4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Etiology of recurrent pregnancy loss in women over the age of 35 years

期刊

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
卷 94, 期 4, 页码 1473-1477

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.06.041

关键词

Recurrent miscarriage; recurrent pregnancy loss; maternal age; karyotype; spontaneous abortion; chromosome

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To determine the rate of embryonic chromosomal abnormalities, thrombophilias, and uterine anomalies in women over the age of 35 years with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL). Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Academic reproductive endocrinology and infertility clinic. Patient(s): Women >= 35 years old with >= 3 first trimester miscarriages. Intervention(s): None. Main Outcome Measure(s): Age, number of prior losses, cytogenetic testing of the products of conception (POC), uterine cavity evaluation, parental karyotype, TSH, and antiphospholipd antibody (APA) and thrombophilia testing. Aneuploidy in the POC in women with RPL was compared with sporadic miscarriages (<= 2 losses) in women >= 35 years. Result(s): Among 43 RPL patients, there were 50 miscarriages in which cytogenetic analysis was performed. In the RPL group, the incidence of chromosomal abnormalities in the POC was 78% (39 out of 50) compared with a 70% incidence (98 out of 140) in the sporadic losses. Thrombophilia results in the RPL patients were normal in 38 patients, four patients had APA syndrome, and one had protein C deficiency. Forty out of 43 had normal uterine cavities. Both TSH and parental karyotypes were normal in all of the patients tested. When the evaluation of RPL included karyotype of the POC, only 18% remained without explanation. However, without fetal cytogenetics, 80% of miscarriages would have been unexplained. Conclusion(s): In older patients with RPL, fetal chromosomal abnormalities are responsible for the majority of miscarriages. Other causes were present in only 20% of cases. (Fertil Steril (R) 2010;94:1473-7. (C) 2010 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

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

4.7
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