P10. Placental expression of haemostatic and angiogenic markers in preeclampsia

Abstract

cantly higher than in late onset PE (497 ± 81 vs. 13 ± 4, p < 0,001 and 131 ± 15 vs. 29 ± 5, p < 0.001; p for early vs. late PE <0.001). Again ROC curves and their AUC showed best performance for the sFlt1/PlGF ratio, being 98.6% (vs. 97.6% for sFlt1 and 97.4% for PlGF) in early onset PE vs. controls and 90.8% (vs. 82.1% for sFlt1 and 88.4% for PlGF) in late onset PE. Patients with superimposed, mild or severe PE and HELLP each showed higher ratios than controls (202 ± 110; 137 ± 27; 497 ± 91 and 254 ± 72 vs. 16 ± 2, each p < 0.001); in calculated ROC curves, their AUC were 93.6%, 94.8%, 99.4% and 98.6%, respectively. Whereas sFlt1/PlGF values compared to controls were significantly higher in patients with PIH and GP, no significant difference was observed in patients with cHT (PIH 65 ± 18 vs. 16 ± 2, p < 0.001; GP 62 ± 25 vs. 16 ± 2, p = 0.01 and cHT 13 ± 8 vs. 16 ± 2, p = 0.6). Ratio values of patients with each PIH and GP were significantly lower than in patients with mild PE (p < 0.007), severe PE (p < 0.001) and HELLP (p < 0.003). Compared to patients with superimposed PE a significant difference was observed only vs. GP (p = 0.015) whereas vs. PIH no significant difference was observed (p = 0.178). Conclusion: The automated measurement of sFlt1/PlGF is a reliable tool to discriminate between different types of pregnancy-related hypertensive disorders, particularly in early onset PE, severe PE and HELLP, being the most severe variations of PE. Thus, sFlt1/PlGF gives additional valuable information and can be used as an aid in diagnosis and therefore adapt clinical management. First Author < 35 years: Yes.