ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024
Pregnancy in myasthenia gravis: a retrospective analysis of maternal and neonatal outcome from a large tertiary care centre in Germany.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety of Ravulizumab Use in Pregnancy: Insights from a Global Pharmacovigilance Analysis.Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- Medication use trajectories in myasthenia gravis pregnancies: a population-based drug utilization study.Journal of neurology · 2026Article
- Myasthenia Gravis and Pregnancy: Clinical Management and Maternal-Neonatal Outcomes.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Risk of Myasthenia Gravis Exacerbation During Pregnancy and Postpartum: A Nationwide Cohort Study.Neurology · 2026Article
- Characterizing Perinatal Treatment Patterns and Outcomes in Myasthenia Gravis.Muscle & nerve · 2026Article
- Asymptomatic Maternal Diseases Presenting with Symptomatic Neonatal Manifestations: A Short Case Series.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMyasthenia gravis (MG) is a rare, potentially life-threatening autoimmune disease with fluctuating muscle weakness frequently affecting women of childbearing age. MG can affect maternal as well as neonatal outcome with risk of worsening of myasthenic symptoms in the mothers and risk of transient neonatal myasthenia gravis (TNMG) and arthrogryposis multiplex congenita (AMC) or foetal acetylcholine receptor antibody-associated disorders (FARAD) in the neonates.
methodsRetrospective analysis of maternal and neonatal outcome in a cohort of pregnant MG patients treated at a tertiary care centre in Germany.
resultsOverall, 66 pregnancies were analysed. During 40 (63%) pregnancies, women experienced a worsening of myasthenic symptoms, of whom 10 patients (15.7%) needed acute therapy with IVIg or plasma exchange. There was no case of myasthenic crisis. Rate of caesarean section was comparable to the overall C-section rate at our centre (38% vs. 40%). However, there was a slightly higher rate for operative vaginal delivery (15% vs. 10%) as potential indicator for fatiguing striated musculature in MG patients during the expulsion stage. Rate of TNMG as well as AMC was 3% (two cases each).
conclusionsMaternal and neonatal outcome in our cohort was favourable with a low rate of myasthenic exacerbations requiring acute therapies and a low rate of TNMG and AMC/FARAD. Our data might help neurologists and obstetricians to advice MG patients with desire to have children.
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.