Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31441864›Full record

Observational studyMedicine2019

Comparison of 2 approaches in management of pregnant women with inherited trombophilias: Prospective analytical cohort study.

Stefan Dugalic, Milos Petronijevic, Aleksandar Stefanovic, Katarina Stefanovic, Svetlana Vrzic Petronijevic, Dejana Stanisavljevic, Sonja Perkovic Kepeci, Nemanja Milincic, Igor Pantic, Milan Perovic

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Stefan DugalicClinical Centre of Serbia, Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics.
Milos PetronijevicClinical Centre of Serbia, Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics.
Aleksandar StefanovicClinical Centre of Serbia, Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics.
Katarina StefanovicClinical Centre of Serbia, Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics.
Svetlana Vrzic PetronijevicClinical Centre of Serbia, Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics.
Dejana StanisavljevicFaculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade.
Sonja Perkovic KepeciFaculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade.
Nemanja MilincicClinical Centre of Serbia, Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics.
Igor PanticLaboratory for Cellular Physiology, Institute of Medical Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade.
Milan PerovicFaculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade.
University of Belgrade · RS

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous adverse pregnancy outcomes (APO) in women with hereditary thrombophilia have emerged as new indications for prophylactic use of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) during pregnancy. Recent meta-analysis conducted to establish if LMWH may prevent recurrent placenta-mediated pregnancy complications point to important therapeutic effect but these findings are absolutely not universal. Furthermore, previous studies regarding LMWH prophylaxis for APO in women with inherited thrombophilia were performed in high risk patients with previous adverse health outcomes in medical, family and/or obstetric history. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the effects of LMWH prophylaxis on pregnancy outcomes in women with inherited thrombophilias regardless of the presence of previous adverse health outcomes in medical, family, and obstetric history.Prospective analytical cohort study included all referred women with inherited thrombophilia between 11 and 15 weeks of gestation and followed-up to delivery. Patients were allocated in group with LWMH prophylaxis (study group) and control group without LWMH prophylaxis. The groups were compared for laboratory parameters and Doppler flows of umbilical artery at 28 to 30th, 32nd to 34th and 36th to 38th gestational weeks (gw), and for obstetric and perinatal outcomes.The study group included 221 women and control group included 137 women. Mean resistance index of the umbilical artery Ri in 28 to 30, 32 to 34, and 36 to 38 gw were significantly higher in the control group compared to study group (0.71 ± 0.02 vs 0.69 ± 0.02; 0.67 ± 0.03 vs 0.64 ± 0.02; and 0.67 ± 0.05 vs 0.54 ± 0.08, respectively). Intrauterine fetal death (IUFD) and miscarriages were statistically significantly more frequent in control group compared to the patients in study (P < .001). The frequencies of fetal growth restriction (FGR) and APO were significantly higher in the control group compared to the study group (P = .008 and P < .001, respectively). In a multivariate regression model with APO as a dependent variable, only Ri was detected as a significant protective factor for APO, after adjusting for age and LMWH prophylaxis (P < .001).We have demonstrated better perinatal outcomes in women with LMWH prophylaxis for APO compared to untreated women.

Indexed as

Abortion, SpontaneousAdultAnticoagulantsCase-Control StudiesFemaleFetal DeathFetal Growth RetardationHeparin, Low-Molecular-WeightHumansInfant, NewbornLive BirthPregnancyPregnancy Complications, HematologicProspective StudiesThrombophiliaAnticoagulantsHeparin, Low-Molecular-Weight

Identifiers

PMID31441864
PMCPMC6716684
OpenAlexW2969972704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.