Key result
Mid-trimester blood pressure patterns distinctively predict adverse pregnancy outcomes across 5 identified trajectory groups.
Why the study?
Do distinct patterns of mid-trimester systolic and diastolic blood pressure influence the risk of individual and co-occurring adverse pregnancy outcomes in singleton pregnancies?
Cohort (n=78,891)
Yes
Do distinct patterns of mid-trimester systolic and diastolic blood pressure influence the risk of individual and co-occurring adverse pregnancy outcomes in singleton pregnancies?
Mid-trimester systolic and diastolic blood pressures combine in distinct patterns that differentially predict specific individual and clustered adverse pregnancy outcomes, suggesting a role for tailored blood pressure management.
Background The combined contributions of maternal systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) to adverse pregnancy outcomes (APOs) remain unclear. We investigated how mid-trimester SBP-DBP levels, jointly analyzed, influence both individual APOs and co-occurring APO clusters. Methods Two cohorts from northern and southern China involving 78,891 singleton pregnancies were analyzed. Using two-dimensional SBP and DBP "heat maps", we evaluated the associations of mid-trimester (20 to 28 weeks) SBP and DBP with six major APOs (gestational diabetes [GDM], preterm birth, small-for-gestational-age [SGA], postpartum hemorrhage, placental abruption, and severe preeclampsia) both individually and as co-occurring clusters identified by latent class analysis (LCA). Results Five distinct SBP-DBP patterns emerged for individual APO risk: (1) isolated systolic (SBP+, linked to GDM), (2) isolated diastolic (DBP+, preterm birth), (3) concurrent systolic–diastolic (SBP+/DBP+, severe preeclampsia), and two divergent patterns (SBP–/DBP+ for SGA and postpartum hemorrhage; SBP+/DBP– for placental abruption). For LCA-identified four-APO classes, the "GDM-dominant" and the "SGA-dominant" classes were driven by isolated systolic and isolated diastolic patterns, respectively. The "preterm birth-dominant" class was influenced by concurrent systolic–diastolic pattern. Notably, the "placental dysfunction" class (featured by high rates of postpartum hemorrhage, placental abruption, and severe preeclampsia) was featured by isolated diastolic pattern. Pulse pressure analyses further supported these findings. Conclusions Mid-trimester SBP and DBP combine in unique ways to shape both individual and co-occurring APOs. Recognizing these SBP-DBP patterns may refine risk stratification and guide more tailored blood pressure management to improve maternal-fetal outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fang et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Pregnancy (n=78,891). Mid-trimester systolic and diastolic blood pressure was evaluated on Individual and co-occurring adverse pregnancy outcomes (gestational diabetes, preterm birth, small-for-gestational-age, postpartum hemorrhage, placental abruption, and severe preeclampsia). Mid-trimester systolic and diastolic blood pressure combine in five distinct patterns that differentially drive the risk of individual and co-occurring adverse pregnancy outcomes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: