ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2024
Reproductive outcomes in couples with recurrent pregnancy loss after embryonic chromosomal microarray analysis.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Euploid sporadic miscarriage in advanced-age women is associated with reduced live birth rates in subsequent pregnancies.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- PGT-A versus expectant management for fertile patients with recurrent pregnancy loss and prior aneuploidy: a dual-center, real-world study of 5-year cumulative pregnancy outcomes.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Observational
- Chromosomal miscarriage and pregnancy outcomes in recurrent pregnancy loss.Reproduction & fertility · 2025Article
- Screening of triploid in miscarriage tissues using medium-coverage whole genome sequencing with a three-algorithm integrated approach.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) has been widely applied to explore the genetic etiology in recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL). However, the reproductive prognosis in RPL couples with different types of chromosomally abnormal miscarriage remains unclear.
objectivesThe main purpose of this study was to evaluate the reproductive prognosis among RPL couples after genetic testing in products of conception (POCs) by CMA. STUDY
designIn this retrospective study, 1101 RPL couples referred for genetic testing in POCs by CMA. A total of 830 couples who met the inclusion criteria were followed up for at least 24 months after the index miscarriage. The rates of live birth and adverse pregnancy events in subsequent pregnancy and cumulative pregnancies were examined.
resultsFor couples with three or more miscarriage, compared with those with chromosomally normal miscarriage, a significantly higher subsequent live birth rate was found in couples with chromosomally abnormal miscarriage (66.9% vs 71.6%, P = .040). However, differences in cumulative live birth rate among couples with chromosomally abnormal miscarriage and normal miscarriage were nonsignificant (82.7% vs 80.2%, P = .131). Women with advanced maternal age showed a significant decrease in the live birth rate (P < 0.01) and an increase in the miscarriage rate (P < 0.01) than those aged < 35 years old, regardless of whether the miscarriage was chromosomally normal or abnormal. RPL couples with chromosomally normal miscarriage showed a significant decrease in live birth rates in subsequent pregnancy and cumulative pregnancies, when they had experienced a large number of previous miscarriages; however, no significant difference was observed in those with chromosomally abnormal miscarriage.
conclusionFor women with three or more previous miscarriages, RPL couples with chromosomally normal miscarriage manifested a poorer reproductive prognosis than those with chromosomally abnormal miscarriage in subsequent pregnancy, while the cumulative live birth rate was similar. Advanced maternal age was a predictor of adverse pregnancy events, regardless of embryonic chromosomal results. Furthermore, among RPL women with large numbers of previous miscarriages, the supportive care and counselling regarding individual risk is necessary for those with chromosomally normal miscarriage.
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.