This link, to the "hypertension" section of the signs and symptoms page, can help to answer your question: http://www.preeclampsia.org/symptoms.asp#hyper
To paraphrase it, the guidelines for diagnosis of preeclampsia used to include a 30/15 pt rise from baseline BP and the NIH working group changed that in 1990. Following that explanation is this statement:
quote:"Nonetheless, it is the collective clinical opinion of this panel that women who have a rise of 30 mm Hg systolic or 15 mm Hg diastolic blood pressure warrant close observation, especially if proteinuria and hyperuricemia (uric acid [UA] greater than or equal to 6 mg/dL) are also present.
It is written in greater detail and goes on to give more information --definately worth reading!
This section is for discussions with other women who have probably been through the same signs/symptoms that you may be experiencing. Please note, we cannot offer medical advice and encourage members to discuss their concerns with their doctors. New members, come on in and introduce yourself!
2 posts • Page 1 of 1
I keep seeing in the forum that 140/90 is the criteria for PE diagnosis. I keep reading in studies and elsewhere and told by my perinatologist that the criteria is a 30 point increase systolic/diastolic over that person's baseline as the PE criteria. Which one is correct, as a 30 jump to a person with normally low pressures might not place them in the PE range and a person with normally high pressures might be placed incorrectly?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests