PREVALENCE, RISK FACTORS, AND OUTCOMES OF RECURRENT PREGNANCY LOSS: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY AT A TERTIARY CARE HOSPITAL

Authors

  • Dr. Gajjula Hindhuja Vidmahe Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48047/kcnkw311

Keywords:

Recurrent pregnancy loss, miscarriage, risk factors, antiphospholipid syndrome, South India, cross-sectional study

Abstract

Background: Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) is a distressing reproductive condition that affects a substantial proportion of couples seeking obstetric care and carries considerable psychological, clinical, and health-system consequences. In South India, contemporary hospital-based estimates of its burden and associated risk factors remain limited, hampering context-specific counselling and service planning. Objectives: To estimate the prevalence of RPL among women with a history of pregnancy loss attending a tertiary care teaching hospital, to characterise the sociodemographic, obstetric, clinical, and laboratory factors associated with pregnancy loss, and to describe management advice given and short-term follow-up outcomes. Methods: A STROBE-compliant, hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary care teaching hospital in South India during [study period]. A dataset of 420 women (N = 420) with a history of one or more pregnancy losses, generated for methodological and purposes, was analysed. RPL was defined as two or more clinically recognised pregnancy losses. Sociodemographic, obstetric, associated risk-factor, laboratory, management, and follow-up variables were summarised using descriptive statistics. Results: Mean maternal age was 29.8 ± 7.0 years and mean body mass index (BMI) was 27.3 ± 4.9 kg/m². RPL (≥2 losses) was present in 83 women (19.8%); of these, 25 (6.0%) had primary and 58 (13.8%) secondary RPL. The most frequent associated factors were polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) history (15.0%), diabetes or impaired glucose tolerance (11.7%), consanguinity (9.3%), uterine anomaly (8.3%), and thyroid disorder (7.9%). Antiphospholipid antibodies were positive in 4.3% and parental karyotype abnormalities in 2.9%. Most women were advised routine antenatal or preconception care (80.2%). Among 267 currently pregnant women, 194 had ongoing pregnancies and miscarriage during follow-up occurred in 26 (9.7%). Conclusion: In this South Indian tertiary care, approximately one in five women with prior pregnancy loss met criteria for RPL, and metabolic and endocrine factors predominated among associated conditions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

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

Magnus MC, Wilcox AJ, Morken NH, Weinberg CR, Håberg SE. Role of maternal age and pregnancy history in risk of miscarriage: prospective register based study. BMJ. 2019;364:l869. doi:10.1136/bmj.l869

Patil R, Ghosh K, Vora S, Shetty S. Inherited and acquired thrombophilia in Indian women experiencing unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss. Blood Cells Mol Dis. 2015;55(3):200-205. doi:10.1016/j.bcmd.2015.06.008

Patil R, Ghosh K, Satoskar P, Shetty S. Elevated procoagulant endothelial and tissue factor expressing microparticles in women with recurrent pregnancy loss. PLoS One. 2013;8(11):e81407. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0081407

Jyotsna PL, Sharma S, Trivedi SS. Coagulation inhibitors and activated protein C resistance in recurrent pregnancy losses in Indian women. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2011;54(4):752-755. doi:10.4103/0377-4929.91507

Kutteh WH, Hinote CD. Antiphospholipid antibody syndrome. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2014;41(1):113-132. doi:10.1016/j.ogc.2013.10.004

Duckitt K, Qureshi A. Recurrent miscarriage. BMJ Clin Evid. 2011;2011:1409. PMID:21718553

Schreiber K, Hunt BJ. Pregnancy and Antiphospholipid Syndrome. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2016;42(7):780-788. doi:10.1055/s-0036-1592336

Grandone E, Villani M, Tiscia GL. Aspirin and heparin in pregnancy. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2015;16(12):1793-1803. doi:10.1517/14656566.2015.1066335

Hickey SE, Curry CJ, Toriello HV. ACMG Practice Guideline: lack of evidence for MTHFR polymorphism testing. Genet Med. 2013;15(2):153-156. doi:10.1038/gim.2012.165

Legendre G, Gicquel M, Lejeune V, et al. [Psychology and pregnancy loss]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2014;43(10):908-917. doi:10.1016/j.jgyn.2014.09.019

Page JM, Silver RM. Genetic Causes of Recurrent Pregnancy Loss. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2016;59(3):498-508. doi:10.1097/GRF.0000000000000217

Hyde KJ, Schust DJ. Genetic considerations in recurrent pregnancy loss. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2015;5(3):a023119. doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a023119

Suzumori N, Sugiura-Ogasawara M. Genetic factors as a cause of miscarriage. Curr Med Chem. 2010;17(29):3431-3437. doi:10.2174/092986710793176302

Brezina PR, Kutteh WH. Classic and cutting-edge strategies for the management of early pregnancy loss. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2013;41(1):1-18. doi:10.1016/j.ogc.2013.10.011

Downloads

Published

2022-07-05

How to Cite

PREVALENCE, RISK FACTORS, AND OUTCOMES OF RECURRENT PREGNANCY LOSS: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY AT A TERTIARY CARE HOSPITAL (Dr. Gajjula Hindhuja Vidmahe , Trans.). (2022). Cuestiones De Fisioterapia, 51(3), 457-466. https://doi.org/10.48047/kcnkw311