Human Reproduction, Vol. 17, No. 5, 1345-1350,
May 2002
© 2002 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology
Types of pregnancy loss in recurrent miscarriage: implications for research and clinical practice
1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and 2 Miscarriage Clinic, University of Liverpool, Liverpool Women's Hospital, Crown St, Liverpool L8 7SS, UK
BACKGROUND: In recurrent pregnancy loss, there is much debate about cause and association, as exact pathophysiological mechanisms have not been elucidated. The aim of this study was to assess whether recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) patterns differ according to causal/associated conditions, suggesting differing disease processes. METHODS: Following investigation, 427 women with RPL were classified into the following `diagnostic' groups: idiopathic, oligomenorrhoea, antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) and `possible' APS. A total of 323 subsequently conceived, and underwent serial ultrasonography in early pregnancy; of these, 87 (26.9%) miscarried, and the types of pregnancy loss for the four diagnostic groups were allocated to either embryo loss (fetal heart never seen) and fetal loss (fetal heart seen prior to pregnancy loss). RESULTS: Overall, there were 75 embryonic losses and 12 fetal losses. The fetal loss rates in each group were similar: idiopathic 5.1%, oligomenorrhoea 3.4%, `possible' APS 4.9% and APS 4.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Serial ultrasound helps to discriminate type of pregnancy loss and demonstrates that embryo loss is more common than fetal loss. More importantly, pregnancy loss patterns do not seem to differ between diagnostic groups in a treated population. The fetal loss rate in each of the diagnostic groups is similar to that in other reported populations.
Key words: antiphospholipid syndrome/embryonic loss/fetal loss/oligomenorrhoea/recurrent pregnancy loss
3 To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: lbricker{at}liv.ac.uk
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M.T.M. Franssen, J.C. Korevaar, F. van der Veen, K. Boer, N.J. Leschot, and M. Goddijn Management of recurrent miscarriage: evaluating the impact of a guideline Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2007; 22(5): 1298 - 1303. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Jauniaux, R. G. Farquharson, O. B. Christiansen, N. Exalto, and On behalf of ESHRE Special Interest Group for Earl Evidence-based guidelines for the investigation and medical treatment of recurrent miscarriage Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2006; 21(9): 2216 - 2222. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. G. Farquharson, E. Jauniaux, N. Exalto, and on behalf of the ESHRE Special Interest Group for Updated and revised nomenclature for description of early pregnancy events Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2005; 20(11): 3008 - 3011. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Morikawa, H. Yamada, E. H. Kato, S. Shimada, T. Yamada, and H. Minakami Embryo loss pattern is predominant in miscarriages with normal chromosome karyotype among women with repeated miscarriage Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2004; 19(11): 2644 - 2647. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Goddijn, J.H.K. Joosten, A.C. Knegt, F. van derVeen, M.T.M. Franssen, G.J. Bonsel, and N.J. Leschot Clinical relevance of diagnosing structural chromosome abnormalities in couples with repeated miscarriage Hum. Reprod., April 1, 2004; 19(4): 1013 - 1017. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Quenby, G. Vince, R. Farquharson, and J. Aplin Recurrent miscarriage: a defect in nature's quality control? Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2002; 17(8): 1959 - 1963. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|