By Ela, GM; Ikechebelu, JI; Kua, PL; Omunakwe, H; Jumbo-Cleopatra, T (2023).
|
Greener Journal of Medical Sciences Vol. 13(2), pp. 164-182, 2023 ISSN: 2276-7797 Copyright ©2023, the copyright of this article is retained by the
author(s) |
|
Click on Play button...
Comparative Difference in Platelet Indices Among
Preeclamptics and Controls at a Tertiary Centre in
Port Harcourt, Nigeria.
Ela GM1, Jumbo-Ceopatra T2, Kua PL1, Omunakwe H3, Ikechebelu JI4
1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Rivers State University and Teaching Hospital, Port Harcourt, Nigeria.
2. Department of Community Medicine, Rivers State University and Teaching Hospital, Port Harcourt, Nigeria.
3. Department of Haematology, Rivers State University and Teaching Hospital, Port Harcourt, Nigeria.
4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nnamdi Azikiwe University Awka and Teaching Hospital, Nnewi, Nigeria.
|
ARTICLE’S INFO |
|||
|
Article No.: 091623094 Type: Research |
Accepted: 16/09/2023 Published: 17/10/2023 |
*Corresponding Author Dr. Ela GM E-mail: gmatthewela@ gmail.com |
Keywords: |
|
|
ABSTRACT |
|
|
BACKGROUND: Pre-eclampsia (PE) is a common preventable and potentially
life-threatening complication of pregnancy. It is a multisystem disorder
complicating 2-5% of pregnancies. The International Federation of Obstetrics
and Gynaecology (FIGO) in its 2019 guidelines for combating Pre-eclampsia highlighted the fact that predicting and
preventing pre-eclampsia is the solution to this
global scourge. Since the nations of the West African sub-region
are generally resource-poor, there is a need to seek and ascertain other
scientifically reliable but cheaper ways of screening for and predicting pre-eclampsia among pregnant women as a basis for
implementing prophylactic measures. Understanding the changes in platelet
indices in pregnant women with PE compared with healthy controls will be the
first step towards ascertaining the predictive value of platelet indices in
the development of PE which will fill the gap in this regard. OBJECTIVES: The objectives
of this study were to determine the changes in platelet indices in pregnant
women with PE compared with healthy controls and to ascertain the
relationship of these indices with the development of PE. METHODOLOGY: This study was
a case-control study carried out between October 2020 and June 2021 after
ethical approval has been obtained from the Rivers State University Teaching
Hospital Health Research Ethics Committee. It involved 50 eligible and
consenting pregnant women with PE as cases and 50 healthy pregnant women as
controls, all of whom either presented for routine antenatal care or
presented for delivery at the labour ward of the Rivers State University
Teaching Hospital. Blood samples were collected using a vacutainer
and full blood count and platelet indices (platelet count, mean platelet
volume and platelet distribution width) were analysed using an automated
haematology analyser, Sysmex KX-21N. The
socio-demographic information of the study participants was collected using a
structured questionnaire. Data were analysed using the Statistical Package
for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25. RESULTS: The sociodemographic characteristics of cases were similar to
those of controls. The results found a statistically significant difference
in the mean platelet count between cases (176.30 ± 67.38 fL) and controls
(207.16 ± 62.07fL),
p=0.019 as well as in the mean values of platelet distribution width (PDW) in
both cases and controls. The PDW was
significantly raised (15.53 ± 3.36fL)
compared to controls (13.75 ± 2.53fL),
p=.0.004. There was no significant difference in the mean platelet volume
(MPV) between cases and controls. The mean value of the MPV was 11.14 ±1.33
among cases and 10.65±1.38 for controls, p=0.075. Using receiver operator
characteristics (ROC) curves, the cut-off for the diagnosis of PE was 11.6fL
for MPV and 14.5fL for PDW. At this value, the sensitivity of MPV was found
to be 36% and specificity was 88% while the positive predictive value and
negative predictive value were 73.9% and 42.9% respectively. The sensitivity
and specificity of PDW at the cut-off of 14.5 were found to be 66.0%and 72.0%
respectively while the positive and negative predictive values were 70.2% and
67.9% respectively. CONCLUSION: The platelet
count is significantly reduced in PE compared to controls but has very low
diagnostic accuracy. The MPV is not significantly raised in PE when compared
with controls. The PDW is significantly raised in PE compared with controls.
Rising values of the PDW in pregnant women may be an indication of more
focused care within the context of preeclampsia prevention and management. |
|
|
|
Preeclampsia
(PE) is a multisystem disorder affecting 2-5% of pregnant women globally.1 It is a major cause of maternal and perinatal morbidity
and mortality.1–5 It accounts for the death of 76,000 women and 500,000
babies yearly around the world.1 Women in low-income nations are at higher risk.6–8 Data on the overall prevalence of PE in Nigeria is
lacking. However, a study carried out at the University of Calabar
Teaching Hospital, Nigeria, puts the prevalence of PE at 1.2%.7
The
pathogenesis of PE is not known.1,9,10 However, it is believed to involve a two-stage process.
The first stage is accounted for by a poor invasion of the spiral arteries by trophoblasts with the resultant poor remodelling of the
spiral arteries. Two mechanisms are involved in the second stage of the disease.
The first is a maternal response to endothelial malfunction. The second
mechanism is an imbalance between the factors which favour angiogenesis and
those unfavourable to angiogenesis. Together, these two mechanisms
synergistically produce the clinical manifestations of the disease.11,12
Gestational
hypertension is defined as systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥140 mm Hg
and/or diastolic blood pressure (dBP) ≥90 mm Hg
on at least two occasions measured 4-6 hours apart occurring after the
twentieth week of pregnancy in a woman previously known to be non-hypertensive.1 International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
(FIGO) adopted the International Society for the Study of Hypertension in
Pregnancy (ISSHP) definition of PE. As defined by the ISSP, PE is gestational
hypertension accompanied by ≥1 of the following new‐onset conditions at or after 20 weeks of gestation:
proteinuria (i.e. ≥30 mg/mol protein: creatinine ratio; ≥300 mg/24 hours; or ≥2 +
dipstick); evidence of multiple organ abnormality manifesting as: acute kidney
injury (creatinine ≥90μmol/L or 1mg/dL); liver dysfunction (elevated transaminases, e.g.
alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase >40 IU/L) plus or
minus right upper quadrant or epigastric pain;
neurological manifestations such as eclampsia,
altered mental state, blindness, stroke, clonus, severe headaches, and
persisting visual scotomata); or haematological
abnormalities such as thrombocytopenia (platelet count<150,000/L),
disseminated intravascular coagulopathy and haemolysis; or uteroplacental
malfunction manifesting with foetal growth restriction, abnormal umbilical
artery Doppler waveform analysis, or stillbirth).1,4
Factors
which increase a pregnant woman's risk of PE include maternal age >35 at the
time of delivery, nulliparity, history of PE, assisted
conception, and family history of PE in the mother or siblings. Other
identified risk factors include obesity (BMI>30kg/m2),
Afro-Caribbean and South Asian origin as well as the presence of comorbid
conditions like diabetes mellitus, gestational diabetes mellitus, chronic
hypertension, chronic kidney disease and autoimmune conditions such as systemic
lupus erythematosus and antiphospholipid
syndrome.1,5 This potentially life-threatening complication of
pregnancy can, in the mother lead to intracranial haemorrhage, acute pulmonary
oedema, respiratory distress syndrome, placental abruption, acute renal
failure, cardiovascular disease and chronic and end-stage renal disease. Sadly
too, the life expectancy of women who develop PE is reduced on the average by
10 years.1,6 Most of the foetal complications of PE are related to
birth weight and gestational age at delivery.6,12,13 These complications are largely attributed to
early-onset PE.1 Short term foetal complications of PE include foetal
growth restriction, oligohydramnios, intrauterine
foetal death, preterm birth, low Apgar score, non-reassuring foetal heart rate
in labour and increased need for neonatal intensive care unit admission. In the
long term, nervous system disorders, mental health issues, hearing and visual
problems, insulin resistance, derangements of glucose metabolism, coronary
artery disease and chronic hypertension could result.1,14
The overwhelming short- and long-term sequelae of PE on both mother and child, the huge financial
burden of providing neonatal intensive care and the overall burden to the
health system justify efforts aimed at effective prediction and prevention of
PE. More so, accurate prediction of women likely
to develop PE will create room for timely institution of prophylactic measures,
appropriate antenatal surveillance and higher quality research into preventive
interventions.15
In its 2019 Guidelines, FIGO recommends a
four-pronged strategic approach for dealing with PE. This includes a public
health awareness, universal screening, contingent screening, and prophylactic
measures using aspirin or calcium. FIGO’s public health focus is aimed at
activities that create awareness, increase access, and make affordable and
acceptable prenatal services for women of reproductive age. This is to be
combined with raising awareness of the benefits of early prenatal visits for
women of reproductive age, especially in low-resource settings. For early
prediction of PE, FIGO’s best model recommends a patient's risk factor
assessment with assessment of Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP), Placental Growth
Factor (PLGF), and Uterine Artery Pulsatility Index
(UTPI).
