ArticleIrish journal of medical science2017
Obstetric outcomes of recurrent pregnancy loss patients diagnosed wıth inherited thrombophilia.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of hereditary thrombophilia on recurrent pregnancy loss: a retrospective cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Does the use of low-molecular-weight heparin during pregnancy change the expression of PD-1 and PDL-1 in women with recurrent pregnancy loss?Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2023Article
- Effect of low-molecular-weight heparin in women undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: a retrospective cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Review
- Coagulation Biomarkers in Women with Recurrent Miscarriage and Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) is defined by two or more failed pregnancies. The relation between RPL and inherited thrombophilia requires anticoagulant therapy during pregnancy. However the obstetric outcomes have not been well defined in these RPL patients diagnosed with inherited thrombophilia, who have been given anticoagulant therapy.
aimTo investigate the obstetric outcomes in pregnant women with RPL who are given low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and low-dose aspirin due to diagnosis of inherited thrombophilia.
methodsA hundred and eight RPL women were diagnosed with inherited thrombophilia, and 98 women were diagnosed with unexplained RPL. The patients with inherited thrombophilia were given LMWH and low-dose aspirin. Unexplained RPL patients were not given any medicine. The obstetric outcomes of participants were noted.
resultsIn thrombophilic group, the live-birth levels were significantly higher [90 (83%) vs 67 (68%) p < 0.05], and the miscarriage levels were significantly lower than that in the control group [14 (13%) vs 27 (28%) p < 0.01]. The number of patients with preeclampsia was significantly higher in the thrombophilic group [16 (15%) vs 6 (6%) p < 0.05]. The number of preterm births was significantly higher than that of the controls [25 (23%) vs 10 (10%) p < 0.05]. The median gestation age of delivery was 35 weeks for thrombophilic patients and 38 weeks for controls (p < 0.05).
conclusionThe RPL patients diagnosed with inherited thrombophilia and who were given LMWH with low-dose aspirin had higher live-birth rates and lower miscarriage rates than those in the unexplained RPL patients. Increased risk of preeclampsia is seen in RPL patients with inherited thrombophilia despite thrombophilia prophylaxis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.