Neonatal Outcomes of Women with Recurrent Pregnancy Loss from Immunologic Causes in the Philippine General Hospital from 2010-2015
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70552/pjaai.22.1.9709Keywords:
recurrent pregnancy loss, antiphospholipid syndrome, obstetric morbidity APSAbstract
Background: Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) has been classically defined as three consecutive pregnancy losses, which may be associated with several immunologic and non-immunologic etiologies. There are two immunologic mechanisms, autoimmune or alloimmune, of RPL that have drawn much interest in recent years. The direct effects of these immunologic dysregulations on the clinical outcomes of children born from mothers afflicted with Antiphospholipid Antibody Syndrome (APS) or alloimmune causes still need further investigation.
Objective: To determine the neonatal outcome of infants born from mothers with RPL from immunologic causes at the Philippine General Hospital (PGH) from 2010-2015. Pregnant women with RPL from immunologic causes are classified as high-risk pregnancies. The results of this study hope to guide physicians in close monitoring and early intervention of mothers with RPL and their neonates.
Methodology: This was a retrospective study of neonates born from mothers diagnosed to have immunologic causes of RPL from 2010-2015 at the PGH. All patients born from mothers diagnosed to have an immunologic cause of RPL from 2010-2015 based on the patient database of the section of Allergy and Immunology of the PGH.
Results: The prevalence of neonates born from mothers with RPL from identified immunologic causes and unexplained causes among all infants born at the PGH from 2010 to 2015 is 0.18%. There were 5.1% of the neonates that were classified as Classical APS, 63.8% as Obstetric Morbidity associated with Antiphospholipid
Antibody Syndrome (OMAPS), and 31% had an unexplained cause. There were no cases classified under other immunologic causes. Most neonates under Classical APS were born live, full-term, via cesarean delivery with a mean birth weight of 2206 ± 539.48 grams with APGAR Score (AS) of 9 and 9. The majority of the neonates under OMAPS were born live, full-term, via cesarean delivery with a mean birth weight of 2537 ± 737.46 grams and AS of 9 and 9. Most of the neonates under the unclassified cause of RPL were born live, full-term via cesarean delivery with a mean birth weight of 2228.75 ± 887.05 grams and an AS of 9 and 9.
Conclusion: The majority of these infants born from mothers with RPL from immunologic or unexplained causes had a good birth outcome. Hence, the immunologic cause of RPL has minimal effects on the neonate.
References
Ford HB, Schust DJ. RPL: etiology, diagnosis, and therapy. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Spring;2(2):76-83. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19609401 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2709325
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Definitions of infertility and RPL: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(1):63. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23095139 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.09.023 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.09.023
Carp, H. RPL Causes, Controversies, Treatment. United Kingdom: Taylor and Francis; 2007.
