No abstract

Objectives This article outlines a process for differentiating preeclampsia from other potential causes of end-organ damage in a critically ill patient. Case Presentation A patient in her early 30s, G2P1001 with intrauterine pregnancy at 12 weeks’ gestation was admitted seven months after delivering her first child due to new-onset psychosis and starvation ketosis. She was started on lithium for postpartum psychosis at 20 weeks’ gestation. She subsequently developed respiratory failure at 26 weeks’ gestation due to aspiration pneumonia in the setting of lithium toxicity, requiring admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) and intubation. She received antibiotics and vasopressors for suspected septic shock in addition to dialysis for lithium-induced acute kidney injury. One week after ICU admission, her sepsis resolved, her serum creatinine levels returned to normal, and her respiratory status improved. However, after vasopressors were discontinued, she suddenly developed persistently elevated blood pressures with proteinuria and elevated liver function tests (LFT’s). Due to concern for preeclampsia with severe features and rapidly increasing LFT’s, the patient underwent cesarean delivery at 27 weeks’ gestation. Conclusions In a critically ill patient with multiple comorbidities, it can be difficult to diagnose preeclampsia using the standard criteria. It is important to exclude other potential etiologies, as a misdiagnosis can have potentially devastating consequences.

No abstract

Background: Treatment of psychotic disorders in pregnancy is often ethically and clinically challenging, especially when psychotic symptoms impair decision-making capacity. There are several competing ethical obligations to consider: the ethical obligation to maternal autonomy, the maternal and fetal beneficence-based obligations to treat peripartum psychosis, and the fetal beneficence-based obligation to minimize teratogenic exposure. Objective: This article outlines an ethical framework for clinical decision-making for the management of chronic psychosis in pregnancy, with an emphasis on special considerations in the previable and periviable period. Case Presentation: A 31-year-old gravida 2, para 1 with intrauterine pregnancy at 12 weeks and 4 days gestation was brought to the emergency department by her husband seven months after delivering her first child, due to sudden onset of behavioral changes that included self-isolation, not eating, and not taking care of her child. Her past medical history included hypothyroidism and inflammatory bowel disease, but no prior psychiatric illness. After being admitted to the psychiatric hospital, she continued to have poor oral intake and weight loss despite initial inpatient treatment with antipsychotics, levothyroxine, and discontinuation of corticosteroids. Her pregnancy was also complicated by the diagnosis of multiple fetal anomalies at 20 weeks gestation, when the fetus was periviable. Conclusions: For previable or periviable pregnancies, the patient and/or surrogate should decide whether to pursue prenatal genetic screening and invasive diagnostic testing, as well as whether to continue or terminate the pregnancy. When the choice is made to continue the pregnancy, initiation of long-term psychiatric treatment (including medications with potential adverse fetal effects) should be based on shared decision-making between the physician and the patient and/or surrogate. Although some pharmacologic interventions may have potential adverse effects on the developing fetus, the use of psychotropic medications can be ethically justified, even if the patient herself does not have the capacity to consent and requires a surrogate, when the goal is to restore maternal autonomy and minimize the risks of maternal and fetal harm from untreated psychiatric illness.