Diagnosis and Monitoring of White Coat Hypertension in Pregnancy: an ISSHP Consensus Delphi Procedure

Hypertension phenotypes and adverse pregnancy outcome-related office and ambulatory blood pressure thresholds during pregnancy: a retrospective cohort study

Blood pressure (BP) phenotypes, as determined by the consistency between office BP (OBP) and ambulatory BP (ABP) measurements, enhance risk assessment during pregnancy. However, diagnostic criteria for hypertension in pregnancy are based on data from non-pregnant populations regarding long-term cardiovascular risks. This study aimed to identify adverse pregnancy outcomes (APOs; including maternal/fetal outcomes)-related BP thresholds to refine risk assessment in pregnant women. We analyzed 967 high-risk pregnant women who underwent simultaneous OBP and ABP measurements at an average gestational age of 29.6 ± 8.0 weeks. All hypertension phenotypes were associated with an increased risk of maternal and fetal outcomes, except white coat hypertension, which showed no association with fetal outcomes. Using an XGBoost algorithm, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve-derived daytime diastolic BP (DBP) thresholds of 81.5 mmHg for maternal and 82.5 mmHg for fetal outcomes were identified as the BP parameters most strongly linked to APOs. Incorporating these thresholds into the BP phenotype-based model improved the area under the curve for APOs and the net reclassification index for maternal and fetal outcomes. Decision curve analysis demonstrated a consistent positive net benefit after incorporating BP thresholds into the phenotype-based model for maternal and composite outcomes. In conclusion, in a Chinese pregnancy cohort, we identified daytime DBP as the most influential parameter for APOs, significantly enhancing the predictive performance of BP phenotype-based models. This study underscores the importance of ABP monitoring in high-risk pregnancies and the need for further research to establish optimal BP monitoring criteria for pregnancy.

Assessing Severity and Need for Delivery in Early Onset Preeclampsia Before 32 Weeks of Gestation: a Delphi Consensus Procedure

Background

Preeclampsia is a potentially life-threatening hypertensive pregnancy disorder that carries an acute risk of an unfavorable outcome of the pregnancy but also has consequences for the long-term health of the mother. Women who develop the early form of pre-eclampsia before the 32nd week of pregnancy have the highest risk and are also the most difficult to treat. The severity of pre-eclampsia is not characterized uniformly in Germany, so that the indication for delivery is rather individualized. The aim of this study was to reach a consensus on parameters that could serve as criteria for describing the severity of pre-eclampsia based on the urgency of delivery. To this end, a Delphi procedure was used to present a scenario in which a woman was admitted for preeclampsia before 32 gestational weeks and after completion of antenatal steroid therapy.

Methods

Clinicians specialized in maternal-fetal medicine from German-speaking countries completed five rounds of a modified Delphi questionnaire. Presented parameters were selected by the section "Hypertensive Pregnancy Diseases and Fetal Growth Restriction" of the German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics after reviewing the literature. These included objectifiable laboratory or clinical parameters as well as subjective symptoms of the patient. In addition, nine fetal parameters were taken into account. The clinicians were asked to rate presented parameters as an indication for delivery on a Likert scale from 0 to 4 (no indication to absolute indication without delay). For each item, the predefined cut-off for group consensus was ≥ 70% agreement.

Results

A total of 126 experts were approached. Sixty-nine experts (54.8%) took part in the first round; of those 50 completed the entire Delphi procedure. A consensus was reached on 14 parameters to be considered rapid preparation for delivery without delay (4 points on the Likert scale). These were among others hepatic hematoma or liver capsule rupture, acute liver failure with fulminant coagulation disorder or disseminated intravascular coagulation, eclampsia, pathologic findings in imaging (e.g. cMRI) or electrocardiogram arranged for new onset of headache or retrosternal pain, respectively. Twenty-six parameters were rated as factors that should be considered in the decision without being absolute (1 to 3 points), and 13 parameters should have no influence on the decision to deliver (0 points). No consensus on severe hypertension as an indication for delivery could be reached for blood pressure values below 220/140 mmHg.

Conclusion

A consensus was reached on whether to deliver in preeclampsia typic clinical findings and symptoms. The results can serve as guidance for current clinical practice and for the definition of clinical endpoints in intervention studies. Nevertheless, the isolated criteria are a theoretical construction since the combined deterioration or summation of several factors rather than a single factor most likely influences the decision to deliver and reflect the severity of preeclampsia. Moreover, the degree of hypertension as an indication for delivery remains controversial, unless the patient suffers additionally from complaints. Future research should be enforced to incorporate long-term risks for the mother into a decision aid.

