardial performance index (uncomplicated pregnancies 0.78 z scores [0.32–1.41], fetal growth restriction 1.48 [0.97–2.08], preeclampsia with a normally grown fetus 1.15 [0.75–2.17], and preeclampsia with fetal growth restriction 0.45 [0.54–1.94]; P<.001) and greater cord blood B-type natriuretic peptide (uncomplicated pregnancies 14.2 [8.4–30.9] pg/mL, fetal growth restriction 20.8 [13.1–33.5] pg/mL, preeclampsia with a normally grown fetus 31.8 [16.4–45.8] pg/mL and preeclampsia with fetal growth restriction 37.9 [15.7–105.4] pg/mL; P<.001) and troponin I as compared with uncomplicated pregnancies. Conclusion: Fetuses of preeclamptic mothers, independently of their growth patterns, presented cardiovascular remodeling and dysfunction in a similar fashion to what has been previously described for fetal growth restriction. Future research is warranted to better elucidate the mechanism(s) underlying fetal cardiac adaptation in these conditions.
|Enheter & grupper|
Ämnesklassifikation (UKÄ) – OBLIGATORISK
|Tidskrift||American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology|
|Status||Published - 2020|
|Peer review utförd||Ja|