Paternal and maternal carriage of the annexin A5 M2 haplotype are equal risk factors for recurrent pregnancy loss: a pilot study

2012 ◽  
Vol 98 (2) ◽  
pp. 383-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina Rogenhofer ◽  
Laura Engels ◽  
Nadja Bogdanova ◽  
Frank Tüttelmann ◽  
Arseni Markoff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Recurrent Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Annexin A5

scholarly journals The C20068T gene variant in the 3` end of the prothrombin gene and recurrent pregnancy loss: A pilot study

Genetika ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 469-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iva Pruner ◽  
Valentina Djordjevic ◽  
Maja Gvozdenov ◽  
Branko Tomic ◽  
Mirjana Kovac ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Health Problem ◽  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Recurrent Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Reproductive Age ◽  
Gene Variant ◽  
Women Of Reproductive Age ◽  
Prothrombin Gene

Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) is a health problem affecting up to 5% of women of reproductive age. Several thrombophilic risk factors might contribute to RPL.To investigate relationship between a novel C20068T gene variant in the 3` end of prothrombin gene and RPL, we tested 153 women with RPL and 111 controls for the presence of this gene variant. In patients, we have detected four heterozygous (2.61%) and no homozygous carriers. In controls, no carriers were detected. Our results indicate higher prevalence of C20068T gene variant in women with RPL but this difference was not statistically significant. However, in patients who suffered 5 or more RPL, frequency of C20068T gene variant was significantly increased compared to controls (12.5% vs. 0%, P=0.02). This is the first study which points out a possible role of C20068T gene variant in etiology of RPL, but larger studies should be carried out to confirm our findings.

scholarly journals Puzzle Out the Reason behind Habitual Miscarriage

2020 ◽  
pp. 92-98
Author(s):  
Waqas Ahmad ◽  
Shahid Bilal ◽  
Sarah Azhar ◽  
Muhammad Aitmaud Uddolah Khan ◽  
Nasima Iqbal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Maternal Age ◽  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Recurrent Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Multinomial Logistic Regression ◽  
Strong Association ◽  
Multinomial Logistic Regression Model ◽  
Multiple Risk Factors ◽  
Bivariate Correlation ◽  
History Of

Aims: As no data is available in Pakistan so the aim of current study is to find out the link of multiple risk factors with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) in Pakistan. Study Design: Case control study. Place and Duration of Study: Study conducted in Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic of Benazir Bhutto Hospital, Holy Family Hospital Rawalpindi and Polyclinic Hospital Islamabad from November 2018 to April 2019. Methodology: Subjects were investigated on the basis of an in depth Performa. For data analysis Statistical package for social sciences version-20 was used. Beside this, height in cm, weight in kg and blood pressure in mmHg were recorded. All the statistical calculations were performed by using SPSS 20. For association analysis of qualitative variables Spearman bivariate correlation was calculated while for numerical variables ANOVA was applied. Multinomial logistic regression model was used and the odd ratio and relative risk were calculated. Results: Among cases 91.34% were having spontaneous miscarriage and majority (64.86%) were during first trimester. Spearman bivariate correlation reported a strong association of recurrent pregnancy loss with the risk factors including family history, smoking, obesity, history of hypertension and history of diabetes, having highly significant p-values, on the hand, significant association of maternal age with the frequency of recurrent pregnancy loss was found but not with the paternal age and parity. The multinomial logistic regression model showed that smokers were19.012 times more prone to develop recurrent pregnancy loss. Conclusion: The multiple risk factors including maternal age, obesity, smoking, family history, body mass index, hypertension and diabetes have a strong association with the recurrent pregnancy loss. So keeping these risk factors in mind a careful evaluation of each pregnancy is necessary to reduce the risk of recurrent pregnancy loss.

P–425 Recurrent pregnancy loss: what can we learn from different international guidelines?

