The diagnostic value of angiogenic and antiangiogenic factors in differential diagnosis of preeclampsia.

Abstract

The definition of preeclampsia is changing. However, with the addition of organ symptoms to the presence of hypertension in pregnancy instead of relying only on proteinuria, a more precise detection of women at risk of preeclampsia-associated adverse events has not been achieved. Instead, under the new definitions of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and of the International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy, more women are classified as preeclamptic, with a tendency to milder disease. Furthermore, angiogenic and antiangiogenic factors have emerged as essential tools for predicting and diagnosing preeclampsia at high accuracies. Next to being rooted in the pathophysiology of the disease, they have been proven to be reliable tools for predicting and diagnosing the disease. In addition, 2 cutoffs have been evaluated for the clinical setting. As shown in the Prediction of Short-Term Outcome in Pregnant Women With Suspected Preeclampsia Study, at the soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1-to-placental growth factor ratio cutoff of 38, a preeclampsia can be ruled out for 1 week with a negative predictive value of 99.3% (95% confidence interval, 97.9-99.9) and ruled in with a positive predictive value of 36.7% (95% confidence interval, 28.4-45.7). The diagnostic cutoff of 85 has been shown to accurately identify women with preeclampsia, with a sensitivity of up to 88% and a specificity of 99.5%. In this review, we highlight the central role of angiogenic and antiangiogenic factors in the differential diagnosis of women presenting at high risk of the disease, such as patients with chronic hypertension or chronic kidney disease. We will focus on their ability to predict preeclampsia-associated adverse fetal and maternal outcomes. This is only possible when critically reviewing the evolution of the definition of "preeclampsia." We show how changes in this definition shape our clinical picture of the condition and how angiogenic and antiangiogenic biomarkers might be included to better identify women destined to develop preeclampsia-related adverse outcomes.