Prediction of Adverse Pregnancy Outcome Related to Placental Dysfunction Using the sFlt-1/PlGF Ratio: A Narrative Review

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The sFlt-1 (soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1)/PlGF (placental growth factor) ratio is a helpful tool for the prediction and diagnosis of preeclampsia (PE). Current data even show that the ratio has the potential to predict adverse pregnancy outcomes (APO) caused by placental pathologies. The aim of this article is to give a brief overview of recent findings on APO predictions based on the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio. The focus is on obstetric pathologies related to placental dysfunction (PD) such as PE and/or fetal growth restriction (FGR). New uses of the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio as a predictor of APO demonstrate its potential with regard to planning hospitalization and corticosteroid administration and the optimal timing of delivery. However, prospective interventional studies are warranted to define the exact role of the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio as a predictor of adverse pregnancy outcomes caused by placental pathologies.

Zusammenfassung

Der sFlt-1-(lösliche Fms-ähnliche Tyrosinkinase-1)/PlGF-(plazentarer Wachstumsfaktor-)Quotient ist ein nützliches Werkzeug für die Prognose und Diagnose einer Präeklampsie (PE). Aktuelle Daten zeigen sogar, dass der Quotient das Potenzial hat, durch plazentare Pathologien hervorgerufene ungünstige perinatale Outcomes (APO) vorherzusagen. Dieser Artikel gibt einen kurzen Überblick über die neuesten Erkenntnisse zu APO-Vorhersagen, die auf dem Einsatz des sFlt-1/PlGF-Quotienten basieren. Im Mittelpunkt stehen geburtshifliche Pathologien, die durch eine plazentare Dysfunktion (PD) wie PE und/oder fetale Wachstumsrestriktion (FGR) hervorgerufen werden. Neue Einsatzfelder für den sFlt-1/PlGF-Quotienten als Prädiktor von APO zeigen sein Potenzial bei der Planung einer Einweisung ins Krankenhaus bzw. der Verabreichung von Kortikosteroiden sowie für die optimale Terminierung einer Entbindung. Prospektive interventionelle Studien sind notwendig, um die präzise Rolle des sFlt-1/PlGF-Quotienten als Prädiktor von ungünstigen Schwangerschaftsergebnissen, die durch plazentare Pathologien hervorgerufen werden, zu ermitteln.

Publication History

Received: 05 December 2020

Accepted after revision: 27 February 2021

Article published online:
09 August 2021

© 2021. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

• References

• 1 Rana S, Powe CE, Salahuddin S. et al. Angiogenic factors and the risk of adverse outcomes in women with suspected preeclampsia. Circulation 2012; 125: 911-919
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Verlohren S, Herraiz I, Lapaire O. et al. The sFlt-1/PlGF ratio in different types of hypertensive pregnancy disorders and its prognostic potential in preeclamptic patients. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 206: 58.e1-58.e8
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Gómez-Arriaga PI, Herraiz I, López-Jiménez EA. et al. Uterine artery Doppler and sFlt-1/PlGF ratio: prognostic value in early-onset pre-eclampsia. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 43: 525-532
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Graupner O, Lobmaier SM, Ortiz JU. et al. sFlt-1/PlGF ratio for the prediction of the time of delivery. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2018; 298: 567-577
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Stepan H, Herraiz I, Schlembach D. et al. Implementation of the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio for prediction and diagnosis of pre-eclampsia in singleton pregnancy: implications for clinical practice. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 45: 241-246
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Villalaín C, Herraiz I, Valle L. et al. Maternal and Perinatal Outcomes Associated With Extremely High Values for the sFlt-1 (Soluble fms-Like Tyrosine Kinase 1)/PlGF (Placental Growth Factor) Ratio. J Am Heart Assoc 2020; 9: e015548
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Mirkovic L, Tulic I, Stankovic S. et al. Prediction of adverse maternal outcomes of early severe preeclampsia. Pregnancy Hypertens 2020; 22: 144-150
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Hoffmann J, Ossada V, Weber M. et al. An intermediate sFlt-1/PlGF ratio indicates an increased risk for adverse pregnancy outcome. Pregnancy Hypertens 2017; 10: 165-170
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Bednarek-Jędrzejek M, Kwiatkowski S, Ksel-Hryciów J. et al. The sFlt-1/PlGF ratio values within the < 38, 38–85 and > 85 brackets as compared to perinatal outcomes. J Perinat Med 2019; 47: 732-740
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Chang YS, Chen CN, Jeng SF. et al. The sFlt-1/PlGF ratio as a predictor for poor pregnancy and neonatal outcomes. Pediatr Neonatol 2017; 58: 529-533
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Stolz M, Zeisler H, Heinzl F. et al. An sFlt-1:PlGF ratio of 655 is not a reliable cut-off value for predicting perinatal outcomes in women with preeclampsia. Pregnancy Hypertens 2018; 11: 54-60
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Simón E, Permuy C, Sacristán L. et al. sFlt-1/PlGF ratio for the prediction of delivery within 48 hours and adverse outcomes in expectantly managed early-onset preeclampsia. Pregnancy Hypertens 2020; 22: 17-23
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Graupner O, Karge A, Flechsenhar S. et al. Role of sFlt-1/PlGF ratio and feto-maternal Doppler for the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome in late-onset pre-eclampsia. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2020; 301: 375-385
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Ciobanou A, Jabak S, De Castro H. et al. Biomarkers of impaired placentation at 35–37 weeksʼ gestation in the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2019; 54: 79-86
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Friedman AM, Cleary KL. Prediction and prevention of ischemic placental disease. Semin Perinatol 2014; 38: 177-182
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Levine RJ, Maynard SE, Qian C. et al. Circulating angiogenic factors and the risk of preeclampsia. N Engl J Med 2004; 350: 672-683
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Herraiz I, Dröge LA, Gómez-Montes E. et al. Characterization of the soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 to placental growth factor ratio in pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 124 (2 Pt 1): 265-273
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Gaccioli F, Sovio U, Cook E. et al. Screening for fetal growth restriction using ultrasound and the sFLT1/PlGF ratio in nulliparous women: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Child Adolesc Health 2018; 2: 569-581
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Quezada MS, Rodríguez-Calvo J, Villalaín C. et al. sFlt-1/PlGF ratio and timing of delivery in early-onset fetal growth restriction with antegrade umbilical artery flow. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2020; 56: 549-556
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Mendoza M, Hurtado I, Bonacina E. et al. Individual risk assessment for prenatal counseling in early-onset growth-restricted and small-for-gestational-age fetuses. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2020; DOI: 10.1111/aogs.14032.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Mendoza M, Garcia-Manau P, Arévalo S. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of first-trimester combined screening for early-onset and preterm pre-eclampsia at 8–10 compared with 11–13 weeksʼ gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2021; 57: 84-90
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Sapantzoglou I, Wright A, Arozena MG. et al. Ophthalmic artery Doppler in combination with other biomarkers in prediction of pre-eclampsia at 19–23 weeksʼ gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2021; 57: 75-83
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Papastefanou I, Wright D, Syngelaki A. et al. Competing-risks model for prediction of small-for-gestational-age neonate from biophysical and biochemical markers at 11–13 weeksʼ gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2021; 57: 52-61
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Allotey J, Snell KI, Smuk M. et al. Validation and development of models using clinical, biochemical and ultrasound markers for predicting pre-eclampsia: an individual participant data meta-analysis. Health Technol Assess 2020; 24: 1-252