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Aulitzky
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Recurrent Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Developmental Process ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Polycystic Ovary ◽  
Therapeutic Options ◽  
Chronic Endometritis ◽  
International Guidelines ◽  
Guidelines And Recommendations

Abstract Study question To which extent do the current international guidelines and recommendations concerning recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) differ? Summary answer All guidelines apply definitions for RPL, however few diagnostic and therapeutic options are described. Diagnostics should be based on best evidence and current scientific knowledge. What is known already Established risk factors for RPL include anatomical, genetic, endocrine, hemostatic and immune alterations. The European Society of Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), German/Austrian/Swiss Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (DGGG/OEGGG/SGGG) and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (RCOG) published guidelines concerning diagnostic and therapeutic options in RPL. Due to the different guideline processes and date of publication actuality as well as complexity differ widely. Study design, size, duration We compared the guidelines of the ESHRE, ASRM, DGGG/OEGGG/SGGG and RCOG with regard to definition, diagnostic and therapeutic aspects. The guidelines were published between 2011 and 2018. Structured guideline processes with regular (complete) updates are only provided by the DGGG/OEGGG/SGGG. Participants/materials, setting, methods After thorough literature research (Pubmed, Embase) all existing guidelines and recommendations were analysed and compared considering the current state of knowledge. The RCOG recommendations from 2011 were updated in 2014 and 2017, the ARSM expert letter was last updated in 2012. The ESHRE guideline was published in 2017. The first version of the DGGG/OEGGG/SGGG guideline was published 2006, updated in 2013 and upgraded to a higher evidence-level in 2018 and is currently under review. Main results and the role of chance All guidelines agree that a diagnostic work-up is indicated after at least two clinical pregnancies and should exclude anatomical malformations, an antiphospholipid syndrome and thyroid dysfunction. Furthermore, lifestyle modifications are recommended by all. The general evaluation of an inherited thrombophilia is not recommended by any guideline. Exclusion of other risk factors like parental chromosomal disorders, a polycystic ovary syndrome or insulin resistance are only included in some guidelines, partly due to a lack of diagnostic criteria (luteal phase insufficiency) or due to the different year of publication of the recommendations (e.g. chronic endometritis). All guidelines recommend treating APLS by administering low-dose aspirin (75–100mg daily) in combination with unfractionated/low-molecular-weight heparin. With regard to uterine malformations whether or not a septum should be dissected is still a matter of debate: ESHRE and RCOG consider evidence insufficient, while DGGG/OEGGG/SGGG and ASRM recommend a surgical intervention. In case of chronic endometritis, the DGGG/OEGGG/SGGG recommends antibiotic therapy e.g. with doxycycline (200 mg daily for 14 days). Limitations, reasons for caution Different health economic as well as consensus aspects in the process of guideline development have a significant influence on the individual guidelines and recommendations. Wider implications of the findings: Since personalized diagnostic and therapeutic strategies in RPL patients are required, physicians have to decide when to follow the guideline and when to expand diagnostics and therapy. Therefore, the knowledge of the weaknesses of each guideline and its developmental process is helpful for treating RPL couples. Trial registration number -

Abstract 14592: Pregnancy Loss and Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors in Early Adulthood: Preliminary Findings From Add Health

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yamnia I Cortes ◽  
Shuo Zhang ◽  
Diane C Berry ◽  
Jon Hussey
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Risk Factor ◽  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Recurrent Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Early Adulthood ◽  
Add Health ◽  
Cvd Risk Factors ◽  
Cvd Risk ◽  
Live Births

Introduction: Pregnancy loss, including miscarriage and stillbirth, affect 15-20% of pregnancies in the United States annually. Accumulating evidence suggests that pregnancy loss is associated with greater cardiovascular disease (CVD) burden later in life. However, associations between pregnancy loss and CVD risk factors in early adulthood (age<35 years) have not been assessed. Objective: To examine associations between pregnancy loss and CVD risk factors in early adulthood. Methods: We conducted a secondary data analysis using the public-use data set for Wave IV (2007-2009) of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health). Our sample consisted of women, ages 24-32 years, with a previous pregnancy who completed biological data collection (n=2,968). Pregnancy loss was assessed as any history of miscarriage or stillbirth; and as none, one, or recurrent (≥2) pregnancy loss. Dependent variables included physical measures and blood specimens: body mass index (BMI), blood pressure, diabetes status, and dyslipidemia. Associations between pregnancy loss and each CVD risk factor were tested using linear (for BMI) and logistic regression adjusting for sociodemographic factors, parity, pre-pregnancy BMI, smoking during pregnancy, and depression. Results: Six hundred and ninety-three women (23%) reported a pregnancy loss, of which 21% reported recurrent pregnancy loss. Women with all live births were more likely to identify as non-Hispanic White (73%) and report a higher annual income. After adjusting for sociodemographics (age, race/ethnicity, education, income), pregnancy loss was associated with a greater BMI (ß=0.90; SE,0.39). In fully-adjusted models, women with recurrent pregnancy loss were more likely to have hypertension (AOR, 2.50; 95%CI, 1.04-5.96) and prediabetes (AOR, 1.93; 95%CI. 1.11-3.37) than women with all live births; the association was non-significant for women with one pregnancy loss. Conclusions: Pregnancy loss is associated with a more adverse CVD risk factor profile in early adulthood. Findings suggest the need for CVD risk assessment in young women with a prior pregnancy loss. Further research is necessary to identify underlying risk factors of pregnancy loss that may predispose women to CVD.

