4.4 Article

Analysis of the risk factors in patients with unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/aji.13774

关键词

disease cause; logistic regression analysis; multiple factors; recurrent spontaneous abortion (RSA); risk factors

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The risk factors for URSA include the number of SAs, levels of autoantibodies and TNF-alpha, and the MTHFR C677T T allele; while 25-(OH)D is a protective factor. Women diagnosed with URSA should receive early intervention to actively reduce the occurrence of recurrent SA.
ProblemWe aimed to explore the risk factors in patients with unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion (URSA) and to provide a basis for clinically targeted therapy.Method of studyThis case-control study comprised 202 patients with URSA treated at our hospital and 115 women in early pregnancy with a normal birth history during the same period. After procuring the data we conducted a multivariate logistic regression analysis of risk factors related to URSA.ResultsLogistic regression analysis showed (i) that the number of spontaneous abortions (SAs; odds ratio [OR] = 492.123), the levels of autoantibodies (OR = 19.322) and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha; OR = 9.615), and the CT and TT genotypes of methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) C677T (OR = 6.217 and 15.009, respectively) were risk factors for URSA and (ii) that 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-(OH)D; OR = 0.919) was a protective factor. The most important risk factor was a history of one or more SAs, with the risk of pregnancy loss increasing 491.123-fold. Every unit increase in serum 25-(OH)D reduced the risk of SA by 8.1%.ConclusionsThe risk factors for URSA included the number of SAs, the levels of autoantibodies and TNF-alpha, and the MTHFR C677T T allele; 25-(OH)D was a protective factor. We recommend that women diagnosed with URSA receive intervention as soon as possible so as to actively reduce the incidence of recurrent SA.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据