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Evaluation and treatment of RPL: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(5):1103-11. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22835448 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.06.048 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.06.048
Costa OL, Santos EM, Jesus VS, Netto EM. Reproductive outcome in pregnant women with RPL. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2015;37(12):578-84. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26650322 https://doi.org/10.1590/SO100-720320150005445 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-720320150005445
Jivraj S, Anstie B, Cheong YC, Fairlie FM, Laird SM, Li TC. Obstetric and neonatal outcome in women with a history of recurrent miscarriage: a cohort study. Hum Reprod. 2001;16(1):102-6. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11139545 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/16.1.102 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/16.1.102
Greaves M, Cohen H, MacHin SJ, Mackie I. Guidelines on the investigation and management of the antiphospholipid syndrome. Br J Haematol. 2000;109(4):704-15. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10929019 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2141.2000.02069.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2141.2000.02069.x
Miyakis S, Lockshin MD, Atsumi T, et al. International consensus statement on an update of the classification criteria for definite antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). J Thromb Haemost. 2006;4(2):295-306. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6420554 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-7836.2006.01753.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-7836.2006.01753.x
Cervera R, Piette JC, Font J, et al. Antiphospholipid syndrome: clinical and immunologic manifestations and patterns of disease expression in a cohort of 1,000 patients. Arthritis Rheum. 2002;46(4):1019-27. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11953980 https://doi.org/10.1002/art.10187 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.10187
Tincani A, Rebaioli CB, Andreoli L, et al. Neonatal effects of maternal antiphospholipid syndrome. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2009;11(1):70-6. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19171114 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11926-009-0010-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11926-009-0010-8
Alijotas-Reig J, Ferrer-Oliveras R, Ruffatti A, et al. The European Registry on Obstetric Antiphospholipid Syndrome (EUROAPS): a survey of 247 consecutive cases. Autoimmun Rev. 2015;14(5):387-95. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25555817 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autrev.2014.12.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autrev.2014.12.010
Motta M, Boffa MC, Tincani A, Avcin T, De Carolis S, Lachassinne E. Follow-up of babies born to mothers with antiphospholipid syndrome: preliminary data from the European neonatal registry. Lupus. 2012;21(7):761-3. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22635225 https://doi.org/10.1177/0961203312446387 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0961203312446387
Mekinian A, Lachassinne E, Nicaise-Roland P, et al. European registry of babies born to mothers with antiphospholipid syndrome. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(2):217-22. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22589374 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3551221 https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2011-201167 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2011-201167
Mayer-Pickel K, Lang U, Mortl M, et al. Maternal and neonatal outcome in women with antiphospholipid syndrome and systemic lupus erythematosus. Gyaenecologia et Perinatalogia. 2014;23(2):43-8.
da Costa Peixoto MV, de Carvalho JF, Rodrigues CEM. Clinical, laboratory, and therapeutic analyses of 21 patients with neonatal thrombosis and antiphospholipid antibodies: a literature review. J Immunol Res.2014;2014:672603. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25133197 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4124841 https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/672603 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/672603
Ruffatti A, Calligaro A, Hoxha A, et al. Laboratory and clinical features of pregnant women with antiphospholipid syndrome and neonatal outcome. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010;62(3):302-7.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20391475 https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.20098 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.20098
Brewster JA, Shaw NJ, Farquharson RG. Neonatal and pediatric outcome of infants born to mothers with antiphospholipid syndrome. J Perinat Med. 1999;27(3):183-7. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10503179 https://doi.org/10.1515/JPM.1999.025 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/JPM.1999.025
Cetković A, Kastratović B, Novaković I. Prospective study of perinatal outcome in pregnancies with primary antiphospholipid syndrome. Vojnosanit Pregl. 2014;71(8):742-5. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25181833 https://doi.org/10.2298/vsp1408742c DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/VSP1408742C
Jeremic K, Stefanovic A, Dotlic J, et al. Neonatal outcome in pregnant patients with antiphospholipid syndrome. J Perinat Med. 2015;43(6):761-8. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25324435 https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2014-0118 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2014-0118
Committee Opinion No. 644: The Apgar score. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(4):e52-5. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26393460 https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000001108 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000001108
Uzan J, Carbonnel M, Piconne O,et al. Pre-eclampsia: pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2011;7:467-74. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21822394 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3148420 https://doi.org/10.2147/VHRM.S20181 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/VHRM.S20181
Ballabh P. Intraventricular hemorrhage in premature infants: mechanism of disease. Pediatr Res. 2010;67(1):1-8. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19816235 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2799187 https://doi.org/10.1203/PDR.0b013e3181c1b176 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1203/PDR.0b013e3181c1b176
Cloherty J, Eichenwald E, Stark A. Manual of neonatal care. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Williams; 2004.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Hyacinth Claire T. Chacon, MD,, Alric V. Mondragon, MD, Mary Anne R. Castor, MD, Marysia Stella T. Recto, MD, Roxanne Casis Hao, MD, Madeleine W. Sumpaico, MD
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
