Maternal and neonatal outcomes in pregnant women with heart disease with single evaluation vs. semi-structured evaluation by a cardio-obstetric team.

Abstract

Introduction: Cardiovascular diseases in pregnant women are challenging, with high maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality, so a cardio-obstetric team is recommended for their care. Even so, little data evaluates the impact of these teams. Therefore, the present study aims to compare the obstetric, maternal, and neonatal outcomes of semi-structured follow-up (SSF) in a Cardio-obstetric clinic concerning regular or unstructured follow-up (USF) in pregnant women with heart disease.

Methods: A prospective registry of pregnant women with heart disease was carried out. Patients with SSF by a cardio-obstetric team were compared with those with single evaluation or USF. The risk of events was calculated according to the modified World Health Organization (mWHO) classification and the CARPREG-II scale, and cardiac, obstetric, and neonatal outcomes were evaluated.

Results: One hundred sixty-eight patients were evaluated, 37 with SSF and 131 with single evaluation (USF). The primary diagnoses were congenital heart disease, arrhythmias, and valve disease. The average CARPREG-II in USF patients was 2.48 (SD 2.3); in SSF patients, it was 3.37 (SD 2.45; p = 0.041). The average of the mWHO in patients with USF was 2.1 (SD 1.6), and with SSF, it was 2.65 (SD 0.95; p = 0.0052). There were no significant differences in primary cardiac outcomes (13.8% in USF vs. 5.4% in SSF; p = 0.134), secondary cardiac (5.3% in USF vs. 2.7% in SSF; p = 0.410), obstetric (10% in USF vs. 16.2% in SSF; p = 0.253) and neonatal (35.9% in USF and 40.5% in SSF; p = 0.486) even though patients with SSF had a higher risk than patients with USF according to the mWHO and CARPREG-II scales.

Conclusions: In pregnant women with heart disease, an SSF compared with a USF by a cardio-obstetric team did not show statistically significant differences in cardiovascular, obstetric, and neonatal outcomes. However, patients with SSF had a significantly higher risk of adverse outcomes due to the mWHO and CARPREG-II scales. This result suggests that the SSF achieves at least equal outcomes despite the higher risk of adverse events that patients in this group had.