4.4 Article

Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy as a risk factor for preeclampsia

Journal

ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS
Volume 301, Issue 3, Pages 655-664

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00404-020-05456-y

Keywords

Pregnancy; Cholestasis; Preeclampsia; High risk; Bile acids; Twins

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy and preeclampsia are two major pregnancy complications. We aimed to investigate the association between intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) and preeclampsia. Methods Single-center retrospective study. Study group included 180 women (162 singletons and 18 twin gestations) who were diagnosed with ICP based on clinical presentation, elevated liver enzymes and bile acids. The reference group included 1618 women (1507 singletons and 111 twin gestations) who delivered during the study period, and were matched according to age, gravidity, parity and singleton or twin gestation. Results The incidence of ICP was 0.36%. The incidence of preeclampsia was higher in women with ICP compared to reference group (7.78% vs 2.41%, aOR, 3.74 95% CI 12.0-7.02, p < 0.0001), for either without-(3.89% vs 1.61%, aOR 2.83, 95% CI 1.23-6.5, p = 0.145) or with severe features (3.89% vs 0.80%, aOR 5.17 95% CI 2.14-12.50, p = 0.0003). For both singleton and twin pregnancies, overall preeclampsia rates were higher in the ICP group (5.56% vs 2.19%, aOR 2.91 95% CI 1.39-6.07 p = 0.0045; and 27.78% vs 5.41%, aOR 10.9 95% CI 2.16-47.19, p = 0.0033, respectively). Earlier diagnosis of ICP was associated with higher incidence of preeclampsia (31.1 +/- 3.8 vs 34.86 +/- 6.2 gestational weeks, p = 0.0259). The average time between ICP diagnosis and to the onset of preeclampsia was 29.7 +/- 24 days. Conclusion ICP is associated with an increased risk for preeclampsia. We suggest intensified follow-up for preeclampsia in women with ICP, especially among those with early ICP presentation and twins' gestations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available