When and how to use ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and home blood pressure monitoring for managing hypertension

Many individuals have different blood pressure (BP) values in the office setting compared to that outside the office setting. Therefore, confirming hypertension based on office BP (OBP) measurement alone can lead to misdiagnosis and mistreatment. The limitations of OBP measurement have led to the complementary use of out-of-office BP measurements, including 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) and home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM). This review aims to describe when and how ABPM or HBPM can be used to accurately diagnose and treat hypertension. Both methods should be performed using validated automated oscillometric devices. To minimize user errors, ABPM should be performed using standard techniques, whereas HBPM requires patient education regarding proper BP measurements. ABPM provides short-term comprehensive information on BP, including daytime, nighttime, morning, and 24-h BP. Therefore, ABPM is recommended for the initial diagnosis of hypertension, assessment of BP phenotypes and circadian patterns, and detection of nocturnal hypertension, Furthermore, ABPM plays a critical role in confirming true resistant hypertension thereby excluding pseudo-resistant hypertension. However, it is not suitable for long-term follow-up of patients with hypertension. In contrast, HBPM involves multiple BP readings taken at specific times during the day and evening over a long period. Therefore, HBPM is recommended for diagnosing hypertension and assessing BP phenotypes. However, this method has limitations in measuring nocturnal BP and circadian BP patterns. HBPM is preferred over ABPM for the long-term follow-up of patients with hypertension. This approach improves patient adherence to treatment and ultimately enhances the rate of control of hypertension. Additionally, both methods play an important role in diagnosing and treating white coat hypertension during pregnancy. Consequently, out-of-office BP measurement is essential to prevent the misdiagnosis and mistreatment of hypertension. However, these two methods offer different information regarding the BP status of an individual, and they indeed show discrepancies in the diagnosis of hypertensive phenotypes. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the advantages and limitations of both ABPM and HBPM to ensure their appropriate use in clinical practice.

White-coat hypertension in pregnant women: risk factors, pregnancy outcomes, and biomarkers

Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are a worldwide health problem for women. They cause complications in up to 10% of pregnancies and are associated with increased maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. Traditional blood pressure measurement in clinical practice is the most commonly used procedure for diagnosing and monitoring hypertension treatment, but it is prone to significant inaccuracies caused, on the one hand, by the inherent variability of blood pressure and, on the other, by errors arising from measurement technique and conditions. Some studies have demonstrated a better estimate of the prognosis for the development of cardiovascular diseases using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. We can detect white-coat hypertension using this method, which helps to avoid overdiagnosis and overtreatment in many cases, and we can also detect masked hypertension, which helps to avoid underdiagnosis and a lack of prescribed treatment if needed. White-coat hypertension is not a benign condition - it has been shown to be associated with higher risks of developing preeclampsia, preterm birth, and small-for-gestational-age babies. In this regard, it is extremely important for clinicians to be aware of the risk factors and outcomes associated with this condition. Pregnant women should be medically monitored both during pregnancy and after delivery to detect target organ damage, cardiovascular risk factors, or a metabolic syndrome.

Prediction and prevention of preeclampsia in women with preexisting diabetes: the role of home blood pressure, physical activity, and aspirin

Women with type 1 or type 2 (preexisting) diabetes are four times more likely to develop preeclampsia compared with women without diabetes. Preeclampsia affects 9%-20% of pregnant women with type 1 diabetes and 7%-14% of pregnant women with type 2 diabetes. The aim of this narrative review is to investigate the role of blood pressure (BP) monitoring, physical activity, and prophylactic aspirin to reduce the prevalence of preeclampsia and to improve pregnancy outcome in women with preexisting diabetes. Home BP and office BP in early pregnancy are positively associated with development of preeclampsia, and home BP and office BP are comparable for the prediction of preeclampsia in women with preexisting diabetes. However, home BP is lower than office BP, and the difference is greater with increasing office BP. Daily physical activity is recommended during pregnancy, and limiting sedentary behavior may be beneficial to prevent preeclampsia. White coat hypertension in early pregnancy is not a clinically benign condition but is associated with an elevated risk of developing preeclampsia. This renders the current strategy of leaving white coat hypertension untreated debatable. A beneficial preventive effect of initiating low-dose aspirin (150 mg/day) for all in early pregnancy has not been demonstrated in women with preexisting diabetes.