The association between serum sFlt-1, PlGF and sFlt-1/PlGF ratio in singleton pregnancy and placental abruption: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 8.7 1区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Katarzyna Kosińska-Kaczyńska,Iwona Szymusik,Robert Brawura Biskupski Samaha,Dorota Sys
{"title":"The association between serum sFlt-1, PlGF and sFlt-1/PlGF ratio in singleton pregnancy and placental abruption: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Katarzyna Kosińska-Kaczyńska,Iwona Szymusik,Robert Brawura Biskupski Samaha,Dorota Sys","doi":"10.1016/j.ajog.2025.04.020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\r\nThe study aimed to evaluate whether women with singleton pregnancies who experienced subsequent placental abruption had lower serum PlGF concentrations, higher serum sFlt-1 concentrations, and a higher sFlt-1/PlGF ratio compared to women with singleton pregnancies without placental abruption.\r\n\r\nDATA SOURCES\r\nPubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and the Web of Science and Clinicaltrial.gov databases had been searched electronically until March 2025, using combinations of relevant medical subject heading terms, keywords and word variants considered suitable for the topic.\r\n\r\nSTUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA\r\nProspective and retrospective comparative cohort studies and case-control studies were included. Case reports, editorials, letters to the editor and conference abstracts were excluded from the systematic review.\r\n\r\nSTUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS\r\nThe outcome of the study included differences in PlGF, sFlt-1 concentrations or the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio between placental abruption cases and a group without placental abruption. The quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Continuous data were expressed as the mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval when the units of measurement for the outcome variable were the same. When conducting the meta-analysis, a random effects model was consistently employed.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nThe main findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis are as follows: (1) maternal serum PlGF concentration did not differ between women with and without placental abruption; (2) maternal serum sFlt-1 concentration was higher in women with placental abruption, especially when assessed in the second half of gestation; (3) maternal serum sFlt-1/PlGF ratio was higher in women with placental abruption, both in the first and second half of pregnancy, with the difference being no longer significant in women with the diagnosis or symptoms of preeclampsia.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSION\r\nThe results presented in this systematic review may improve the risk stratification for placental abruption. Understanding the changes of the above markers in placental abruption may support clinical guideline development with regard to prediction models of the above complication.","PeriodicalId":7574,"journal":{"name":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","volume":"68 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2025.04.020","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

OBJECTIVE The study aimed to evaluate whether women with singleton pregnancies who experienced subsequent placental abruption had lower serum PlGF concentrations, higher serum sFlt-1 concentrations, and a higher sFlt-1/PlGF ratio compared to women with singleton pregnancies without placental abruption. DATA SOURCES PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and the Web of Science and Clinicaltrial.gov databases had been searched electronically until March 2025, using combinations of relevant medical subject heading terms, keywords and word variants considered suitable for the topic. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA Prospective and retrospective comparative cohort studies and case-control studies were included. Case reports, editorials, letters to the editor and conference abstracts were excluded from the systematic review. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS The outcome of the study included differences in PlGF, sFlt-1 concentrations or the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio between placental abruption cases and a group without placental abruption. The quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Continuous data were expressed as the mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval when the units of measurement for the outcome variable were the same. When conducting the meta-analysis, a random effects model was consistently employed. RESULTS The main findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis are as follows: (1) maternal serum PlGF concentration did not differ between women with and without placental abruption; (2) maternal serum sFlt-1 concentration was higher in women with placental abruption, especially when assessed in the second half of gestation; (3) maternal serum sFlt-1/PlGF ratio was higher in women with placental abruption, both in the first and second half of pregnancy, with the difference being no longer significant in women with the diagnosis or symptoms of preeclampsia. CONCLUSION The results presented in this systematic review may improve the risk stratification for placental abruption. Understanding the changes of the above markers in placental abruption may support clinical guideline development with regard to prediction models of the above complication.
单胎妊娠和胎盘早剥中血清sFlt-1、PlGF和sFlt-1/PlGF比值的相关性:一项系统综述和荟萃分析
目的:本研究旨在评估与未发生胎盘早剥的单胎妊娠妇女相比,随后发生胎盘早剥的单胎妊娠妇女是否具有较低的血清PlGF浓度、较高的血清sFlt-1浓度和较高的sFlt-1/PlGF比值。数据来源pubmed /MEDLINE, Scopus和Web of Science and Clinicaltrial.gov数据库在2025年3月之前已经通过电子方式检索,使用相关医学主题标题术语、关键字和被认为适合该主题的词变体的组合。研究资格:纳入前瞻性和回顾性比较队列研究和病例对照研究。病例报告、社论、给编辑的信和会议摘要被排除在系统评价之外。研究评价与综合方法研究结果包括胎盘早剥患者与未发生胎盘早剥患者间PlGF、sFlt-1浓度或sFlt-1/PlGF比值的差异。采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表对纳入的研究进行质量评估。当结果变量的测量单位相同时,连续数据以95%置信区间的均值差(MD)表示。在进行meta分析时,始终采用随机效应模型。结果本系统综述和荟萃分析的主要结果如下:(1)胎盘早剥与未发生胎盘早剥的孕妇血清PlGF浓度无显著差异;(2)胎盘早剥的孕妇血清sFlt-1浓度较高,尤其是在妊娠后半期;(3)胎盘早剥孕妇血清sFlt-1/PlGF比值在妊娠前半期和后半期均较高,而在诊断或有子痫前期症状的孕妇中差异不再显著。结论本系统综述的结果有助于改善胎盘早剥的危险分层。了解上述标志物在胎盘早剥中的变化,可能有助于上述并发症预测模型的临床指南的制定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
15.90
自引率
7.10%
发文量
2237
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, known as "The Gray Journal," covers the entire spectrum of Obstetrics and Gynecology. It aims to publish original research (clinical and translational), reviews, opinions, video clips, podcasts, and interviews that contribute to understanding health and disease and have the potential to impact the practice of women's healthcare. Focus Areas: Diagnosis, Treatment, Prediction, and Prevention: The journal focuses on research related to the diagnosis, treatment, prediction, and prevention of obstetrical and gynecological disorders. Biology of Reproduction: AJOG publishes work on the biology of reproduction, including studies on reproductive physiology and mechanisms of obstetrical and gynecological diseases. Content Types: Original Research: Clinical and translational research articles. Reviews: Comprehensive reviews providing insights into various aspects of obstetrics and gynecology. Opinions: Perspectives and opinions on important topics in the field. Multimedia Content: Video clips, podcasts, and interviews. Peer Review Process: All submissions undergo a rigorous peer review process to ensure quality and relevance to the field of obstetrics and gynecology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信