4.2 Article

Women with Subclinical Hypothyroidism Are at Low Risk of Poor Pregnancy Outcome in Japan

期刊

TOHOKU JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE
卷 242, 期 3, 页码 167-172

出版社

TOHOKU UNIV MEDICAL PRESS
DOI: 10.1620/tjem.242.167

关键词

adverse outcome; anti-thyroid antibodies; pregnancy; subclinical hypothyroidism; thyroid-stimulating hormone

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Maternal subclinical hypothyroidism may be associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes, although not consistently across regions. Here, we sought to determine the effect of elevated thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) on pregnancy outcomes in Japanese women without known medical complications. TSH was determined by dried blood spots at 8-20 weeks of gestation, and 3.0-10.0 pU/mL of TSH was considered as elevated TSH (eTSH). A retrospective study involving 167 cases of eTSH was conducted. Five hundred and seventy eight of controls with normal TSH and without thyroid antibodies were selected. We compared a composite adverse maternal outcome comprised of spontaneous abortion, premature delivery, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), placental abruption, and pregnancy-induced hypertension, as well as composite adverse neonatal outcome including stillbirths, heavy for date, light for date, and a low Apgar score (< 7) at 5 minutes between two groups. The incidence of GDM was significantly higher in eTSH (p < 0.01); however, composite adverse maternal and neonatal outcome did not differ between groups (p = 0.19 and p = 0.50, respectively). Although 27 out of 167 cases in eTSH have antibodies, composite adverse outcome did not differ between eTSH with antibodies and controls (p = 0.64 and p = 0.50, respectively). Additionally, composite adverse maternal and neonatal outcome did not differ between the group larger than the median of TSH in eTSH (n = 81) and controls (p = 0.43 and p = 0.98, respectively). Thus, elevated TSH is not associated with overall adverse pregnancy outcomes in women without known medical complications.

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

4.2
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