How science is shifting pregnancy care from reaction to prevention
What if one of the most dangerous complications1 in pregnancy could be identified, and even prevented, before it ever begins?
For decades, preeclampsia has largely been managed after symptoms appear. Elevated blood pressure and other clinical signs often indicate that the condition is already progressing, narrowing the window to meaningfully change outcomes. While clinicians have long understood the risks, identifying them early enough to act has remained a persistent challenge.
The field began moving toward earlier intervention through new risk assessment approaches, developments that continue to influence care today.
When prevention becomes possible
Preeclampsia does not begin with symptoms. It starts with subtle biological and physiological changes that emerge early in pregnancy, long before clinical signs are visible.
The ASPRE study marked a turning point by demonstrating that these early signals could be captured and used to assess risk at 11-13 weeks of gestation. By combining maternal factors, blood pressure, ultrasound measurements, and biomarkers such as placental growth factor (PlGF), clinicians were able to identify women at higher risk with far greater accuracy than traditional approaches.2
More importantly, the study showed that early identification enables early intervention. Women identified as high risk who received low-dose aspirin (150mg daily) saw a 62% reduction in preterm preeclampsia before 37 weeks, fundamentally changing the trajectory of care before the condition escalated.2 This breakthrough has been validated across multiple international cohorts, with implementation studies confirming similar protective effects in routine clinical practice.3,4,5
Several global recommendations (e.g. FIGO, ISSHP, ISUOG) recommend this combined screening approach as the new standard for preeclampsia prevention, recognizing its potential to transform maternal outcomes globally.6,7,8
For the first time, preeclampsia could be approached not just as a condition to manage, but as one that could be anticipated, and, in some cases, prevented.
The challenge: turning evidence into everyday care
While the science is clear, applying it consistently in clinical practice is more complex.
Effective early screening depends on bringing together multiple data points into a single, meaningful risk assessment. Clinical history, physiological measurements, and biochemical markers each provide part of the picture, but only when integrated do they offer the clarity needed to guide decisions. Recent validation studies demonstrate that this multimodal approach significantly outperforms traditional risk assessment methods, yet implementation remains inconsistent.9,10
The gap is no longer about understanding preeclampsia.
It is about making that understanding practical, scalable, and accessible within real-world healthcare systems, regardless of geographic location or resource constraints.
Enabling earlier, more informed decisions
This is where Revvity plays an important role.
Building on evidence from studies like ASPRE and subsequent international validations, Revvity provides solutions11 that help healthcare providers implement combined first-trimester screening in routine practice. These approaches integrate biomarkers such as PlGF, a key early indicator of placental development and angiogenic balance, with clinical and ultrasound data to generate a more complete risk profile.
Importantly, this can often be done using existing prenatal workflows and even the same blood sample already collected for other screenings, reducing complexity while expanding insight. This efficiency has proven critical for widespread adoption, as demonstrated in large-scale implementation programs.10
The focus is not simply on detecting risk, but on enabling clinicians to act on it, earlier, with greater confidence, and with evidence-based guidance for preventive interventions that can reduce maternal and perinatal complications.12
Expanding access to earlier detection
Advancing maternal and newborn health is a key initiative for Revvity, building on decades of leadership in prenatal and newborn screening.
Today, efforts are underway to expand access to preeclampsia screening globally, helping bring these capabilities into more routine care settings. As WHO data reveals significant global disparities in preeclampsia outcomes, expanding access to early detection becomes not just a clinical imperative, but a health equity priority. As adoption grows, earlier detection becomes more widely available, supporting a shift toward more proactive, personalized pregnancy care.
Because the ability to identify risk early should not depend on geography, a principle supported by international maternal health initiatives and evidence from diverse healthcare systems.13
What this makes possible
Preeclampsia remains complex, but the ability to identify risk earlier is changing how it is managed.
When clinicians can move from reacting to symptoms to anticipating risk, they gain time — time to intervene with proven preventive treatments, to monitor more closely with targeted surveillance, and to guide care in ways that improve outcomes for both mother and baby.
The signals are there earlier than we once thought, and the ability to act on them is becoming part of everyday care.
Bridging the gap from research to prevention. Challenge accepted.
References:
- Cresswell J., et al. (2025). Global and regional causes of maternal deaths 2009–20: a WHO systematic analysis. The Lancet Global Health, 2025; 13, e626-e634. DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(24)00560-6
- Rolnik, D.L., et al. (2017). Aspirin versus Placebo in Pregnancies at High Risk for Preterm Preeclampsia. New England Journal of Medicine, 377(7), 613-622.
- Badr, D.A., et al. (2026). Implementation of PlGF-based first-trimester screening and aspirin prophylaxis for preterm pre-eclampsia: clinical and economic evaluation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 67: 304-311. DOI: 10.1002/uog.70176
- Riishede, I., et al. (2023). Pre-eclampsia screening in Denmark (PRESIDE): national validation study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 61: 682-690. DOI: 10.1002/uog.26183
- Johnson J. M., et al. (2023). The Implementation of Preeclampsia Screening and Prevention (IMPRESS) Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 5(2):100815. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2022.100815.
- Poon, L.C., et al. (2019). The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) initiative on pre-eclampsia: A pragmatic guide for first-trimester screening and prevention. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 145(S1), 1-33.
- Magee, L. A., et al. (2022). The 2021 International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy classification, diagnosis & management recommendations for international practice. Pregnancy Hypertension, 27, 148-169. DOI: 10.1016/j.preghy.2021.09.008.
- Sotiriadis, A., et al. (2019). ISUOG Practice Guidelines: role of ultrasound in screening for and follow-up of pre-eclampsia. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 53: 7-22. DOI: 10.1002/uog.20105
- Tan, M.Y., et al. (2018). Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of early screening for pre-eclampsia by NICE guidelines and a method combining maternal factors and biomarkers: results of SPREE. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 51(6), 743-750. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.19039
- Ronzoni S., et al. (2025). Preterm preeclampsia screening and prevention: a comprehensive approach to implementation in a real-world setting. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 25(1):32. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-025-07154-6.
- https://www.revvity.com/category/preeclampsia-testing
- Magee, L. A., et al. (2022). Preeclampsia. The New England journal of medicine, 386(19), 1817–1832. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra2109523
- Boyer B, et al. (2024). Advancing the future of equitable access to health care: recommendations from international health care leaders. Health Aff Sch. 2(8):qxae094. DOI: 10.1093/haschl/qxae094.
For in vitro diagnostic use. This product is only available where licensed in accordance with the law. Please contact your local representative for availability.
Revvity Inc. does not endorse or make recommendations with respect to research, medication, or treatments. All information presented is for informational purposes only and is not intended as medical advice. For country specific recommendations, please consult your local health care professionals.