scholarly journals Long-term study for the risk factors and outcomes of recurrent pregnancy loss in Japan

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (0) ◽  
pp. 16-23
Author(s):  
Keiko Moritaa ◽  
Yosuke Onob ◽  
Sayaka Tsudaa ◽  
Akitoshi Nakashima ◽  
Shigeru Saito
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Recurrent Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Term Study ◽  
Long Term Study

scholarly journals Risk Factors of Recurrent Pregnancy Loss in Jalalabad Ragib Rabeya College Hospital, Sylhet

2020 ◽  
Vol 03 (02) ◽  
pp. 62-66
Author(s):  
Dr. Shahina Akther ◽  
Dr. Dipu Das ◽  
Dr. Natia Rahnuma ◽  
Dr. Lubna Yeasmin ◽  
Dr. Iffana Azam
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Recurrent Pregnancy Loss ◽  
College Hospital

Common haplotype in the annexin A5 gene promoter associated with recurrent pregnancy loss

2008 ◽  
Vol 28 (S 01) ◽  
pp. S109-S110
Author(s):  
J. Horst ◽  
M. Chlystun ◽  
P. J. P. Croucher ◽  
A. Nebel ◽  
A. Bohring ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Recurrent Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Gene Promoter ◽  
Annexin A5 ◽  
Common Haplotype

scholarly journals Recurrent pregnancy loss: diagnostic workup after two or three pregnancy losses? A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 356-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Myrthe M van Dijk ◽  
Astrid M Kolte ◽  
Jacqueline Limpens ◽  
Emma Kirk ◽  
Siobhan Quenby ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Antiphospholipid Syndrome ◽  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Recurrent Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Chromosomal Abnormalities ◽  
Thyroid Disorders ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Inherited Thrombophilia ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract BACKGROUND Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) occurs in 1–3% of all couples trying to conceive. No consensus exists regarding when to perform testing for risk factors in couples with RPL. Some guidelines recommend testing if a patient has had two pregnancy losses whereas others advise to test after three losses. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current evidence on the prevalence of abnormal test results for RPL amongst patients with two versus three or more pregnancy losses. We also aimed to contribute to the debate regarding whether the investigations for RPL should take place after two or three or more pregnancy losses. SEARCH METHODS Relevant studies were identified by a systematic search in OVID Medline and EMBASE from inception to March 2019. A search for RPL was combined with a broad search for terms indicative of number of pregnancy losses, screening/testing for pregnancy loss or the prevalence of known risk factors. Meta-analyses were performed in case of adequate clinical and statistical homogeneity. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. OUTCOMES From a total of 1985 identified publications, 21 were included in this systematic review and 19 were suitable for meta-analyses. For uterine abnormalities (seven studies, odds ratio (OR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.79–1.27, I2 = 0%) and for antiphospholipid syndrome (three studies, OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.86–1.25, I2 = 0%) we found low quality evidence for a lack of a difference in prevalence of abnormal test results between couples with two versus three or more pregnancy losses. We found insufficient evidence of a difference in prevalence of abnormal test results between couples with two versus three or more pregnancy losses for chromosomal abnormalities (10 studies, OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.55–1.10), inherited thrombophilia (five studies) and thyroid disorders (two studies, OR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.06–4.56). WIDER IMPLICATIONS A difference in prevalence in uterine abnormalities and antiphospholipid syndrome is unlikely in women with two versus three pregnancy losses. We cannot exclude a difference in prevalence of chromosomal abnormalities, inherited thrombophilia and thyroid disorders following testing after two versus three pregnancy losses. The results of this systematic review may support investigations after two pregnancy losses in couples with RPL, but it should be stressed that additional studies of the prognostic value of test results used in the RPL population are urgently needed. An evidenced-based treatment is not currently available in the majority of cases when abnormal test results are present.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document