Comparison of National Factor-based Models for Preeclampsia Screening

Abstract

Objective This study aimed to compare the predictive values of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), and the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada (SOGC) factor-based models for preeclampsia (PE) screening.

Study Design We conducted a secondary analysis of maternal and birth data from 32 hospitals. For each delivery, we calculated the risk of PE according to the ACOG, the NICE, and the SOGC models. Our primary outcomes were PE and preterm PE (PE combined with preterm birth) using the ACOG criteria. We calculated the detection rate (DR or sensitivity), the false positive rate (FPR or 1 − specificity), the positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values of each model for PE and for preterm PE using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves.

Results We used 130,939 deliveries including 4,635 (3.5%) cases of PE and 823 (0.6%) cases of preterm PE. The ACOG model had a DR of 43.6% for PE and 50.3% for preterm PE with FPR of 15.6%; the NICE model had a DR of 36.2% for PE and 41.3% for preterm PE with FPR of 12.8%; and the SOGC model had a DR of 49.1% for PE and 51.6% for preterm PE with FPR of 22.2%. The PPV for PE of the ACOG (9.3%) and NICE (9.4%) models were both superior than the SOGC model (7.6%; p < 0.001), with a similar trend for the PPV for preterm PE (1.9 vs. 1.9 vs. 1.4%, respectively; p < 0.01). The area under the ROC curves suggested that the ACOG model is superior to the NICE for the prediction of PE and preterm PE and superior to the SOGC models for the prediction of preterm PE (all with p < 0.001).

Conclusion The current ACOG factor-based model for the prediction of PE and preterm PE, without considering race, is superior to the NICE and SOGC models.

Key Points

• Clinical factor-based model can predict PE in approximately 44% of the cases for a 16% false positive.

• The ACOG model is superior to the NICE and SOGC models to predict PE.

• Clinical factor-based models are better to predict PE in parous than in nulliparous.

Keywords

preeclampsia - aspirin - prevention - screening

Publication History

Received: 25 September 2023

Accepted: 26 February 2024

Article published online:
15 March 2024

• References

• 1 Poon LC, Shennan A, Hyett JA. et al. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) initiative on pre-eclampsia: A pragmatic guide for first-trimester screening and prevention. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2019; 145 (Suppl. 01) 1-33
• 2 Bujold E, Roberge S, Lacasse Y. et al. Prevention of preeclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction with aspirin started in early pregnancy: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 116 (2 Pt 1): 402-414
• 3 Roberge S, Giguère Y, Villa P. et al. Early administration of low-dose aspirin for the prevention of severe and mild preeclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Perinatol 2012; 29 (07) 551-556
• 4 Roberge S, Villa P, Nicolaides K. et al. Early administration of low-dose aspirin for the prevention of preterm and term preeclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fetal Diagn Ther 2012; 31 (03) 141-146
• 5 Askie LM, Duley L, Henderson-Smart DJ, Stewart LA. PARIS Collaborative Group. Antiplatelet agents for prevention of pre-eclampsia: a meta-analysis of individual patient data. Lancet 2007; 369 (9575) 1791-1798
• 6 Henderson JT, Vesco KK, Senger CA, Thomas RG, Redmond N. Aspirin use to prevent preeclampsia and related morbidity and mortality: updated evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA 2021; 326 (12) 1192-1206
• 7 Henderson JT, O'Connor E, Whitlock EP. Low-dose aspirin for prevention of morbidity and mortality from preeclampsia. Ann Intern Med 2014; 161 (08) 613-614
• 8 Duley L, Meher S, Hunter KE, Seidler AL, Askie LM. Antiplatelet agents for preventing pre-eclampsia and its complications. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 2019 (10) CD004659
• 9 Hastie R, Tong S, Wikström AK, Sandström A, Hesselman S, Bergman L. Aspirin use during pregnancy and the risk of bleeding complications: a Swedish population-based cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2021; 224 (01) 95.e1-95.e12
• 10 The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Gestational Hypertension and Preeclampsia: ACOG Practice Bulletin Summary, Number 222. Obstet Gynecol 2020; 135 (06) 1492-1495
• 11 Davidson KW, Barry MJ, Mangione CM. et al; US Preventive Services Task Force. Aspirin use to prevent preeclampsia and related morbidity and mortality: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2021; 326 (12) 1186-1191
• 12 The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Hypertension in pregnancy. Report of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Task Force on Hypertension in Pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 122 (05) 1122-1131
• 13 World Health Organization. WHO Recommendations for Prevention and Treatment of Pre-Eclampsia and Eclampsia; 2011. Accessed July 10, 2023 at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK140561/
• 14 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Guidance | Overview | Hypertension in pregnancy: diagnosis and management. Accessed November 21, 2022 at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng133
• 15 Magee LA, Smith GN, Bloch C. et al. Guideline No. 426: Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy: Diagnosis, Prediction, Prevention, and Management. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2022; 44 (05) 547-571.e1
• 16 The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Low-Dose Aspirin Use for the Prevention of Preeclampsia and Related Morbidity and Mortality. Accessed March 07, 2024 at: https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/practice-advisory/articles/2021/12/low-dose-aspirin-use-for-the-prevention-of-preeclampsia-and-related-morbidity-and-mortality
• 17 Chaillet N, Dumont A, Abrahamowicz M. et al; QUARISMA Trial Research Group. A cluster-randomized trial to reduce cesarean delivery rates in Quebec. N Engl J Med 2015; 372 (18) 1710-1721
• 18 O'Gorman N, Wright D, Poon LC. et al. Multicenter screening for pre-eclampsia by maternal factors and biomarkers at 11-13 weeks' gestation: comparison with NICE guidelines and ACOG recommendations. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 49 (06) 756-760
• 19 The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion No. 638: First-Trimester Risk Assessment for Early-Onset Preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 126 (03) e25-e27
• 20 Chaemsaithong P, Pooh RK, Zheng M. et al. Prospective evaluation of screening performance of first-trimester prediction models for preterm preeclampsia in an Asian population. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2019; 221 (06) 650.e1-650.e16
• 21 Wright D, Syngelaki A, Akolekar R, Poon LC, Nicolaides KH. Competing risks model in screening for preeclampsia by maternal characteristics and medical history. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015; 213 (01) 62.e1-62.e10
• 22 Al-Amin A, Rolnik DL, Black C. et al. Accuracy of second trimester prediction of preterm preeclampsia by three different screening algorithms. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2018; 58 (02) 192-196
• 23 Rocha RS, Gurgel Alves JA, Bezerra Maia E Holanda Moura S. et al. Comparison of three algorithms for prediction preeclampsia in the first trimester of pregnancy. Pregnancy Hypertens 2017; 10: 113-117
• 24 Al-Rubaie ZTA, Askie LM, Hudson HM, Ray JG, Jenkins G, Lord SJ. Assessment of NICE and USPSTF guidelines for identifying women at high risk of pre-eclampsia for tailoring aspirin prophylaxis in pregnancy: An individual participant data meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2018; 229: 159-166