Cited by 43Pregnancy and preeclampsia studiesNeurological Complications and SyndromesGestational Diabetes Research and Management

Isolated gestational proteinuria preceding the diagnosis of preeclampsia – an observational study

Open access
Yamada, Takahiro, Obata‐Yasuoka, Mana, Hamada, Hiromi, Baba, Yosuke, Ohkuchi, Akihide, Yasuda, Shun, Kawabata, Kosuke, Minakawa, Shiori +16 more·2016·Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

Abstract

Introduction: Some pregnant women develop significant proteinuria in the absence of hypertension. However, clinical significance of isolated gestational proteinuria (IGP) is not well understood. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of IGP in singleton pregnancies and the proportion of women with IGP who subsequently developed preeclampsia (IGP‐PE) among all PE cases. Material and methods: This was an observational study of 6819 women with singleton pregnancies at 12 centers, including 938 women with at least once determination of protein‐to‐creatinine ratio (P/Cr). Significant proteinuria in pregnancy (SPIP) was defined as P/Cr (mg/mg) level >0.27. IGP was defined as SPIP in the absence of hypertension. Gestational hypertension (GH) preceding preeclampsia (GH‐PE) was defined as preeclampsia (PE) in which GH preceded SPIP. Simultaneous PE (S‐PE) was defined as PE in which both SPIP and hypertension occurred simultaneously. Results: IGP and PE were diagnosed in 130 (1.9%) and 158 (2.3%) of 6819 women, respectively. Of 130 women with IGP, 32 (25%) progressed to PE and accounted for 20% of all women with PE. Hence, women with IGP had a relative risk of 13.1 (95% CI; 9.2–18.5) for developing PE compared with those without IGP [25% (32/130) vs. 1.9% (126/6689)]. At diagnosis of SPIP, P/Cr levels already exceeded 1.0 more often in women with S‐PE than in those with IGP‐PE [67% (33/49) vs. 44% (14/32), respectively, p = 0.031]. Conclusions: IGP is a risk factor for PE, and IGP‐PE accounts for a considerable proportion (20%) of all PE.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/aogs.12915

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Minakami H, Maeda T, Fujii T, Hamada H, Iitsuka Y, Itakura A et al. Guidelines for obstetrical practice in Japan: Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (JSOG) and Japan Association of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (JAOG) 2014 edition. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2014;40:1469-99.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yamada, T., Obata‐Yasuoka, M., Hamada, H., Baba, Y., Ohkuchi, A., Yasuda, S., Kawabata, K., Minakawa, S., Hirai, C., Kusaka, H., Murabayashi, N., Inde, Y., Nagura, M., Umazume, T., Itakura, A., Maeda, M., Sagawa, N., Ohno, Y., Kataoka, S., Fujimori, K., Kudo, Y., Ikeda, T., Nakai, A., & Minakami, H.
Affiliations
  • Hokkaido University Hospital (JP)
  • University of Tsukuba Hospital (JP)
  • Jichi Medical University Hospital (JP)
  • Fukushima Medical University Hospital (JP)
  • Hakodate Central General Hospital (JP)
  • Hiroshima University Hospital (JP)
  • Juntendo University Hospital (JP)
  • Mie Chuo Medical Center (JP)
  • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Mie University Hospital Tsu Japan
  • Nippon Medical School Tama Nagayama Hospital (JP)
  • Rakuwakai Otowa Hospital (JP)
  • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Ohno Ladies Clinic Iwakura Japan
  • Mie University Hospital (JP)
Corresponding author
Yamada, Takahiro
Venue
Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-05-23
Volume
95
Issue
9
Pages
1048-1054
ISSN
  • 0001-6349 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0412
OpenAlex
W2342948116
Cited by
43
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2
FWCI
5.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) (submittedVersion)
  • Hokkaido University Collection of Scholarly and Academic Papers (Hokkaido University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, and Culture of Japan (25462546, 26462468)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Neurological Complications and Syndromes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
Keywords
preeclampsia, urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, gestational hypertension, preeclampsia risk factors, singleton pregnancy, hypertension in pregnancy
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Creatinine, Female, Humans, Japan, Maternal Age, Middle Aged, Pre-Eclampsia, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Proteinuria, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review