In low-resource settings, such as exist in
the West African sub-region, a more pragmatic approach for prediction of PE is
needed. Such an approach will be a prediction model that not only has a high
positive predictive value but also cost-effectiveness. In this regard, several
studies have shown promise using platelet indices (platelet count, PC, platelet
distribution width, PDW, and mean platelet volume, MPV) as guide for the
prediction of the likelihood and severity of PE.10,16–23
The
potential role of platelet indices in prediction of PE has not been
sufficiently explored. There are still gaps in what is known at the moment.
Controversies exist. Some studies find statistically significant changes that
are predictive and determinant of the severity of PE in all platelet indices
(PC, PDW, MPV).10,17,19,23 However, other studies suggest either one or two of the
platelet indices to be more reliable as predictor and determinant of the
severity of PE.16,18,20,21
Such differences could possibly result from
the performance of the different models of the haematology analysers used and
/or the socio-demographic indices of the populations studied. The preponderance
of controversies on the role of platelet indices in the prediction and
determination of disease severity in PE is an indication that more studies are
needed in order to reach a definitive conclusion on the role of platelet
indices for predicting pre-eclampsia and determining
its severity among the obstetric population.
Again, there is a dearth of studies on
platelet indices among pregnant women with PE in this region. This is a huge
gap in the obstetric practice in our environment, especially, given the unmet
need for use of more economically pragmatic but reliable markers for the early
prediction of PE.
Platelet indices are extracted from the
routine measurement of full blood count using the automated haematology
analyser. As such, the method for evaluating platelet indices is easy, readily
available, and cost-effective. It is, therefore, necessary; to evaluate
platelet indices among pregnant women with PE in Port Harcourt city as this can
highlight the comparative difference with healthy pregnant controls and serve
as a proxy for understanding the role of these indices in the setting of
preeclampsia prevention and management in our environment.
Pre-eclampsia is a life-threatening multisystem disorder of pregnancy and
a leading cause of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. It
complicates about 2-5% of pregnancies globally.1 It is sub-classified into early-onset and late-onset
pre-eclampsia as well as preterm and term.
Early-onset occurs before 34 weeks gestation whereas late-onset occurs after 34
weeks gestation. Preterm PE is one in which delivery occurs before 37 completed
weeks while term PE is one in which delivery takes place after 37 completed
weeks.1 Women in low resource settings are adjudged to be at
greatest risk.2 African American women
for example are said to have a preeclampsia-related mortality three times
greater than that seen among white women due to inequalities associated with
inadequate antenatal care.3
It is defined broadly as the presence of an
elevated blood pressure of ≥140/90mmHg taken on two occasions at
least 4-6 hours apart with significant proteinuria (≥300mg in a 24-hour
urine sample or 2+ on dipstick) at or after the twentieth week of pregnancy in
a woman not previously known to be hypertensive or proteinuric.
In clinical practice, the diagnosis of PE is based on this definition.1
The pathophysiology of PE has not been fully
elucidated.4,13,24 However, it is currently understood that in genetically
predisposed women, a combination of abnormal immune response and defective
placentation lead to imbalance between pro-angiogenic
factors and anti-angiogenic factors with consequent
widespread maternal endothelial dysfunction, vasospasm and activation of the
coagulation system.25–27
Peripheral vasoconstriction results in hypertension
which with derangement of endothelial cell integrity causes enhanced vascular
permeability and resultant generalized oedema. In the kidneys, endothelial
damage leads to altered glomerular filtration and selective leakage of
intermediate weight proteins such as albumin causing proteinuria.26,28
Endothelial damage in preeclampsia is
associated with platelet activation and consumption leading to
thrombocytopaenia.29 In the liver, sub-endothelial fibrin deposition occurs
with associated elevation of the liver enzymes and haemolysis. The combined,
concurrent occurrence of haemolysis, elevated liver enzymes and low platelets
is known as HELLP syndrome. Cerebral vasospasm and oedema are believed to be
responsible for the neurological manifestations of the disease.30
Abnormalities of
the vascular system manifesting with raised systemic vascular resistance,
enhanced platelet aggregation, activation and modification of the coagulation
system, and endothelial cell dysfunction are believed to contribute
significantly to the pathogenesis of preeclampsia.31–33
A gradual reduction in the platelet count is the most common observation and
may be due to platelet consumption during low-grade intravascular coagulopathy.
Several studies have indicated that platelets may play a critical role in the aetiopathogenesis of preeclampsia and thrombocytopenia is
the most common haematological abnormality seen in PE34.
The severity of thrombocytopenia increases with the severity of the disease.
The pathogenesis of thrombocytopenia in
preeclampsia is not clear; however, it may result from activation of the
coagulation system and increased platelet consumption.34 Platelet indices (PIs) are a group of parameters which
are cheap to assay and are gotten from routine full blood counts. The mean
platelet volume (MPV) and platelet distribution width (PDW) are the most valid
and remarkable PIs and are useful for clinical research because they are
readily available to clinicians.17
Life-threatening
thrombocytopenia is associated with HELLP syndrome. Thromboxane A released by
thrombocytes plays a critical role in the pathophysiology of PE. Thromboxane A enhances platelet aggregation
and endothelial damage, causing platelet dysfunction and platelet consumption
and ultimately thrombocytopenia. Platelet activation (by P selectin,
CD 63 and PECAM) is associated with enhanced endothelial damage with microthrombi formation leading to end-organ degenerative
necrosis and placental infarction.
The
bone marrow responds to the decrease in platelets by release of immature, larger-size
platelets having raised Mean Platelet Volume (MPV) and Platelet Distribution
Width (PDW).25–27,29,34 MPV is a measure of platelet size while PDW is a measurement of platelet anisocytosis.
Several
studies have evaluated the significance of platelet indices in the prediction,
diagnosis and prognostication of preeclampsia.10,17–23,32
Likewise, raised MPV and PDW serve as
important indicators of disease severity.35
Whereas the definitive cause for PE remains
unknown, certain risk factors have been identified to be associated with
increased incidence of the disease. The disease is more common in primigravidae and those with a previous personal history of
PE. Pregnant women with multiple gestations, chronic hypertension or underlying
kidney disease have also been noted to be at greater risk of PE.1,2
Advanced maternal age 35 years and above poses an
increased risk of preeclampsia. Besides, hydatidiform
mole, obesity (13.3% in those with BMI≥35kg/m˛), thrombophilia, oocyte
donation or donor insemination, urinary tract infection, diabetes mellitus also
increase the risk of PE.1 Risk factors noted in both early- and late-onset PE include older maternal age, Hispanic race and Native
American race. Others are smoking, single women, and male foetus. Risk factors
more strongly linked with early-onset PE than late-onset disease included black
race, chronic hypertension, and congenital anomalies. Younger maternal age, nulliparity, and diabetes mellitus are more strongly linked
to late-onset preeclampsia than with early-onset disease.6
Several studies have shown a lot of promise
as regards the role of platelet indices in predicting the likelihood and
severity of PE in at-risk patients.34 In a study of sixty PE patients and sixty healthy
controls, Alsheeha et al observed no significant
difference in PDW and MPV between patients with PE and their healthy
counterparts. However, both PC and PC to MPV ratio were significantly reduced
in the women with PE compared with healthy controls. There was no significant
difference in the PC, PDW, MPV, and PC to MPV ratio when women with mild and
severe preeclampsia were compared. PC cut off was 248.0×103/μL for diagnosis of preeclampsia (p=0.019; the
area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve was 62.4%). In
the study, binary regression suggested that women with PC <248.010×103/μL were at higher risk of PE (odds ratio =2.2, 95%
confidence interval =1.08–4.6, P=0.03). In this study, the PC/MPV cut
off was 31.2 for the diagnosis of PE (P=0.035, the area under the ROC
curve was 62.2%). The researchers concluded that PC <248.010×103/μL and PC to MPV ratio 31.2 are valid predictors of
preeclampsia.34
In a study of one hundred Indian women, fifty
of whom had PE and fifty healthy controls, Deepak et al found a difference
between the PDW values in pregnant women with pre-eclampsia
and that of healthy controls which was statistically significant. Though the
mean platelet count in their study was decreased in comparison to controls, it
lacked statistical significance. The researchers concluded that assessing the
PDW and MPV, along with platelet count may be beneficial as an indicator of
pre-eclampsia.35 Priyanka G et al in their study of
sixty-seven women with PE compared with an equal number of healthy controls
noted that MPV was higher in women with pre-eclampsia
whereas platelet count was significantly lower.
Though also lower, the difference in PDW between preeclampsia patients
and the control group was not significant.36
Abas et al in Sudan analysed platelet indices of thirty-seven
women with PE compared to fifty normal healthy pregnant women and reported thrombocytopaenia in 32.4% of PE patients compared to 0% in
healthy pregnant women. MPV and PDW were also significantly higher in PE
patients compared to controls.18
To evaluate the predictive value of platelet
indices in the development of PE, Dadhich, S et al in
a prospective study, observed the changes in platelet indices of two hundred
women from 20-24 weeks gestation up until 40 weeks and 7 days following
delivery. The results showed that platelet count decreased significantly (19.4%
versus 7.4%) whereas mean platelet volume and platelet distribution width
increased significantly in women with PE compared to healthy controls (44.5%
versus 9.22% and 47.19% versus 29.4% respectively. The decrease in platelet
count in normal pregnancies was not statistically significant whereas the
decline in platelet count in PE patients was statistically significant and
rapid with such decline being directly proportional to the severity of
hypertension. Though the MPV was raised in normal pregnancies, such rise was
insignificant but a significant and consistent rise in MPV was seen among PE
patients which was noticed 4-6 weeks before a notable increase in blood
pressure. In this study the rise in PDW was not statistically significant in
normal pregnancies up to 32weeks gestation while the rise in PDW among pregnant
women with PE was statistically significant, occurring even before a
significant blood pressure increase was noted. This study established a direct
correlation between changes in PC, MPV and PDW and progressive rise and
severity of PE as the month-wise decrease in platelet count as well as the
month-wise increase in MPV and PDW were statistically significant compared to
non-PE patients. The authors concluded that the evaluation of platelet indices
appear to be a reliable, rapid, easy and economical way of predicting PE and
its severity in early pregnancy.19
In a study to evaluate the relationship
between platelet count, mean platelet volume (MPV) and platelet distribution
width (PDW) and severity of preeclampsia and to evaluate their role in
prediction of preeclampsia, Abdel-Moneim et al
studied one hundred and fifty pregnant women at the Al-Azhar
University Hospital, Cairo, Egypt. In their study, fifty women had severe PE;
fifty had mild PE while the third group of fifty were healthy pregnant women
who served as control. Their findings
were in consonance with those of other researchers.10,17–23,32 The platelet count was significantly lower in women with
severe PE compared to women with mild PE and normal pregnant women groups
(139.340 ± 32.610,183.940 ± 37.380 and 249.120 ± 38.350with P ˂
0.001) respectively. They also found that mean platelet volume and platelet distribution width were
significantly higher in women with severe PE compared to women with mild PE and
normal pregnant women groups (11.07 ± 1.08 vs. 9.82 ± 0.68 and 8.50 ± 0.75with p ˂ 0.001
for MPV and 17.09 ± 2.12 vs. 14.26 ± 1.84 and 11.01 ±
1.77 with p ˂ 0.001 for PDW) respectively.
They opined that due to increased platelet destruction and platelet turn over
in patients with preeclampsia, decreasing platelet count and increasing MPV and
PDW may play a role in predicting preeclampsia and concluded that Platelet
indices are simple, cheap and practical tools in predicting severity of PE.17
The study by Tesfay
et al of 79 PE patients and 140 healthy pregnant women in Ethiopia also
highlighted the role of platelet indices in the prediction and prognostication
of disease severity in PE. In their study, PC showed significant decrease while
the MPV and PDW increased significantly with severity of PE. At cut-off value greater than 9.45fL, the MPV had a
sensitivity of 83.5%, specificity of 86.4%, positive
predictive value of 77.6% and negative predictive value of 90.3%. In
conclusion, the authors posited that MPV and PC can be used to diagnose severe
PE as well as predict and prognosticate the disease.10
Thrombocytopenia is the most common
haematological abnormality observed in preeclampsia and it may be due to
consumption of platelets during abnormal activation of the coagulation system.35 However, Ceyhan et al in their study of fifty-six
pregnant women with PE and forty-three normotensive pregnant women did not find
a significant difference in the MPV and platelet count between preeclampsia
patients and healthy controls.37
Thalor et al found no statistically significant relationship
between platelet count decrease and PE but observed a significant correlation
between MPV and PDW and PE. The lack of significant correlation between thrombocytopaenia and PE in that study was attributed to
the low sample size as well as the fact that most of the PE patients had mild
PE and at an earlier GA of between 20 and 24 weeks. MPV and PDW were however
significantly raised, with the rise being directly proportional to the severity
of hypertension; making the researchers conclude that these easily available
and inexpensive markers could be used as predictors of preeclampsia and its
severity.20 Kashanian et al. observed that
MPV alterations in the first and third trimester of pregnancy are increased in
women who would ultimately develop PE, but has low predictive value and as such
is not a good predictor of pre-eclampsia.38
The study by Han et al looked at changes in
blood coagulation parameters and platelet indices in healthy pregnant women
compared with women with mild and severe PE. The report from that study showed
that MPV was significantly raised among women with PE. For this study, 174
pregnant women were recruited. Of these, 79 were healthy pregnant
women, 53 had mild PE while 42 had severe PE. Blood samples were
collected during early and late pregnancy. Coagulation and platelet indices
were assessed and compared among the three different groups of women. The
receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves of the various parameters were
generated, and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated. The predictive
values of both coagulation and platelet parameters were assessed in binary
regression analysis. In the later part of pregnancy activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), prothrombin
time (PT), thrombin time (TT) and platelet count decreased in healthy pregnant
women, while the fibrinogen level and mean platelet volume (MPV) were raised
compared to early pregnancy (p<0.05). On the other hand, in women with PE
raised APTT, TT, MPV and D-dimer (DD) during the third trimester was observed.
It was also observed that TT showed the largest AUC (0.743) and high predictive
value in all participants. In women with PE, MPV showed the largest AUC (0.671)
and ideal predictive efficiency irrespective of the severity. The researchers
concluded that thrombin time and MPV may serve as early monitoring markers for
the onset and severity of PE, respectively.21
Based on observations from a retrospective
study of 284 pregnant women at a tertiary hospital in Istanbul, Turkey
(composed of 49 with mild PE, 70 with severe PE and 165 healthy women serving
as control group) over a three-year period, Dogan K
et al recommended that PC, MPV, and the PC/MPV ratio are useful indices for
predicting the risk of PE. They observed a statistically significant difference
between pregnant women with PE and healthy controls in terms of PC (p = 0.023; p˂0.05), MPV (p = 0.023;
p˂0.05), PC/MPV ratio (p = 0.005; p˂0.01). However, no difference was
observed between women with severe PE and those with mild PE. Cut-off values
for MPV and PC were 9 and 90 respectively for the diagnosis of PE (p˂0.01)
whereas the odds ratios were 1.999 and 1.932 for MPV and PC respectively. In
the study, the PC/MPV ratio was significantly lower in subjects with PE than
healthy controls (p = 0.001). A significant relationship between PE and a
cut-off level of 19.9 for the PC/MPV ratio was evident from the study (p˂
0.01). The study highlighted a 2.4-fold higher risk of PE in women with PC/MPV
ratios of ≥19.9 with an odds ratio
of 2.422 (95% CI: 1.449–4.048).32Viana-Rojas et al demonstrated from their study of 64
women with PE and 70 normotensive pregnant women that the MPV was significantly
raised in PE and even more so in severe PE compared with normotensive
pregnancies and concluded that the MPV is a cheap and easily accessible marker
of PE and its severity.39 Many other studies have also highlighted the
effectiveness of MPV as a marker of PE.22,23,40
Raised MPV indicates enhanced platelet
activation which may result from poor utero-placental circulation. Kanat-Pektas et al studied 200 women at 11- 14 weeks
gestation to determine the predictive value of MPV in the late first trimester
in detecting women who could develop PE.
MPV was significantly higher in pregnant women who subsequently
developed PE (P = 0.001). The study concluded that MPV values of 10.5 fL or more could predict pre-eclampsia
with 66.7% sensitivity and 63.8% specificity.41
Reddy et al in a prospective study of 235 PE
patients and 203 healthy pregnant women demonstrated that the PC, MPV and PDW
values had diagnostic and prognostic values for PE. While the PC decreased, the
MPV and PDW increased. The MPV particularly demonstrated prognostic
significance as the degree of increase in the MPV correlated with the degree of
severity of PE. MPV at cut-off values of 10.95fL had a sensitivity of 80% and a
specificity of 75%. In the study, a cut-off value of 10.95f L for MPV was found
to have significant predictive value for disease progression in PE.42
In a retrospective case-control study of
fifty PE patients and fifty healthy controls, Amita K
et al reported no statistically significant increase in MPV in PE patients as
compared with healthy controls. However, they noted that platelet count was a
reliable index for diagnosing PE and predicting its severity. They also
observed a statistically significant increase in PDW and concluded that this
was also another reliable index for diagnosis of PE but recommended that its
role in determining the severity of preeclampsia need to be explored.43
To ascertain normal platelet indices in the
city of Port Harcourt, Pughikumo, et al studied the
platelet indices of 126 healthy pregnant women and those of 102 non-pregnant
women of reproductive age using the automated haematology analyser, PCE-210
(N), ERMA. They reported a progressive decline in platelet count and PDW with
advancing gestation compared to non-pregnant controls, but the finding was not
statistically significant. The MPV in their study was higher in pregnant women
but this, again, was not statistically significant. The mean platelet count for
the pregnant women was 212.74 ± 63.28 x 109/L;
the mean MPV 9.99 ±1.94fL while the mean PDW was 12.68 ± 1.91fL.44
To establish normal haematological values in
healthy pregnant women in the city of Port Harcourt, Amah-Tariah
et all studied the values of platelet count, mean
platelet volume and platelet distribution width, in the three trimesters of
pregnancy among two hundred and twenty healthy pregnant women. Of that number,
seventy-three were in the first trimester, seventy-five in the second and
seventy-two in the third trimester. Platelet count, mean platelet volume and
platelet distribution width, were all determined by flow cytometry
using the Swelab Alfa Basic model haematological
analyser (Boule Medical AB, Stockholm, Sweden). Their study showed that the average PC across
the three trimesters varied from 289.4±21.68 x10ł/μL
(87.00-594.00) in the first trimester to 259.93± 98.6 x 10ł/μL
(71.00-558.00) in the second trimester and 279.63± 107.97 x 10ł/μL (117.00-693.00) in the third trimester. Average values for the MPV (fL) were 8.45±0.79(6.60-10.90),
8.65±0.76(7.00-10.2) and 8.69±0.75(7.00-10.70) in the first, second and third
trimesters respectively. The PDW(%) averages were 9.93±1.40 (6.90-14.4),
10.10±1.46(6.90-13.40), and 9.86±1.37(7.70-14.90) for the first, second and
third trimesters respectively.45 Unamba in a study of 65
pregnant women with PE at the University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital,
Port Harcourt, Nigeria looked at “Haematological indices and the Effects of
Thrombocytopenia on maternal and Perinatal Outcome in women with preeclampsia
in Port Harcourt, Nigeria” and reported no thrombocytopaenia
among the study population using a cut-off mark of 150 x 109/L. The
researcher concluded that platelet count may not be a reliable index for
predicting and prognosticating disease severity and risk for foetal-maternal
complications in pregnant women with PE in Nigeria. The author further asserted that the
probability of using thrombocytopaenia to ascertain
the prognosis of pre-eclampsia is not feasible in our
environment and should not be advocated for.46 However, the author attributed the absence of thrombocytopaenia among the study population in this
particular study to possible early intervention before the onset of thrombocytopaenia. Again, since this was not a comparative
study, it is difficult to rely on the conclusion from this study as the study
did not consider what the platelet indices were in the healthy pregnant
population. Also, in this study, proteinuria was pegged at 1+ on urine
dipstick. However, FIGO definition of significant proteinuria is 2+ on urine
dipstick. This could have also affected the results of this study which
contradicts the findings of similar studies showing a progressive decline in
platelet count even before the onset of a rise in blood pressure. From the foregoing, it is clear that the
potential role of platelet indices has not been sufficiently explored. There
are still gaps in what is known at the moment. Controversies exist. Some
studies find statistically significant changes that are predictive and
determinant of the severity of PE in all platelet indices (PC, PDW, MPV).10,17,19,23 However, other studies suggest either one or
two of the platelet indices to be more reliable as predictor and determinant of
the severity of PE.18,21,22,32,47Such differences could possibly
result from the performance of the different models of the haematology
analysers used and /or the socio-demographic indices of the populations studied.
The preponderance of controversies on the role of platelet indices in the
prediction and determination of disease severity in PE is an indication that
more studies are needed in order to reach a definitive conclusion on the role
of platelet indices for predicting pre-eclampsia and
determining its severity among the obstetric population.
This study
aimed to compare the platelet indices between pregnant women with and without
preeclampsia and determine the relationship between platelet indices and the
occurrence of preeclampsia.
The subjects for this study were from the antenatal
clinic attendees and labour ward parturients. Routine
examinations and investigations carried out at the booking antenatal visit and
the labour ward for unbooked patients include weight,
height, and blood pressure measurements. Others are full blood count,
retroviral screening, hepatitis B virus screening, venereal disease research
laboratory test, haemoglobin genotype, ABO blood group and rhesus typing and
urinalysis. This study was a case-control study involving pregnant women with
PE and healthy pregnant women at a gestational age of 20 completed weeks and
above being seen at the ante-natal clinic or labour ward of the Rivers State
University Teaching Hospital.
Socio-demographic
information of participants was collected using a structured questionnaire by
the principal investigator and trained designated house officers. Physical
examination was carried out by the principal investigator. Pregnant women were
initially advised to sit and relax for five minutes before having their blood
pressure taken. The participants were then instructed to take off their extra
clothes and sit up straight with their left arm resting on the bench. Blood
pressure readings of participants were then taken by designated trained
midwives using OMRON automated blood pressure monitor, Model M3 and finally
crosschecked by the principal investigator. A urine sample was collected using a clean dry
specimen bottle to check for proteinuria. This aspect of the study which was
carried out by designated trained midwives involved dipping a Meditest Combi-2 test strip into the urine sample for one
minute and then checking for colour change which indicated the presence of
proteinuria. A colour change from yellow to green which is equivalent to 2+
proteinuria in addition to a raised blood pressure of ≥140/90mmHg on at
least two occasions four hours apart was used to make the diagnosis of
preeclampsia. A woman who meets the inclusion criteria was briefly counselled
on the procedure for blood sample collection. She sits down with her arm rested
on a table. A tourniquet is then applied
to the upper arm 8cm-10cm above the antecubital
fossa. The area over the cubital vein is cleaned with
a spirit-soaked piece of cotton wool. The vacutainer
needle on a holder with the bevel facing up was used to puncture the vein and a
properly labelled vacutainer tube prefilled with K2
EDTA applied. When blood flow starts, the tourniquet was removed and three
(3ml) of blood collected. After sample collection, a piece of dry cotton wool
was placed on the venepuncture site, the needle removed, and gentle pressure
applied by the participant for about two minutes to prevent bleeding. The vacutainer tube was then inverted 8-10 times for proper
mixing with the anticoagulant and then kept in a temperature-controlled carrier
(Versapak Insulated Sample Carrier) and subsequently
transferred to the laboratory for analysis. Sample collection from the study
participants was done by either a phlebotomist, a
trained house officer or the principal investigator. Platelet indices (platelet
count, mean platelet volume and platelet distribution width) were analysed
using automated haematology analyser, Sysmex KX-21N
by a dedicated laboratory scientist at the haematology laboratory. Pregnant
women at or after 20 weeks gestational age with blood pressure of
≥140/90mmHg measured on two occasions at least 4 hours apart with
proteinuria (≥2 + dipstick) constituted the cases while pregnant women at
or after 20 weeks gestational age who were normotensive and had no proteinuria
constituted the control group. Pregnant women with pre-gestational
hypertension, chronic kidney disease, urinary tract infection, patients on
aspirin therapy or who do not meet the inclusion criteria above.
Data were entered and cleaned using Microsoft Excel and
then exported to IBM Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25
for statistical analysis. Socio-demographic characteristics of participants
were collected and presented as frequencies and percentages in tables.
Descriptive statistics included means and standard deviation for variables of
the ratio scale of measurement e.g., platelet count, etc. Nominal variables
were summarized using frequencies and proportions. The mean platelet indices
between preeclampsia and controls were compared using independent t-test. The
platelet indices were recorded into normal and abnormal categories. The
relationship between platelet indices and preeclampsia were determined using
Chi-square statistics. The predictive value of the platelet
indices (platelet count, MPV, and PDW) for forecasting preeclampsia were
determined using the Receiver Operator Characteristics (ROC) Curve. The Area Under the Curve (AUC) values with the 95% confidence
intervals were calculated. Validity tests of the platelet indices in relation
to preeclampsia were determined using sensitivity, specificity, and positive
and negative predictive values. Statistical significance was set at alpha level
of 0.05.
This was
obtained from the Rivers State University Teaching Hospital Health Research
Ethics Committee.
Table 1 shows that the highest proportion 16 (32%) of the cases were aged
31-35 years; 12 (24%) were aged 36-40 years, 12
(24%) within the 26–30-year age group and 6 (12%) within the 19–25-year age
group. while 4
(8%) were aged 41-46 years. The age distribution was similar among the controls
since they were age-matched with the cases.
Most
participants were married as observed among cases 47 (94%) and controls 49
(98%), while 3(6%) among cases and 1 (2%) among controls were single.
Table
1:
Socio-demographic characteristics of cases and controls
|
|
Study
group |
|
||||||
|
Variables |
Cases N
= 50 n
(%) |
Controls N
= 50 n
(%) |
Total N
= 100 n
(%) |
|||||
|
Age
category |
|
|
|
|||||
|
19 – 25 years |
6 (12.0) |
6 (12.0) |
12 (12.0) |
|||||
|
26 – 30 years |
12 (24.0) |
12 (24.0) |
24 (24.0) |
|||||
|
31 – 35 years |
16 (32.0) |
16 (32.0) |
32 (32.0) |
|||||
|
36 – 40 years |
12 (24.0) |
12 (24.0) |
24 (24.0) |
|||||
|
41 – 46 years |
4(8.0) |
4 (8.0) |
8 (8.0) |
|||||
|
|
Chi
Square =5.316; p-value = 0.256 |
|
||||||
|
Marital
status |
|
|
|
|||||
|
Married |
47 (94.0) |
49 (98.0) |
96 (96.0) |
|||||
|
Single |
3 (6.0) |
1 (2.0) |
4 (4.0) |
|||||
|
|
Fisher’s
exact p-value = 0.617 |
|
||||||
|
Occupation |
|
|
|
|||||
|
Civil servant/
Professional |
15 (30.0) |
8 (16.0) |
23 (23.0) |
|||||
|
Trader/ Business |
26 (52.0) |
34 (68.0) |
60 (60.0) |
|||||
|
Housewife |
7 (14.0) |
4 (8.0) |
11 (11.0) |
|||||
|
Student |
2 (4.0) |
4 (8.0) |
6 (6.0) |
|||||
|
|
Chi
Square = 4.682; p-value = 0.197 |
|
||||||
|
Level of education |
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Primary |
2 (4.0) |
1 (2.0) |
3 (3.0) |
|
||||
|
Secondary |
21 (42.0) |
18 (36.0) |
39 (39.0) |
|
||||
|
Tertiary |
27 (54.0) |
31 (62.0) |
58 (58.0) |
|
||||
|
|
Fisher’s
exact test = 0.924; p-value = 0.650 |
|
|
|||||
|
Religion |
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Christianity |
48 (96.0) |
46 (92.0) |
94 (94.0) |
|
||||
|
Islam |
2 (4.0) |
4 (8.0) |
6 (6.0) |
|
||||
|
|
Fisher’s
exact test = 1.604; p-value = 0.678 |
|
|
|||||
|
Tribe |
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Hausa |
2 (4.0) |
2 (4.0) |
4 (4.0) |
|
||||
|
Yoruba |
0 (0.0) |
4 (8.0) |
4 (4.0) |
|
||||
|
Igbo |
18 (36.0) |
25 (50.0) |
43 (43.0) |
|
||||
|
Ijaw |
7 (14.0) |
5 (10.0) |
12 (12.0) |
|
||||
|
Others |
23 (46.0) |
14 (28.0) |
37 (37.0) |
|
||||
|
|
Fisher’s
exact test = 7.471; p-value = 0.099 |
|
|
|||||
Among cases
13(26.0%) had a past history of preeclampsia while only 1(2.0%) of controls had
a history of preeclampsia and this was statistically significant (p = 0.001). (Table 2).
Table 2: Past medical history of cases and controls
in the study
|
|
Study
group |
|
|
|
Variables |
Cases N
= 50 n
(%) |
Controls N
= 50 n
(%) |
Total N
= 100 n
(%) |
|
History
of preeclampsia |
|
|
|
|
Yes |
13 (26.0) |
1 (2.0) |
14 (14.0) |
|
No |
37 (74.0) |
49 (98.0) |
86 (86.0) |
|
|
Chi
Square =11.960; p-value = 0.001* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
History
of high blood pressure |
|
|
|
|
Yes |
3 (6.0) |
0 (0.0) |
3 (3.0) |
|
No |
47 (94.0) |
50 (100.0) |
97 (97.0) |
|
|
Chi
Square =3.093; p-value = 0.079 |
|
|
|
History
of diabetes |
|
|
|
|
Yes |
0 (0.0) |
1 (2.0) |
1 (1.0) |
|
No |
50 (100.0) |
49 (98.0) |
99 (99.0) |
|
|
Chi
Square =1.010; p-value = 0.315 |
|
|
|
History
of Kidney disease |
|
|
|
|
Yes |
0 (0.0) |
0 (0.0) |
0 (0.0) |
|
No |
50 (100.0) |
50 (100.0) |
100 (100.0) |
|
|
Chi
Square =0.00; p-value =1.000 |
|
|
|
History
of infertility |
|
|
|
|
Yes |
1 (2.0) |
0 (0.0) |
1 (1.0) |
|
No |
49 (98.0) |
50 (100.0) |
99 (100.0) |
|
|
Chi
Square =1.010; p-value = 0.315 |
|
|
Table 3 shows that 5(10%) of cases had a
family history of PE whereas 1(2%) of controls had such history. In both cases
and controls, the history of PE was more in the sister.
Table 3: Family and social history of cases and
controls
|
|
Study
group |
|
|
|
Variables |
Cases N
= 50 n
(%) |
Controls N
= 50 n
(%) |
Total N
= 100 n
(%) |
|
Relative
with history of preeclampsia |
|
|
|
|
Yes |
5 (10.0) |
1 (2.0) |
6 (6.0) |
|
No |
45 (90.0) |
49 (98.0) |
94 (94.0) |
|
|
Chi
Square =2.837; p-value = 0.092 |
|
|
|
Exact
relationship with relative with history of preeclampsia |
|
|
|
|
Mother |
1 (2.0) |
0 (0.0) |
1 (1.0) |
|
Sister |
4 (8.0) |
1 (2.0) |
5 (5.0) |
|
Nil |
45 (90.0) |
49 (98.0) |
94 (94.0) |
|
|
Fisher’s
exact =2.755; p-value = 0.204 |
|
|
|
History
of tobacco intake |
|
|
|
|
Yes |
0 (0.0) |
1 (2.0) |
1 (1.0) |
|
No |
50 (100.0) |
49 (98.0) |
99 (99.0) |
|
|
Chi
Square =1.010; p-value = 0.315 |
|
|
|
History
of alcohol intake |
|
|
|
|
Yes |
4 (4.0) |
7 (14.0) |
11 (11.0) |
|
No |
46 (92.0) |
43 (86.0) |
89 (89.0) |
|
|
Chi
Square =0.919; p-value =0.338 |
|
|
The highest proportion of the participants
were para 1 and above 32 (64%) for cases and 36(72%)
for controls. Most of the cases and controls had history of delivery of babies
with normal birth weight (Table 4).
Table 4: Obstetrics and gynaecological history of
cases and controls in the study
|
|
Study
group |
|
||
|
Variables |
Cases N
= 50 n
(%) |
Controls N
= 50 n
(%) |
Total N
= 100 n
(%) |
|
|
Gravidity |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
6 (12.0) |
7 (14.0) |
13 (13.0) |
|
|
2-3 |
21 (42.0) |
25 (50.0) |
46 (46.0) |
|
|
4-5 |
17 (34.0) |
16 (32.0) |
33 (33.0) |
|
|
>5 |
6 (12.0) |
2 (4.0) |
8 (8.0) |
|
|
|
Chi
Square =2.455; p-value = 0.483 |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parity |
|
|
|
|
|
Nulliparous |
16 (32.0) |
13 (26.0) |
29 (29.0) |
|
|
Para 1-4 |
32 (64.0) |
36 (72.0) |
68 (68.0) |
|
|
>Para 4 |
2 (4.0) |
1 (2.0) |
3 (3.0) |
|
|
|
Fisher’s
exact =0.963; p-value = 0.630 |
|
||
|
Birth
weight of previous babies (N=71) |
|
|
|
|
|
< 2.5kg |
6 (20.0) |
1 (2.4) |
7 (9.9) |
|
|
2.5 – 3.9kg |
21 (70.0) |
30 (73.2) |
51 (71.8) |
|
|
> 3.9kg |
3 (10.0) |
10 (24.4) |
13 (18.3) |
|
|
|
Fisher’s
exact =7.038; p-value = 0.026* |
|
||
|
History
of miscarriage |
|
|
|
|
|
Yes |
15 (30.0) |
17 (34.0) |
32 (32.0) |
|
|
No |
35 (70.0) |
33 (66.0) |
68 (68.0) |
|
|
|
Fisher’s
exact =2.006; p-value =0.397 |
|
||
|
G.A
at miscarriage (n=27) |
|
|
|
|
|
1-10wks |
5 (33.3) |
6 (50.0) |
11 (40.7) |
|
|
11-20wks |
6 (40.0) |
4 (33.3) |
10 (37.0) |
|
|
21-30wks |
4 (26.7) |
2 (16.7) |
6 (22.2) |
|
|
|
Fishers
exact =0.886; p-value = 0.692 |
|
||
|
|
|
|
||
|
Babies died in womb |
|
|
|
|
|
Yes |
6 (12.0) |
1 (2.0) |
7 (7.0) |
|
|
No |
44 (88.0) |
49 (98.0) |
93 (93.0) |
|
|
|
Chi
square =3.840; p-value = 0.050* |
|
||
|
Babies died within
28 days of delivery |
|
|
|
|
|
Yes |
5 (10.0) |
3 (6.0) |
8 (8.0) |
|
|
No |
45 (90.0) |
47 (94.0) |
92 (92.0) |
|
|
|
Chi
square =0.543; p-value = 0.461 |
|
||
|
Method of GA
determination |
|
|
||
|
LMP |
45 (90.0) |
45 (90.0) |
90 (9.0) |
|
|
First trimester |
5 (10.0) |
5 (10.0) |
10 (10.) |
|
|
Ultrasound scan |
0 (0.0) |
0 (0.0) |
0 (0.0) |
|
|
|
Fisher’s
exact =0.996; p-value = 1.000 |
|
||
*Statistically significant
There is no significant difference in the
systemic and general examination of cases and controls as table 5 shows.
Table 5: Systemic and general examination of cases
and controls in the study
|
|
Study
group |
|
|||
|
Variables |
Cases N
= 50 n
(%) |
Controls N
= 50 n
(%) |
Total N
= 100 n
(%) |
||
|
Respiratory
system |
|
|
|
||
|
Normal |
46 (92.0) |
50 (100.0) |
96 (96.0) |
||
|
Abnormal |
4 (8.0) |
0 (0.0) |
4 (4.0) |
||
|
|
Chi
Square =4.167; p-value = 0.041* |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Blood
pressure |
|
|
|
||
|
Normal |
0 (0.0) |
50(100.0) |
50 (50.0) |
||
|
Hypertension |
50 (100.0) |
0 (0.0) |
50 (50.0) |
||
|
|
Chi
Square =88.395; p-value = 0.0001* |
|
|||
|
Pulse
rate |
|
|
|
||
|
Normal |
31 (62.0) |
50 (100.0) |
81 (81.0) |
||
|
Tachycardia |
19 (38.0) |
0 (0.0) |
19 (19.0) |
||
|
|
Chi
Square =23.457; p-value = 0.0001* |
|
|||
|
Foetal
heart rate |
|
|
|
||
|
Normal |
45 (90.0) |
49 (98.0) |
94 (94.0) |
||
|
Abnormal |
5 (10.0) |
1 (2.0) |
6 (6.0) |
||
|
|
Chi
Square =2.837; p-value =0.092 |
|
|||
|
Fundal height |
|
|
|
||
|
Compactible with G.
A |
49 (98.0) |
47 (94.0) |
96 (96.0) |
||
|
<G. A |
1 (2.0) |
1 (2.0) |
2 (2.0) |
||
|
>G. A |
0 (0.0) |
2 (4.0) |
2 (2.0) |
||
|
|
Fisher’s
exact =1.911; p-value =0.745 |
|
|||
|
Glycosuria |
|
|
|
||
|
Absent |
50 (100.0) |
50 (100.0) |
100 (100.0) |
||
|
Present |
0 (0.0) |
0 (0.0) |
0 (0.0) |
||
|
Proteinuria |
Chi
Square =; p-value = |
|
|||
|
Absent |
0 (00.0) |
50 (100.0) |
50 (50.0) |
||
|
Present |
50(100.0) |
0 (0.0) |
50 (50.0) |
||
|
|
Chi
Square =81.818; p-value =0.0001* |
|
|||
|
Conjunctiva |
|
|
|
||
|
Normal |
45 (90.0) |
49 (98.0) |
94 (94.0) |
||
|
Pale |
5 (10.0) |
1 (2.0) |
6 (6.0) |
||
|
|
Chi
Square =2.837; p-value =0.092 |
|
|||
|
Pedal oedema |
|
|
|
||
|
Present |
37 (74.0) |
4 (8.0) |
41 (41.0) |
||
|
Absent |
13 (26.0) |
46 (92.0) |
59 (59.0) |
||
|
|
Chi
Square =45.019; p-value =0.0001* |
|
|||
|
Jaundice |
|
|
|
||
|
Present |
0 (0.0) |
0 (0.0) |
0 (0.0) |
||
|
Absent |
50 (100.0) |
50 (100.0) |
100 (100.0) |
||
*Statistically significant
As shown in table 6, there was a significant
difference in the mean BMI of cases (33.44±5.33) and controls (30.95±4.76). p =
0.015. This is an indication that obesity is a risk factor for the development
of PE.
Table 6: Comparison of mean weight, height, and BMI
between the two groups
|
|
Cases |
Controls |
|
|
|
Variables |
Mean ± SD |
Mean ± SD |
T |
p-value |
|
Weight |
1.57±0.07 |
1.59±0.08 |
1.625 |
0.107 |
|
Height |
82.80 ± 14.93 |
79.07 ± 13.86 |
1.295 |
0.198 |
|
BMI |
33.44 ± 5.33 |
30.95 ± 4.76 |
2.466 |
0.015* |
SD – Standard deviation *Statistically significant
The results found a statistically significant
difference in the mean platelet count between cases (176.30 ± 67.38) and controls
(207.16 ± 62.07), p
= 0.019, as well as in the mean values of PDW in both cases and controls. The PDW was significantly raised (15.53 ± 3.36) compared to
controls (13.75 ± 2.53), p
= 0.004. (Tables 7 and 8).
Table 7: Comparison of mean blood indices among the
two groups
|
|
Cases |
Controls |
|
|
|
Variables |
Mean ± SD |
Mean ± SD |
t |
p-value |
|
PCV |
34.44 ± 4.55 |
32.22 ± 2.69 |
2.950 |
0.004* |
|
WBC count |
11.48 ± 5.44 |
8.20 ± 2.06 |
3.979 |
0.0001* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
SD – Standard deviation *Statistically significant
Table 8: Comparison of MPV and PDW among the two
groups of the study
|
|
Cases |
Controls |
|
|
|
Variables |
Mean ± SD |
Mean ± SD |
t |
p-value |
|
MPV |
11.14 ± 1.33 |
10.65 ± 1.38 |
1.799 |
0.075 |
|
PDW |
15.53 ± 3.36 |
13.75 ± 2.53 |
2.987 |
0.004* |
|
PC |
176.30±67.38 |
207.16±62.07 |
2.390 |
0.019* |
SD – Standard deviation *Statistically significant
Figure 1
is the Receiver Operator Characteristics (ROC) Curve of
the platelet indices (PC, MPV and PDW).

Figure 1: Receiver Operator Characteristics (ROC) Curve of the platelet indices
(PC, MPV and PDW)
Table 9 shows that the Area under the Curve of the Receiver Operator
Characteristics indicates that PDW has a greater area under the curve and is
significant whereas the MPV shows moderate evidence of a correlation with
preeclampsia.
Table 9: ROC Curve outputs [Area under the Curve (AUC) values and optimal
cut-off value of platelet indices]
|
|
|
95% CI |
|
|
|
|
Variables |
AUC |
Lower |
Upper |
p-value |
Optimal
cut-off |
|
Platelet count |
0.336 |
0.229 |
0.443 |
0.005* |
** |
|
MPV |
0.634 |
0.525 |
0.743 |
0.021* |
11.60 |
|
PDW |
0.672 |
0.565 |
0.779 |
0.003* |
14.50 |
*Statistically significant
**Not determined due to poor diagnostic accuracy of test
Table 10: Validity tests for MPV based on optimal
cut-off of 11.60FL
|
|
|
Pre-Eclampsia |
||
|
|
|
Yes |
No |
Total |
|
MPV |
≥ 11.6 FL |
17 True positive |
6 False positive |
23 |
|
< 11.6 FL |
33 False negative |
44 True negative |
77 |
|
|
Total |
50 |
50 |
100 |
|
x
100
= .
17 .x
100 = 34.0%
50
x
100
. 44
x
100 = 88.0%
50
x
100
. 17
.x 100 = 73.9%
23
x
100
= . 44
x
100 = 42.9%
77
x
100
= . 17 + 44 x 100 = 61.0%
100
Table 11: Validity tests for
PDW based on optimal cut-off of 14.5%
|
|
|
Pre-Eclampsia |
||
|
|
|
Yes |
No |
Total |
|
PDW |
≥ 14.5% |
33 True positive |
14 False positive |
47 |
|
< 14.5% |
17 False negative |
36 True negative |
53 |
|
|
Total |
50 |
50 |
100 |
|
x
100
= .
33 .x
100 = 66.0%
50
x
100
. 36
x
100 = 72.0%
50
x
100
. 33
.x 100 = 70.2%
47
x
100
= . 36
x
100 = 67.9%
53
x
100
= . 69
x
100 = 69.0%
100
Table
12 shows that at a cut-off mark of ≥11.6 FL, MPV has a sensitivity of 34%
and a specificity of 88% while the positive predictive value and negative
predictive value are 73.9% and 34.2% respectively. It also
shows that at a cut-off value of 14.5% the sensitivity of PDW is 66.0% while
the specificity is 72.0%. The positive predictive value for PDW is 70.2 while
the negative predictive value is 67.9%. This implies that whereas the
predictive value MPV is low, PDW is has a high predictive value for PE.
Table 12: Validity findings on MPV and PDW indices
|
Variables |
Sensitivity |
Specificity |
PPV |
NPV |
Overall
accuracy |
|
MPV |
34.0% |
88.0% |
73.9% |
42.9% |
61.0% |
|
PDW |
66.0% |
72.0% |
70.2% |
67.9% |
69.0% |
Pre-eclampsia is a life-threatening multisystem disorder of
pregnancy and a leading cause of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality
complicating about 2-5% of pregnancies globally.1Its
pathophysiology is not fully understood. However, widespread endothelial damage
with associated increased platelet activation and consumption leading to thrombocytopaenia (the
most common haematological abnormality seen in PE) have been implicated in its
pathophysiology.4,13,24 The objectives of this
study were to: compare platelet indices (platelet count, MPV and PDW)
between preeclampsia and healthy controls in RSUTH, determine the relationship
between platelet indices and occurrence of preeclampsia among pregnant women in
RSUTH and ascertain
the predictive value of platelet indices (platelet count, MPV and PDW) in the
development of PE among the study population.
There were
no significant differences in the sociodemographic
indices of the study participants. The study demonstrated significant reduction
in PC in PE compared to controls. The mean platelet count in cases was 176.30 ×
109/L± 67.38 but 207.16 × 109/L ± 62.07 for controls (P=0.019). However, the PC displayed
very low diagnostic accuracy when the three parameters were evaluated on the
ROC curve. The PDW was significantly raised (15.53 ± 3.36) compared to controls (13.75 ± 2.53) (P=0.004). The area under the curve (AUC) of the
ROC Curve for PDW was 0.672(0.565-0,779), CI 95% P=0.003 at a cut-off level of
14.50. This means that at PDW cut-off value of 14.5, there was ahigh risk of developing PE. Though also raised, the
difference in MPV between women with PE and the healthy controls in this study
was not significant. Furthermore, the MPV in this study displayed very low
sensitivity.
The mean
values for PC in this study are lower than those obtained by Alsheeha et al where the mean value for PE subjects was
248.0×109/L. Again, unlike the findings in this study, Alsheeha et al assessed and reported no significant
difference in the PDW and MPV between pregnant women with PE and healthy
controls.34 Some findings of this study are closer to those by Gopi-Arun et al who found statistically significant
difference in the PDW values of PE patients compared with healthy controls.49 In that study, PDW was observed to be significantly
raised in PE compared to healthy controls but the MPV and PC showed no
difference between the two groups.
Several
studies reported statistically significant difference among women with PE
compared with healthy control in all three parameters (marked reduction in
platelet count and elevation of the PDW and MPV).10,17–19,42,43 However, this was not the case in this study as only the
PC and PDW showed statistically significant difference in PE subjects compared
to the healthy group of women. Other studies reported findings congruent with
the findings in this study with just one or two parameters displaying significant
differences among cases and controls.32,39,41 The findings of this study are, however, completely at
variance with the findings by Ceyhan et al who reported no significant
difference in all three platelet indices among cases with PE and controls.37 Reddy et al in a prospective study of 235 PE patients
and 203 healthy pregnant women reported that the MPV demonstrated prognostic
significance as the degree of rise in MPV correlated with the disease severity
in PE at a cut-off value of 10.9fL and a sensitivity and specificity of 80% and
75% respectively. The authors concluded that MPV had predictive value for
disease progression in PE and all three indices have diagnostic and prognostic
values for PE. In this study however, MPV at a cut off value of 11.6fL had a
sensitivity of 34% and a specificity of 88%.42
The
dissimilarities in the various studies on the performance of platelet indices
can be attributed to two major factors. First, it could possibly be due to differences
in the sociodemographic characteristics of the
various study populations. Secondly, it could be due to functional differences
in the various versions of the automated haematology analysers used for
analysing blood samples for full blood count by the various researchers.
The platelet
count is significantly reduced in PE compared to controls but has a very low
diagnostic accuracy. The MPV is not significantly raised in PE when compared
with controls. The PDW is significantly raised in PE compared with controls.
Rising values of the PDW in pregnant women may be an indication of more focused
care within the context of preeclampsia prevention and management.
The small sample size, the study design being a case-control and its
single-centre profile limits the findings of this study. A prospective cohort
study with a large sample of pregnant women initiating antenatal care in the
first trimester would have provided more robust data for analysing the
performance of platelet indices as predictive markers
for PE.
The PDW
values in pregnant women should be carefully noted by caregivers as this could
be an indication of more focused care within the context of pre-eclampsia prevention and management. Future
research should adopt a prospective cohort study design with a large sample of
healthy pregnant women initiating antenatal care in the first trimester to
corroborate the findings of this study. Again, large scale, multicentre
prospective cohort studies with the same version of haematology analyser could
be carried out among pregnant women with similar baseline characteristics to
ascertain the generalisability of the findings of
this study for clinical decision-making in resource-poor settings like ours.
1. Poon LC, Shennan A, Hyett JA, Kapur A, Hadar E, Divakar H, et
al. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics ( FIGO )
initiative on pre‐eclampsia: A pragmatic guide for first‐trimester screening and prevention. Int J Gynecol Obstet.
2019;145(S1):1–33.
2. Belay AS, Wudad T. Prevalence and associated factors of
pre-eclampsia among pregnant women attending anti-natal care at Mettu Karl
referal hospital, Ethiopia: cross-sectional study. Clin Hypertens.
2019;25(1):14.
3. Bibbins-Domingo K, Grossman DC, Curry SJ, Barry MJ, Davidson
KW, Doubeni CA, et al. Screening for Preeclampsia US preventive services task
force recommendation statement. JAMA - J Am Med Assoc. 2017;317(16):1661–7.
4. Friedman SA, Taylor RN, Roberts JM. Pathophysiology of
Preeclampsia. Clin Perinatol. 1991; 18(4):661-682
5. Gathiram P, Moodley J. Pre-eclampsia: Its pathogenesis and
pathophysiolgy. 2016. Cardiovascular
Journal of Africa. 27:71–8.
6. Lisonkova S, Joseph KS. Incidence of preeclampsia: Risk
factors and outcomes associated with early-versus late-onset disease. Am J
Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(6):544.e1-544.e12.
7. Kooffreh M, Ekott M, Ekpoudom D. The prevalence of
pre-eclampsia among pregnant women in the University of Calabar Teaching
Hospital, Calabar. Saudi J Heal Sci. 2014;
8. Ngwenya S, Jones B, Heazell AEP, Mwembe D. Statistical risk
prediction models for adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes in severe
preeclampsia in a low-resource setting: Proposal for a single-centre
cross-sectional study at Mpilo Central Hospital, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe. BMC Res
Notes. 2019;12(1):500.
9. Phipps E, Prasanna D, Brima W, Jim B. Preeclampsia: Updates in
Pathogenesis, Definitions, and Guidelines. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol.
2016;11(6):1102–13.
10. Tesfay F, Negash M, Alemu J, Yahya M, Teklu G, Yibrah M, et al.
Role of platelet parameters in early detection and prediction of severity of
preeclampsia: A comparative cross-sectional study at Ayder comprehensive
specialized and Mekelle general hospitals, Mekelle, Tigray, Ethiopia. Mastrolia
SA, editor. PLoS One. 2019;14(11):e0225536.
11. Rana S, Lemoine E, Granger J, Karumanchi SA. Preeclampsia:
Pathophysiology, Challenges, and Perspectives. Circ Res. 2019;124(7):1094–112.
12. Sanders CE, Hess PE. Updates in Preeclampsia. Curr Anesthesiol
Rep. 2015;5(1):74–81.
13. Amaral LM, Wallace K, Owens M, LaMarca B. Pathophysiology and
Current Clinical Management of Preeclampsia. Current Hypertension Reports.
2017; 19.
14. LaMarca B, Cunningham M, Cornelius D, Amaral L. Preeclampsia:
long-term consequences for vascular health. Vasc Health Risk Manag.
2015;11:403.
15. Kane SC, Da Silva Costa F, Brennecke SP. New directions in the
prediction of pre-eclampsia. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics
and Gynaecology. Blackwell Publishing; 2014;54:101–7.
16. Doğan K, Guraslan H, Senturk MB, Helvacioglu C, İdil
S, Ekin M. Can Platelet Count and Platelet Indices Predict the Risk and the
Prognosis of Preeclampsia? Hypertens Pregnancy. 2015;34(4):434–42.
17. Abdel-Moneim Alkholy E, Ali Farag E, Atef Behery M, Mohammed
Ibrahim M. The Significance Of Platelet Count, Mean Platelet Volume And
Platelet Width Distribution Inpreeclampsia. AAMJ. 2013;11.
18. Abass A-E, Abdalla R, Omer I, Ahmed S, Khalid A, Elzein H.
Evaluation of Platelets Count and Indices in Pre-Eclampsia Compared to Normal
Pregnancies. IOSR J Dent Med Sci. 2016;15(07):05–8.
19. Dadhich S, Agrawal S, Soni M, Choudhary R, Jain R, Sharma S, et
al. Predictive Value of Platelet Indices in Development of Preeclampsia.
Malhotra N, Puri R, editors. J SAFOG . 2012;4:17–21.
20. Thalor N, Singh K, Pujani M, Chauhan V, Agarwal C, Ahuja R. A
correlation between platelet indices and preeclampsia. Hematol Transfus Cell
Ther. 2019;41(2):129–33.
21. Han L, Liu X, Li H, Zou J, Yang Z, Han J, et al. Blood
coagulation parameters and platelet indices: Changes in normal and preeclamptic
pregnancies and predictive values for preeclampsia. PLoS One. 2014;9(12).
22. Vilchez G, Lagos M, Kumar K, Argoti P. Is mean platelet volume a
better biomarker in pre-eclampsia? J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2017;43(6):982–90.
23. Wang ZM, Zhu QY, Zhang JF, Wu JL, Yang R, Wang DM. Changes of
platelet parameters in early severe preeclampsia. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol.
2017;44(2):259–63.
24. Rosser ML, Katz NT. Preeclampsia: An Obstetrician’s Perspective.
Vol. 20, Advances in Chronic Kidney Disease. 2013. p. 287–96.
25. Adu-Bonsaffoh K, Antwi DA, Gyan B, Obed SA. Endothelial
dysfunction in the pathogenesis of pre-eclampsia in Ghanaian women. BMC
Physiol. 2017;17(1):5.
26. Brennan LJ, Morton JS, Davidge ST. Vascular Dysfunction in
Preeclampsia. Microcirculation. 2014;21(1):4–14.
27. Tenório MB, Ferreira RC, Moura FA, Bueno NB, De Oliveira ACM,
Goulart MOF. Cross-Talk between Oxidative Stress and Inflammation in
Preeclampsia.. Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity. 2019.
28. Boeldt DS, Bird IM. Vascular adaptation in pregnancy and
endothelial dysfunction in preeclampsia. Journal of Endocrinology. 2017;
232:27–44.
29. Vanwijk MJ, Kublickiene K, Boer K, VanBavel E. Vascular function
in preeclampsia. Cardiovascular Research. 2000;47:8–48.
30. Powe CE, Levine RJ, Karumanchi SA. Preeclampsia, a disease of
the maternal endothelium: The role of antiangiogenic factors and implications
for later cardiovascular disease. Circulation. 2011;123(24):2856–69.
31. Possomato-Vieira JS, Khalil RA. Mechanisms of Endothelial
Dysfunction in Hypertensive Pregnancy and Preeclampsia. In: Advances in
Pharmacology. 2016;361–431.
32. Doğan K, Guraslan H, Senturk MB, Helvacioglu C, İdil
S, Ekin M. Can Platelet Count and Platelet Indices Predict the Risk and the
Prognosis of Preeclampsia? Hypertens Pregnancy. 2015;34(4):434–42.
33. Ciobanu AM, Colibaba S, Cimpoca B, Peltecu G, Panaitescu AM.
Thrombocytopenia in Pregnancy. Maedica (Buchar). 2016;11(1):55–60.
34. AlSheeha MA, Alaboudi RS, Alghasham MA, Iqbal J, Adam I.
Platelet count and platelet indices in women with preeclampsia. Vasc Health
Risk Manag. 2016; 12:477–80.
35. Gopi A, Donthi D. Platelet indices in Pre-eclampsia and
Eclampsia. Natl J Lab Med. 2018;7(2).
36. Gogoi P, Sinha P, Gupta B, Firmal P, Rajaram S.
Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and platelet indices in pre-eclampsia. Int J
Gynecol Obstet. 2019;144(1):16–20.
37. Ceyhan T, Beyan C, Başer I, Kaptan K, Güngör S, Ifran A.
The effect of pre-eclampsia on complete blood count, platelet count and mean
platelet volume. Ann Hematol. 2006;85(5):320–2.
38. Kashanian M, Hajjaran M, Khatami E, Sheikhansari N. Evaluation
of the value of the first and third trimester maternal mean platelet volume
(MPV) for prediction of pre-eclampsia. Pregnancy Hypertens. 2013;3(4):222–6.
39. Viana-Rojas JA, Rosas-Cabral A, Prieto-Macías J,
Terrones-Saldívar MC, Arcos-Noguez P, Bermúdez-Gómez J, et al. [Relation of red
cell distribution width and mean platelet volume with the severity of
preeclampsia]. Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc. 2017;55(2):176–81.
40. Howarth S, Marshall LR, Barr AL, Evans S, Pontre M, Ryan N.
Platelet indices during normal pregnancy and pre-eclampsia. Br J Biomed Sci.
1999;56(1):20–2.
41. Kanat-Pektas M, Yesildager U, Tuncer N, Arioz DT, Nadirgil-Koken
G, Yilmazer M. Could mean platelet volume in late first trimester of pregnancy
predict intrauterine growth restriction and pre-eclampsia? J Obstet Gynaecol
Res. 2014;40(7):1840–5.
42. Reddy S, Rajendra Prasad CB. Significance of platelet indices as
severity marker in nonthrombocytopenic preeclampsia cases. J Lab Physicians.
2019;11(3):186.
43. S Nisha DASPSUAT. Prevalence and characterization of
thrombocytopenia in pregnancy in Indian women. Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus.
2012;28(2):77–81.
44. C PO. Platelet Indices in Pregnant Women in Port Harcourt,
Nigeria. IOSR J Dent Med Sci. 2015;14(3):2279–861.
45. Amah-Tariah FS, Ojeka SO, Dapper DV. Haematological values in
pregnant women in Port Harcourt, Nigeria II: Serum iron and transferrin, total
and unsaturated iron binding capacity and some red cell and platelet indices.
undefined. 2011; 0942e3
46. Unamba B. Haematological Indices And The Effect Of
Thrombocytopenia On Maternal And Perinatal Outcome In Women With Pre-Eclampsia
In Port Harcourt Nigeria | Faculty Of Obstetrics And Gynaecology. 2016.
https://www.dissertation.npmcn.edu.ng/index.php/FMCOG/article/view/1808
47. Thalor N, Singh K, Pujani M, Chauhan V, Agarwal C, Ahuja R. A
correlation between platelet indices and preeclampsia. Hematol Transfus Cell
Ther. 2019;41(2):129–33.
48. Katz DL, Elmore JG, Wild D, Lucan SC. Jekel’s Epidemiology,
Biostatistics and Preventive Medicine E-Book: With Student Consult Online
Access. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2013. 453
49. Gopi-Arun DD. (PDF) Platelet indices in Pre-eclampsia and
Eclampsia Researchgate. 2018. 4.
|
Cite
this Article: Ela, GM; Jumbo-Cleopatra, T;
Ikechebelu,
JI; Kua, PL; Omunakwe, H (2023). Comparative Difference in Platelet Indices Among Preeclamptics and Controls at a Tertiary Centre in Port
Harcourt, Nigeria. Greener Journal of
Medical Sciences, 13(2): 164-182. |