4.7 Article

Immunoglobulin G antisperm antibodies and prediction of spontaneous pregnancy

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 92, Issue 5, Pages 1659-1665

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.08.082

Keywords

Mixed agglutination reaction; antisperm antibodies; prospective cohort; subfertility; spontaneous pregnancy; ongoing pregnancy

Funding

  1. ZOnMW [945/12/002]
  2. Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development
  3. Hague, The Netherlands

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To investigate the predictive capacity of immunoglobulin G ASA (direct MAR test) for spontaneous ongoing pregnancy in subfertile couples. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: Nine fertility centers in The Netherlands. Patient(s): Consecutive ovulatory subfertile couples. Intervention(s): A basic fertility workup, including a mixed agglutination reaction test for IgG (MAR test) at first semen analysis. Main Outcome Measure(s): Spontaneous conception resulting in ongoing pregnancy. Result(s): We included 1,794 couples, of which 283 (16%) had a spontaneous ongoing pregnancy within 1 year. When a threshold 50% was used for an abnormal test result, the MAR test was positive in 3% of the couples. In the univariable analysis, a positive MAR test >= 50% reduced, albeit not statistically significant, the probability of spontaneous pregnancy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34 to 1.7). In the multivariable analysis, a positive MAR test >= 50% had no contribution in the prediction of spontaneous pregnancy (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.40 to 2.4). Conclusion(s): This large cohort study shows that the MAR test is not able to predict spontaneous pregnancy chances. Its routine use in the basic fertility workup for identification of couples with low spontaneous pregnancy chances is not justified. (Fertil Steril (R) 2009;92:1659-65. (C) 2009 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available