2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.12.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance of a first-trimester screening of preeclampsia in a routine care low-risk setting

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

11
148
0
5

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 135 publications
(164 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
11
148
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…The most promising strategies are multiparametric approaches that include a combination of maternal factors, biophysical tests (mean blood pressure, uterine artery Doppler), and biochemical markers (44)(45)(46)(47)(48)(49)(50). Sequential multiparametric testing is superior to screening in the first trimester alone (51).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The most promising strategies are multiparametric approaches that include a combination of maternal factors, biophysical tests (mean blood pressure, uterine artery Doppler), and biochemical markers (44)(45)(46)(47)(48)(49)(50). Sequential multiparametric testing is superior to screening in the first trimester alone (51).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous studies ( Table 1) have shown that combined clinical and biological markers have improved detection rates in overt PE, which could be incorporated into clinical care for early screening and assessment of patientspecific risks of PE. [29][30][31] However, the limitation of combined clinical markers and biological markers is the inability of these markers to provide definitive differentiation of the severity of PE and assessment of the PE-disease pathway. Currently, combined biomarkers of PE include cytokines, proteins, angiogenic and antiangiogenic factors that have a fundamental role in the pathogenesis and etiology of PE, as well as other related HDPs.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As it affects multiple organs, no single, specific and cost-effective marker to predict PE has yet been proposed [9]. However, several models have been suggested but are found to be not clinically relevant [10]- [12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%