Maternal cardiovascular potential and kinetic energy indices in pre‐eclamptic and small‐for‐gestational‐age pregnancies. (1st May 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Gutierrez Henares, J.; Gutierrez Henares, R.; Perry, H.; Khalil, A.; Thilaganathan, B.
• Is Part Of: Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology. Volume 59:Number 5(2022)
• Page Start: 613
• Page End: 618
• Publication Date: 2022-05-01
• Subjects: fetal growth restriction -- hemodynamics -- hypertension -- kinetic energy -- PKR -- potential energy -- pre‐eclampsia -- pregnancy -- SMII -- USCOM; Ultrasonics in obstetrics -- Periodicals; Generative organs, Female -- Diseases -- Diagnosis -- Periodicals; Diagnosis, Ultrasonic -- Periodicals; Genital Diseases, Female -- ultrasonography -- Periodicals; Ultrasonography, Prenatal -- Periodicals; 618.047543
• DOI: 10.1002/uog.24768
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0960-7692

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Objective: Non‐invasive assessment of maternal cardiovascular potential and kinetic energy can be used to derive potential‐to‐kinetic‐energy ratio (PKR) and Smith–Madigan inotropic index (SMII), which reflect the balance between blood pressure and blood flow. The aim of this study was to evaluate PKR and SMII in pregnancies complicated by hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) and/or small‐for‐gestational‐age (SGA) birth. Methods: This was a prospective study that enrolled women with a singleton pregnancy between 5 and 41 weeks' gestation. Women who developed HDP and/or SGA underwent cardiovascular profiling from 20 weeks. To establish reference ranges for PKR and SMII, women without any pre‐existing medical problems at the time of booking who did not develop HDP, SGA or other complications during pregnancy were also recruited for cardiovascular profiling. Measurements of cardiovascular parameters were obtained using a non‐imaging ultrasound cardiac output monitor. Results: A total of 688 women completed the study, including 626 controls, 21 cases with HDP, 19 cases with SGA and 22 cases with HDP and SGA. PKR was significantly elevated in pregnancies with placental dysfunction compared with controls (HDP only, 29.81 ± 9.5; HDP and SGA, 44.33 ± 24.27; SGA only, 31.05 ± 13.14; vs controls, 22.30 ± 7.93; all P < 0.05). SMII values were significantly lower only in cases affected by SGA alone when compared with controls (1.47 ± 0.23 W/m 2 vs 1.75 ± 0.40 W/m 2 ; P < 0.005). These differences remained statistically significant when the analysis was undertaken using multiples of the median values corrected for gestational age. Conclusions: The findings of this study suggest that point‐of‐care non‐invasive cardiovascular profiling using PKR and SMII may help distinguish between pregnancies affected by specific placental disorders and those exhibiting healthy cardiovascular adaptation to pregnancy. Women with HDP and/or SGA appear to have distinctive PKR and SMII profiles that reflect low kinetic energy in pregnancies with SGA and high potential energy in pregnancies affected by HDP. Finally, non‐invasive assessment of potential and kinetic cardiovascular energy demonstrates physiological high‐flow and low‐resistance adaptation in uncomplicated pregnancies. © 2022 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.