Severe Preeclampsia at 34 Weeks in a Regional Hospital
A 29-year-old G2P1 at 34+2 weeks presents to a regional hospital with a severe headache, visual flashes, and right upper quadrant pain. BP is 172/114 mmHg on two readings, platelets 92 × 10⁹/L, AST 140 U/L, creatinine 1.1 mg/dL, and urine protein-to-creatinine ratio 1.2. She has had no seizure. Fetal heart tracing shows a baseline of 150 beats/min with recurrent variable decelerations. The hospital has no neonatal intensive care unit and is 90 minutes by road from the tertiary center. The obstetrician is on call alone; a second theater team is available. The patient asks whether she can wait until 37 weeks for the baby's sake.
1. What is the diagnosis and what immediate maternal treatment would you start?
Read the worked answer
This is preeclampsia with severe features at 34+2 weeks: severe-range hypertension, headache, visual symptoms, right upper quadrant pain, thrombocytopenia, raised AST, and proteinuria. Immediate treatment is IV magnesium sulfate for seizure prophylaxis, with a loading dose followed by infusion, and IV antihypertensives such as labetalol or hydralazine to bring BP below 160/110 mmHg without dropping it too quickly. I would place a urinary catheter, monitor reflexes and respiratory rate, and check magnesium levels if available. The reasoning is that maternal complications-stroke, eclampsia, HELLP syndrome-are the immediate threat, and delivery is the definitive treatment. Waiting until 37 weeks is unsafe because severe features at this gestation carry a high risk of maternal and fetal deterioration. I would also give corticosteroids for fetal lung maturity if delivery can be delayed 24–48 hours without maternal instability.
2. How would you decide between immediate delivery and transfer to the tertiary center?
Read the worked answer
The decision depends on maternal stability and fetal status. With recurrent variable decelerations and severe features, I would not plan a long transfer without first stabilizing the mother and confirming that the fetus is not in immediate distress. If the mother is stable after magnesium and antihypertensives and the fetal tracing is reassuring, transfer in utero to a unit with neonatal intensive care is preferable because preterm infants do better with appropriate neonatal support. If the tracing remains nonreassuring or the mother deteriorates, delivery at the regional hospital is safer than a 90-minute road transfer. The judgement is that maternal safety comes first, but the fetus benefits from being born where neonatal care exists. I would discuss the trade-off explicitly with the patient and document it. I would also arrange a second obstetrician and anesthesia support before any operation.
3. What delivery plan and fetal monitoring would you choose?
Read the worked answer
At 34+2 weeks with severe preeclampsia and nonreassuring fetal status, I would plan delivery after stabilization and steroid administration if feasible. The mode depends on cervical findings and fetal condition: cesarean delivery is reasonable for recurrent decelerations, but vaginal delivery can be considered if the cervix is favorable and continuous monitoring is available. I would avoid prolonged induction if the fetus is compromised. Magnesium should continue during and after delivery, and antihypertensives should be available in theater. The reasoning is that delivery is the only cure, but the timing must balance prematurity against maternal and fetal risk. I would monitor the fetus continuously during stabilization and explain that the baby may need neonatal transfer even if delivered locally. The patient's wish to wait must be addressed with clear information about the risks of eclampsia, placental abruption, and stillbirth.