Reproductive Factors and Subsequent Pregnancy Outcomes in Patients with Prior Pregnancy Loss

Overview

Journal BMC Pregnancy Childbirth

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Gynecology & Obstetrics

Date 2024 Mar 26

PMID 38528474

Authors

Xin Yang

Fangxiang Mu

Jian Zhang

Liwei Yuan

Wei Zhang

Yanting Yang

Fang Wang

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: At present, individualized interventions can be given to patients with a clear etiology of pregnancy loss to improve the subsequent pregnancy outcomes, but the current reproductive status of the patient cannot be changed. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between female reproductive status and subsequence pregnancy outcome in patients with prior pregnancy loss (PL).

Methods: A prospective, dynamic population cohort study was carried out at the Second Hospital of Lanzhou University. From September 2019 to February 2022, a total of 1955 women with at least one previous PL were enrolled. Maternal reproductive status and subsequent reproductive outcomes were recorded through an electronic medical record system and follow-up. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between reproductive status and the risk of subsequent reproductive outcomes.

Results: Among all patients, the rates of subsequent infertility, early PL, late PL, and live birth were 20.82%, 24.33%, 1.69% and 50.77% respectively. In logistic regression, we found that age (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.04-1.13) and previous cesarean delivery history (OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.27-4.76) were risk factors for subsequent infertility in patients with PL. Age (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.03-1.10), age at first pregnancy (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.03-1.10), BMI (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02-1.11), previous PL numbers (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.04-1.57) and without pre-pregnancy intervention (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.35-2.24) were risk factors for non-live birth. Age (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.03-1.09), age at first pregnancy (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02-1.09), BMI (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.11), previous PL numbers (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.02-1.31) and without pre-pregnancy intervention (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.65-2.84) were risk factors for PL.

Conclusions: The reproductive status of people with PL is strongly correlated with the outcome of subsequent pregnancies. Active pre-pregnancy intervention can improve the subsequent pregnancy outcome.

Trial Registration: This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry with the registration number of ChiCTR2000039414 (27/10/2020).

Citing Articles

Predicting risk of the subsequent early pregnancy loss in women with recurrent pregnancy loss based on preconception data.

Yang X, Wang R, Zhang W, Yang Y, Wang F BMC Womens Health. 2024; 24(1):381.

PMID: 38956627 PMC: 11218098. DOI: 10.1186/s12905-024-03206-9.

References

Magnus M, Wilcox A, Morken N, Weinberg C, Haberg S . Role of maternal age and pregnancy history in risk of miscarriage: prospective register based study. BMJ. 2019; 364:l869. PMC: 6425455. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.l869. View

Nobuta Y, Tsuji S, Kitazawa J, Hanada T, Nakamura A, Zen R . Decreased Fertility in Women with Cesarean Scar Syndrome Is Associated with Chronic Inflammation in the Uterine Cavity. Tohoku J Exp Med. 2022; 258(3):237-242. DOI: 10.1620/tjem.2022.J082. View

Wang Y, Meng Z, Pei J, Qian L, Mao B, Li Y . Anxiety and depression are risk factors for recurrent pregnancy loss: a nested case-control study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2021; 19(1):78. PMC: 7938475. DOI: 10.1186/s12955-021-01703-1. View

Piosik Z, Goegebeur Y, Klitkou L, Steffensen R, Christiansen O . Plasma TNF-α levels are higher in early pregnancy in patients with secondary compared with primary recurrent miscarriage. Am J Reprod Immunol. 2013; 70(5):347-58. DOI: 10.1111/aji.12135. View

Charach R, Sheiner E, Beharier O, Sergienko R, Kessous R . Recurrent pregnancy loss and future risk of female malignancies. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2018; 298(4):781-787. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-018-4868-4. View

Bender Atik R, Christiansen O, Elson J, Kolte A, Lewis S, Middeldorp S . ESHRE guideline: recurrent pregnancy loss. Hum Reprod Open. 2019; 2018(2):hoy004. PMC: 6276652. DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hoy004. View

Egerup P, Kolte A, Larsen E, Krog M, Nielsen H, Christiansen O . Recurrent pregnancy loss: what is the impact of consecutive versus non-consecutive losses?. Hum Reprod. 2016; 31(11):2428-2434. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dew169. View

Christiansen O, Larsen E, Egerup P, Lunoee L, Egestad L, Nielsen H . Intravenous immunoglobulin treatment for secondary recurrent miscarriage: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. BJOG. 2014; 122(4):500-8. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.13192. View

Empson M, Lassere M, Craig J, Scott J . Prevention of recurrent miscarriage for women with antiphospholipid antibody or lupus anticoagulant. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005; (2):CD002859. PMC: 6768987. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002859.pub2. View

10.

Coccia M, Rizzello F . Two-year outcome after recurrent first trimester miscarriages: prognostic value of the past obstetric history. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2016; 295(1):261-262. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-016-4213-8. View

11.

Zhou B . Predictive values of body mass index and waist circumference for risk factors of certain related diseases in Chinese adults--study on optimal cut-off points of body mass index and waist circumference in Chinese adults. Biomed Environ Sci. 2002; 15(1):83-96. View

12.

Chen D, Xu Q, Mao X, Zhang J, Wu L . Reproductive history does not compromise subsequent live birth and perinatal outcome following in-vitro fertilization: analysis of 25 329 first frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles without preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2023; 62(3):430-438. DOI: 10.1002/uog.26220. View

13.

Maconochie N, Doyle P, Prior S, Simmons R . Risk factors for first trimester miscarriage--results from a UK-population-based case-control study. BJOG. 2007; 114(2):170-86. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01193.x. View

14.

Kruse C, Steffensen R, Varming K, Christiansen O . A study of HLA-DR and -DQ alleles in 588 patients and 562 controls confirms that HLA-DRB1*03 is associated with recurrent miscarriage. Hum Reprod. 2004; 19(5):1215-21. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deh200. View

15.

Zhang B, Wei Y, Niu J, Li Y, Miao Z, Wang Z . Risk factors for unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion in a population from southern China. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2009; 108(2):135-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.09.019. View

16.

Nielsen H, Nybo Andersen A, Kolte A, Christiansen O . A firstborn boy is suggestive of a strong prognostic factor in secondary recurrent miscarriage: a confirmatory study. Fertil Steril. 2008; 89(4):907-11. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.04.029. View

17.

Schwab I, Nimmerjahn F . Intravenous immunoglobulin therapy: how does IgG modulate the immune system?. Nat Rev Immunol. 2013; 13(3):176-89. DOI: 10.1038/nri3401. View

18.

Ruderman R, Yilmaz B, McQueen D . Treating the couple: how recurrent pregnancy loss impacts the mental health of both partners. Fertil Steril. 2020; 114(6):1182. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.09.165. View

19.

Kaandorp S, van Mens T, Middeldorp S, Hutten B, Hof M, van der Post J . Time to conception and time to live birth in women with unexplained recurrent miscarriage. Hum Reprod. 2014; 29(6):1146-52. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deu052. View

20.

Dimitriadis E, Menkhorst E, Saito S, Kutteh W, Brosens J . Recurrent pregnancy loss. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2020; 6(1):98. DOI: 10.1038/s41572-020-00228-z. View