Key result
Early-onset preeclampsia is linked to ~2-fold higher rates of impaired LVEF versus late-onset disease.
Why the study?
Early Onset Preeclampsia (EOPE) and Late Onset Preeclampsia (LOPE) represent distinct pathophysiological entities with different haemodynamic states, requiring subtype-specific cardiovascular risk assessment during pregnancy.
Does early-onset preeclampsia cause more severe echocardiographic signs of biventricular and diastolic dysfunction compared to late-onset preeclampsia?
Observational (n=80)
No
Does early-onset preeclampsia cause more severe echocardiographic signs of biventricular and diastolic dysfunction compared to late-onset preeclampsia?
Absolute Event Rate: 42.5% vs 20%
p-value: p=0.03
Early onset preeclampsia is associated with significantly greater structural and functional cardiac impairment compared to late onset disease, emphasizing the need for targeted cardiovascular surveillance in this high-risk subgroup.
Early-onset preeclampsia may prompt closer LVEF surveillance; extends evidence of distinct phenotypes but remains hypothesis-generating.
Introduction: Preeclampsia is a leading cause of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality worldwide. Significant cardiovascular adaptations occur in preeclampsia, with Early Onset Preeclampsia (EOPE, onset before 34 weeks of gestation) associated with a more complex and severe haemodynamic profile compared to Late Onset Preeclampsia (LOPE, onset at or after 34 weeks). Recent evidence indicates that EOPE and LOPE represent distinct pathophysiological entities characterised by different haemodynamic states, necessitating subtype-specific cardiovascular risk assessment during the antenatal period. Aim: To compare echocardiographic findings in women with EOPE versus those with LOPE and to characterise differences in biventricular systolic and diastolic function between the two subtypes. Materials and Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted in 80 antenatal women (40 with EOPE and 40 with LOPE) at a tertiary care centre in Arunachal Pradesh from June 2021 to September 2022. Standard two-dimensional, M-mode, and Doppler transthoracic echocardiography was performed for all participants. Biventricular systolic function, Left Ventricular (LV) diastolic function, LV geometry, and Right Ventricular (RV) systolic function were assessed according to American and European Society of Echocardiography guidelines. Results: Impairment in LV Ejection Fraction (LVEF) was significantly more prevalent in EOPE compared with LOPE (42.5% versus 20%, p-value=0.03). Indices of LV diastolic dysfunction, including mitral E/A ratio, septal E/E’, and lateral E/E’, were significantly higher in EOPE (p-value=0.005, 0.015, and 0.011, respectively). Overall diastolic dysfunction was more frequent in EOPE than in LOPE (80% versus 55%, p=0.017). Tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) was significantly lower in EOPE compared with LOPE (2.11±0.286 cm versus 2.45±0.523 cm, p-value <0.001), indicating RV longitudinal systolic dysfunction in EOPE. Relative LV wall thickness was significantly higher in EOPE (0.53±0.18 versus 0.45±0.12, p-value=0.026). Conclusion: Women with EOPE demonstrate significantly greater LV diastolic dysfunction and biventricular myocardial contractility impairment compared with LOPE. Echocardiography performed during the antenatal period can identify preeclamptic women at higher cardiovascular risk, particularly those with early onset disease, enabling patient-specific management and long-term cardiovascular surveillance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Doke et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Preeclampsia (n=80). Early Onset Preeclampsia (EOPE) vs. Late Onset Preeclampsia (LOPE) was evaluated on Impairment in LV Ejection Fraction (LVEF) (p=0.03). Early onset preeclampsia was associated with more frequent impairment of LV ejection fraction (42.5% vs 20%, p=0.03) and overall diastolic dysfunction (80% vs 55%, p=0.017) compared to late onset.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: