Corrigendum to “The presence of HLA-antibodies in recurrent miscarriage patients is associated with a reduced chance of a live birth” [J. Reprod. Immunol. 87 (2010) 67–73]

2011 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 216
Author(s):  
Henriette Svarre Nielsen ◽  
Marian D. Witvliet ◽  
Rudi Steffensen ◽  
Geert W. Haasnoot ◽  
Els Goulmy ◽  
...  
2010 ◽  
Vol 87 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 67-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henriette Svarre Nielsen ◽  
Marian D. Witvliet ◽  
Rudi Steffensen ◽  
Geert W. Haasnoot ◽  
Els Goulmy ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 132-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosa Vissenberg ◽  
Eric Fliers ◽  
Joris A. M. van der Post ◽  
Madelon van Wely ◽  
Peter H. Bisschop ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 105 (02) ◽  
pp. 295-301 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jantien Visser ◽  
Veli-Matti Ulander ◽  
Frans Helmerhorst ◽  
Katja Lampinen ◽  
Laure Morin-Papunen ◽  
...  

SummaryRecurrent miscarriage affects 1–2% of women. In more than half of all recurrent miscarriage the cause still remains uncertain. Thrombophilia has been identified in about 50% of women with recurrent miscarriage and thromboprophylaxis has been suggested as an option of treatment. A randomised double-blind (for aspirin) multicentre trial was performed among 207 women with three or more consecutive first trimester (<13 weeks) miscarriages, two or more second trimester (13–24 weeks) miscarriages or one third trimester fetal loss combined with one first trimester miscarriage. Women were analysed for thrombophilia. After complete work-up, women were randomly allocated before seven weeks’ gestation to either enoxaparin 40 mg and placebo (n=68), enoxaparin 40 mg and aspirin 100 mg (n=63) or aspirin 100 mg (n=76). The primary outcome was live-birth rate. Secondary outcomes were pregnancy complications, neonatal outcome and adverse effects. The 0.92–1.48] was found for enoxaparin and placebo and 65% [RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.83–1.39] for enoxaparin and aspirin when compared to aspirin alone (61%, reference group). In the whole study group the live birth rate was 65% (95% CI 58.66–71.74) for women with three or more miscarriages (n=204). No difference in pregnancy complications, neonatal outcome or adverse effects was observed. No significant difference in live birth rate was found with enoxaparin treatment versus aspirin or a combination of both versus aspirin in women with recurrent miscarriage.


2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 15-19

Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) is a heterogeneous reproductive problem with multiple aetiologies and contributing factors. It becomes quite challenging to form a work-up to detect the cause of RPL in the early months as a continuation of pregnancy involves many factors. In more than half of all recurrent miscarriage the cause still remains uncertain. Thrombophilia has been identified in about 50% of women with recurrent miscarriage and thromboprophylaxis has been suggested as an option of treatment.. In obstetric APLA Syndrome (Antiphospholipid antibody) the combination of aspirin and heparin has improved outcomes. The use of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) has become a common practise in women with inherited thrombophilia and also those with unexplained miscarriage to help safeguard the ongoing pregnancy. To evaluate if there is any effectiveness of low molecular weight heparin (enoxaparin) in women with a history of at least two miscarriages without any apparent aetiology for recurrent pregnancy loss. A prospective randomised controlled study held at Vivekananda Institute of Medical Sciences, Kolkata from August 2015- July 2018. The study assessed the effect of anticoagulant treatment on the live-birth rate (primary outcome) in 80 antenatal women with a history of at least two miscarriages without any apparent causes. Interventions included low molecular weight heparin administration in one group and the other one was not given any anti-coagulant therapy. Similar live birth rates were observed with enoxaparin and the patients who did not receive any anti-coagulant, respectively 84% and 82% (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.16). There were no significant differences in live birth weight and other pregnancy outcomes between the two groups. Therefore, there is no evidence to support any incremental benefit of adding LMWH to the treatment as a routine in unexplained cases of recurrent pregnancy loss.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiao Bao ◽  
Feifei Zhao ◽  
Hao Shi ◽  
Zhiqin Bu ◽  
Yuling Lang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: A number of publications have been studied the relation between blood group and female infertility including ovarian reserve, recurrent miscarriage and live birth, there is a lack of literature investigating joint wife/husband ABO blood type in large cohort. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between couple combinations for ABO blood groups and ART outcomes in patients undergoing IVF/ICSI.Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 30,717 couples underwent IVF cycles between 2010 and 2019. Clinical outcomes of IVF treatment was the primary outcome. History of spontaneous miscarriage, embryo quality, and birth sex, weights, defects rate were also studied. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each outcome were estimated.Results: There was no difference in the baseline demographics between the blood type groups. There was a statistically significantly positive association between the combination of female blood type AB and male blood type AB with biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rate (OR 1.36; 95% CI, 1.05-1.78; P 0.02 and OR 1.31; 95% CI, 1.03-1.68; P 0.031 and OR 1.28; 95% CI, 1.01-1.63; P 0.041 respectively). No statistically significant difference was observed between joint wife/husband ABO blood types and high-quality embryo rate, early abortion rate, birth sex, birth weights and birth defects rate.Conclusions: Our findings suggest that husband/wife mating AB blood type may increase the success rate of IVF/ICSI cycles.


Lupus ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-79
Author(s):  
Ziyi Yang ◽  
Xiangli Shen ◽  
Chuqing Zhou ◽  
Min Wang ◽  
Yi Liu ◽  
...  

Objectives To compare and rank currently available pharmacological interventions for the prevention of recurrent miscarriage (RM) in women with antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). Methods A search was performed using PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, CNKI, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the UK National Research Register on December 15, 2019. Studies comparing any types of active interventions with placebo/inactive control or another active intervention for the prevention of RM in patients with APS were considered for inclusion. The primary outcomes were efficacy (measured by live birth rate) and acceptability (measured by all-cause discontinuation); secondary outcomes were birthweight, preterm birth, preeclampsia, and intrauterine growth retardation. The protocol of this study was registered with Open Science Framework (DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/B9T4E). Results In total, 54 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising 4,957 participants were included. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) alone, aspirin plus LMWH or unfractionated heparin (UFH), aspirin plus LMWH plus intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), aspirin plus LMWH plus IVIG plus prednisone were found to be effective pharmacological interventions for increasing live birth rate (ORs ranging between 2.88 to 11.24). In terms of acceptability, no significant difference was found between treatments. In terms of adverse perinatal outcomes, aspirin alone was associated with a higher risk of preterm birth than aspirin plus LMWH (OR 3.92, 95% CI 1.16 to 16.44) and with lower birthweight than LMWH (SMD −808.76, 95% CI −1596.54 to −5.07). Conclusions Our findings support the use of low-dose aspirin plus heparin as the first-line treatment for prevention of RM in women with APS, and support the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine, IVIG, and prednisone when added to current treatment regimens. More large-scale, high-quality RCTs are needed to confirm these findings, and new pharmacological options should be further evaluated.


2012 ◽  
Vol 119 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Lund ◽  
Mads Kamper-Jørgensen ◽  
Henriette Svarre Nielsen ◽  
Øjvind Lidegaard ◽  
Anne-Marie Nybo Andersen ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document