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Task Force on Hypertension in Pregnancy. Hypertension in pregnancy. Report of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologistsʼ Task Force on Hypertension in Pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 122: 1122-1131
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 German Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (DGGG); Austrian Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (OEGG), Swiss Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (SGGG). Guidelines for Hypertensive Disorders in Pregnancy. Diagnosis and therapy. Updated May 2019. Accessed November 14, 2020 at: https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/015-018.html
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Stepan H, Hund M, Andraczek T. Combining Biomarkers to Predict Pregnancy Complications and Redefine Preeclampsia: The Angiogenic-Placental Syndrome. Hypertension 2020; 75: 918-926
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Brown MA, Magee LA, Kenny LC. et al. International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy (ISSHP). The hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: ISSHP classification, diagnosis & management recommendations for international practice. Pregnancy Hypertens 2018; 13: 291-310
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Lai J, Syngelaki A, Nicolaides KH. et al. Impact of new definitions of preeclampsia at term on identification of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2020; DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.11.004.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 Duffy J, Hirsch M, Kawsar A. et al. iHOPE: International Collaboration to Harmonise Outcomes in Pre-Eclampsia. Outcome reporting across randomised controlled trials evaluating therapeutic interventions for pre-eclampsia. BJOG 2017; 124: 1829-1839
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Duffy J, Cairns AE, Richards-Doran D. et al. International Collaboration to Harmonise Outcomes for Pre-eclampsia (iHOPE). A core outcome set for pre-eclampsia research: an international consensus development study. BJOG 2020; 127: 1516-1526
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 32 Bian X, Biswas A, Huang X. et al. Short-Term Prediction of Adverse Outcomes Using the sFlt-1 (Soluble fms-Like Tyrosine Kinase 1)/PlGF (Placental Growth Factor) Ratio in Asian Women With Suspected Preeclampsia. Hypertension 2019; 74: 164-172
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 33 Dröge LA, Perschel FH, Stütz N. et al. Prediction of Preeclampsia-Related Adverse Outcomes With the sFlt-1 (Soluble fms-Like Tyrosine Kinase 1)/PlGF (Placental Growth Factor)-Ratio in the Clinical Routine: A Real-World Study. Hypertension 2021; 77: 461-471
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Perry H, Binder J, Kalafat E. et al. Angiogenic Marker Prognostic Models in Pregnant Women with Hypertension. Hypertension 2020; 75: 755-761
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 35 Broekhuijsen K, van Baaren GJ, van Pampus MG. et al. HYPITAT-II study group. Immediate delivery versus expectant monitoring for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy between 34 and 37 weeks of gestation (HYPITAT-II): an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015; 385: 2492-2501
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 36 Chappell LC, Brocklehurst P, Green ME. et al. PHOENIX Study Group. Planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2019; 394: 1181-1190
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 37 Gordijn SJ, Beune IM, Thilaganathan B. et al. Consensus definition of fetal growth restriction: a Delphi procedure. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016; 48: 333-339
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 38 Lees CC, Stampalija T, Baschat A. et al. ISUOG Practice Guidelines: diagnosis and management of small-for-gestational-age fetus and fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2020; 56: 298-312
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 39 Figueras F, Caradeux J, Crispi F. et al. Diagnosis and surveillance of late-onset fetal growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018; 218 (2S): S790-S802.e1
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 40 Lees CC, Marlow N, van Wassenaer-Leemhuis A. et al. TRUFFLE study group. 2 year neurodevelopmental and intermediate perinatal outcomes in infants with very preterm fetal growth restriction (TRUFFLE): a randomised trial. Lancet 2015; 385: 2162-2172
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 41 Baschat AA. Neurodevelopment following fetal growth restriction and its relationship with antepartum parameters of placental dysfunction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 37: 501-514
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 42 Ganzevoort W, Thornton JG, Marlow N. et al. GRIT Study Group; TRUFFLE Study Group. Comparative analysis of 2-year outcomes in GRIT and TRUFFLE trials. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2020; 55: 68-74
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 43 Shinohara S, Uchida Y, Kasai M. et al. Association between the high soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 to placental growth factor ratio and adverse outcomes in asymptomatic women with early-onset fetal growth restriction. Hypertens Pregnancy 2017; 36: 269-275
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 44 Lobmaier SM, Figueras F, Mercade I. et al. Angiogenic factors vs. Doppler surveillance in the prediction of adverse outcome among late-pregnancy small-for- gestational-age fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 43: 533-540
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 45 Stampalija T, Thornton J, Marlow N. et al. TRUFFLE-2 Group. Fetal cerebral Doppler changes and outcome in late preterm fetal growth restriction: prospective cohort study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2020; 56: 173-181
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 46 Hund M, Verhagen-Kamerbeek W, Reim M. et al. Influence of the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio on clinical decision-making in women with suspected preeclampsia–the PreOS study protocol. Hypertens Pregnancy 2015; 34: 102-115
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 47 Klein E, Schlembach D, Ramoni A. et al. Influence of the sFlt-1/PlGF Ratio on Clinical Decision-Making in Women with Suspected Preeclampsia. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0156013
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar