4.3 Article

Pregnancy failure in patients with obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome with conventional treatment: the influence of a triple positive antibody profile

期刊

LUPUS
卷 26, 期 9, 页码 983-988

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0961203317692432

关键词

Antiphospholipid syndrome; thrombosis; pregnancy; Hughes syndrome; anticardiolipin antibodies

资金

  1. Ministry of the Government of the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires, GCABA Grant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Conventional treatment of obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome fails in approximately 20-30% of pregnant women without any clearly identified risk factor. It is important to identify risk factors that are associated with these treatment failures. This study aimed to assess the impact of risk factors on pregnancy outcomes in women with obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome treated with conventional treatment. We carefully retrospectively selected 106 pregnancies in women with obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome treated with heparin+aspirin. Pregnancy outcomes were evaluated according to the following associated risk factors: triple positivity profile, double positivity profile, single positivity profile, history of thrombosis, autoimmune disease, more than four pregnancy losses, and high titers of anticardiolipin antibodies and/or anti-eta-2-glycoprotein-I (a2GPI) antibodies. To establish the association between pregnancy outcomes and risk factors, a single binary logistic regressions analysis was performed. Risk factors associated with pregnancy loss with conventional treatment were: the presence of triple positivity (OR=5.0, CI=1.4-16.9, p=0.01), high titers of a2GPI (OR=4.4, CI=1.2-16.1, p=0.023) and a history of more than four pregnancy losses (OR=3.5, CI=1.2-10.0, p=0.018). The presence of triple positivity was an independent risk factor associated with gestational complications (OR=4.1, CI=1.2-13.9, p=0.02). Our findings reinforce the idea that triple positivity is a categorical risk factor for poor response to conventional treatment.

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

4.3
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