MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394930034 · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2024.04.016

Lasix for the prevention of de novo postpartum hypertension: a randomized placebo-controlled trial (LAPP Trial)

2024· article· en· W4394930034 on OpenAlexaff
Ukachi N. Emeruwa, Hooman Azad, Samsiya Ona, Shai Bejerano, Sarah Alnafisee, Jordan Emont, Sharon Mathew, Michelle Batlle, Denice Arnold, Erinma P. Ukoha, Louise C. Laurent, Marni Jacobs, Janice J. Aubey, Russell S. Miller, Cynthia Gyamfi‐Bannerman

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
FundersIrving Medical Center, Columbia UniversityNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialPlaceboPreeclampsiaObstetricsPregnancyPediatricsInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Birthing people with de novo postpartum hypertensive disorders continue to be among the populations at highest risk for severe maternal morbidity. Randomized controlled trials demonstrate a benefit of oral loop diuretics in decreasing postpartum hypertensive morbidity in patients with an antenatal diagnosis of preeclampsia. It is not known whether this same therapy benefits patients at risk for new-onset postpartum hypertension. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate whether oral furosemide can reduce the risk for de novo postpartum hypertension among high-risk birthing people by reducing postdelivery blood pressure. STUDY DESIGN: From October 2021 to April 2022, we conducted a randomized triple-masked placebo-controlled clinical trial of individuals at high risk for de novo postpartum hypertension at a single university-based tertiary care medical center. A total of 82 postpartum patients with no antenatal diagnosis of chronic hypertension or a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy who were at high risk for the development of de novo postpartum hypertension based on a prespecified risk factor algorithm were enrolled after childbirth. The participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a 5-day course of 20-mg oral furosemide daily or identical-appearing placebo starting within 8 hours of delivery. Participants were followed for 6 weeks postpartum using Bluetooth-enabled remote blood pressure monitoring and electronic surveys. The primary outcome was mean arterial pressure averaged over the 24 hours before discharge or the 24 hours before antihypertensive therapy initiation. The study was powered to detect a 5 mm Hg difference in average mean arterial pressure (standard deviation, 6.4 mm Hg) with 90% power at an alpha of 0.05, requiring a sample size of 41 per group. Secondary outcomes included the rate of de novo postpartum hypertension, readmission data, other measures of hypertensive and maternal morbidity, breastfeeding data, and drug-related neonatal outcomes. RESULTS: The primary outcome was assessed in 80 of the 82 participants. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. There was no significant difference in average mean arterial pressure in the 24 hours before discharge (or antihypertensive initiation) in the furosemide group (88.9±7.4 mm Hg) compared with the placebo group (86.8±7.1 mm Hg; absolute difference, 2.1 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval, -1.2 to 5.3). Of the 79 participants for whom secondary outcomes were assessed, 10% (n=8) developed de novo postpartum hypertension and 9% (n=7) were initiated on antihypertensive therapy. Rates were not significantly different between the groups (P=.71 and P>.99, respectively). CONCLUSION: De novo postpartum hypertension is a common phenomenon among at-risk patients, warranting close monitoring for severe hypertension and other maternal morbidity. There is insufficient evidence to suggest that furosemide reduces average mean arterial pressure in the 24 hours before discharge from the delivery hospitalization (or antihypertensive medication initiation) compared with placebo.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207