A history of recurrent pregnancy loss is associated with increased perinatal complications, but not necessarily a longer birth interval: a population study spanning 18 years.

STUDY QUESTION: Is there a difference in the time interval between the first and second live births among individuals with and without recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Primary RPL (two or more pregnancy losses before the first live birth) is associated with a shorter time interval between the first and second live births compared with individuals without RPL, but this association is reversed in patients with secondary RPL (RPL patients with no or one pregnancy loss before the first live birth). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: There is limited information regarding the ability to have more than one child for patients with RPL. Previous studies have investigated the time to live birth and the live birth rate from the initial presentation to clinical providers. Most of the previous studies have included only patients treated at specialized RPL clinics and thus may be limited by selection bias, including patients with a more severe condition. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of 184 241 participants who delivered in British Columbia, Canada, and had at least two recorded live births between 2000 and 2018. The aim was to study the differences in the time interval between the first and second live births and the prevalence of pregnancy complications in patients with and without RPL. Additionally, 198 319 individuals with their first live birth between 2000 and 2010 were studied to evaluate cumulative second live birth rates. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Among individuals with at least two recorded live births between 2000 and 2018, 12 321 patients with RPL and 171 920 participants without RPL were included. RPL was defined as at least two pregnancy losses before 20 weeks gestation. Patients with primary RPL had at least two pregnancy losses occurring before the first live birth, while patients with secondary RPL had no or one pregnancy loss before the first live birth. We compared the time interval from the first to second live birth in patients with primary RPL, those with secondary RPL, and participants without RPL using generalized additive models to allow for a non-linear relationship between maternal age and time interval between first and second live births. We also compared prevalence of pregnancy complications at the first and second live births between the groups using non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis H test and Fisher's exact test for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. We assessed the cumulative second live birth rates in patients with primary RPL and those without RPL, among participants who had their first live birth between 2000 and 2010. Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate and compare hazard ratios between the two groups using a stratified modelling approach. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The adjusted time interval between the first and second live births was the longest in patients with secondary RPL, followed by individuals without RPL, and the shortest time interval was observed in patients with primary RPL: 4.34 years (95% CI: 4.09-4.58), 3.20 years (95% CI: 3.00-3.40), and 3.05 years (95% CI: 2.79-3.32). A higher frequency of pregnancy losses was associated with an increased time interval between the first and second live births. The prevalence of pregnancy complications at the first and second live births, including gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorder of pregnancy, preterm birth, and multiple gestations was significantly higher in patients with primary RPL compared with those without RPL. The cumulative second live birth rate was significantly lower in patients with primary RPL compared with individuals without RPL. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This study may be limited by its retrospective nature. Although we adjusted for multiple potential confounders, there may be residual confounding due to a lack of information about pregnancy intentions and other factors, including unreported pregnancy losses. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The results of this study provide information that will help clinicians in the counselling of RPL patients who desire a second child. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was supported in part by a grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR): Reference Number W11-179912. M.A.B. reports research grants from CIHR and Ferring Pharmaceutical. He is also on the advisory board for AbbVie, Pfizer, and Baxter. The other authors report no conflict of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04360564.

Hysteroscopic Lysis of Complex Uterine Adhesions After Interventional Radiology-Guided Access.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate a novel surgical technique using hysteroscopic lysis of adhesions after interventional radiology (IR)-guided access in patients with severe intrauterine adhesions and challenging uterine access. DESIGN: This video illustrates the technique of the safe division of intrauterine adhesions after IR-guided access. SETTING: Conventional hysteroscopic adhesiolysis might be inadequate or risky in cases of severely narrowed or obstructed uterine flow tract, possibly resulting in incomplete adhesiolysis, false passages, or uterine perforation. This video presents 2 cases from a tertiary center involving a multidisciplinary team of a reproductive surgeon and an interventional radiologist. The first case involves a 38-year-old with severe Asherman syndrome, who experienced unsuccessful attempt to treat adhesions that was complicated by a false passage. The second case involves a 39-year-old with recurrent severe Asherman syndrome and a history of unsuccessful attempts at hysterosalpingogram and conventional hysteroscopic lysis of adhesions. INTERVENTIONS: In the IR suite, the patient was put in a lithotomy position on the fluoroscopy table. A vaginal speculum was inserted exposing the cervix. The procedure was performed using intravenous sedation and topical anesthetic spray applied to the cervix. Using fluoroscopy, a balloon cannula was inserted through the cervix, followed by contrast injection to assess uterine access. If there is no route, transvaginal ultrasound-guided needle cannulation of the main portion of the uterine cavity would be performed, approximating as closely as possible to the expected route of the cervical canal. A guidewire followed by a locked loop catheter was advanced through adhesions into the uterine cavity. The catheter was left protruding from the cervix to guide the hysteroscope. The patient was then transferred to the operating room for the hysteroscopic procedure. Under the guidance of the intrauterine catheter, the adhesions were carefully lysed using cold scissors. The endometrial cavity and tubal openings were inspected to ensure complete adhesiolysis and exclusion of any other copathologies. CONCLUSION: IR guidance can provide a safe and effective approach to hysteroscopic lysis of adhesions in patients with challenging intrauterine adhesions and difficult uterine access, such as patients with severe Asherman syndrome, intractable cervical stenosis, uterine wall agglutination, previous adhesiolysis failure, marked fixed retroverted retroflexed uteri, and previous false passage or uterine perforation.

Prevalence, causes, and impact of non-visualized pregnancy losses in a recurrent pregnancy loss population.

STUDY QUESTION: Does the occurrence of non-visualized pregnancy loss (NVPL) affect future reproductive outcomes in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL)? SUMMARY ANSWER: The number of previous NVPLs is a significant predictor of subsequent live birth in patients with RPL. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The number of preceding miscarriages is a strong indicator for future reproductive outcomes. However, NVPL particularly has been sparsely addressed in previous literature. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 1981 patients attending a specialized recurrent pregnancy loss clinic (RPL) from January 2012 to March 2021. A total of 1859 patients met the inclusion criteria of the study and were included in the analysis. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Patients with a history of RPL, defined as ≥2 pregnancy losses before 20 weeks gestation, who attended a specialized RPL clinic in a tertiary care center were included. Patients' evaluation included parental karyotyping, antiphospholipid antibodies screening, uterine cavity assessment with hysterosalpingography (HSG) or hysteroscopy, maternal thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) testing, and serum hemoglobin A1C testing. Other investigations were performed only when indicated such as testing for inherited thrombophilias, serum prolactin, oral glucose tolerance test, and endometrial biopsy. Patients were divided into three groups; patients who experienced NVPLs only (pure NVPLs group), patients with only visualized pregnancy losses (pure VPLs group), and patients with history of both NVPLs and VPLs (mixed group). Statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for continuous variables and Fisher's exact tests for categorical variables. Significance was detected when P values <0.05. A logistic regression model was used to determine the impact of NVPLs and VPLs numbers on any live birth subsequent to the initial RPL clinic visit. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The prevalence of patients with pure NVPLs, pure VPLs, and mixed losses was 14.7% (274/1859), 31.8% (591/1859), and 53.5% (994/1859), respectively. The prevalence of acquired and congenital uterine anomalies diagnosed by HSG or hysteroscopy was significantly different between pure NVPLs, pure VPLs, and mixed groups (16.8% versus 23.7% versus. 20.7%, respectively P = 0.05). There were no significant differences in the results of other RPL investigations or baseline demographics between the three groups. A logistic regression model controlling for maternal age at the initial RPL clinic visit and the follow-up duration showed that the numbers of NVPLs (odds ratio (OR): 0.77, CI: 0.68-0.88) and VPLs (OR: 0.75, CI: 0.64-0.86) are strong predictors for subsequent live births after the initial RPL clinic visit (P < 0.001). The odds of having a live birth decreased by 23% and 25% with each additional NVPL and VPL, respectively. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This study may be limited by its retrospective design. Some of our data, including home pregnancy tests and obstetric history, are based on patient self-reporting, which could have overstated the true prevalence of NVPLs. Another limitation is the lack of available live birth data for all patients at the time of the analysis. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine and analyze the reproductive outcomes of patients with pure NVPLs in a substantial cohort of patients with RPL. NVPLs seem to affect future live births the same way as clinical miscarriages, which supports their inclusion in RPL definitions. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was supported in part by Canadian Institute Heath Grant (CIHR): Reference Number/W11-179912 and Women's Health Research Institute (WHRI), Vancouver, BC, Canada. M.A.B: Research grants from Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR) and Ferring Pharmaceutical. M.A.B. is on the advisory board for AbbVie and Baxter. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Uterine Septum and Other Müllerian Anomalies in a Recurrent Pregnancy Loss Population: Impact on Reproductive Outcomes.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To study the impact of Müllerian anomalies on reproductive outcomes in a recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) population and to evaluate the effect of surgical correction of uterine septum on the odds of achieving live birth in RPL patients with a septate uterus. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A specialized RPL clinic at a tertiary center. PATIENTS: RPL patients with ≥ 2 pregnancy losses before 20 weeks' gestation who attended a specialized RPL clinic. INTERVENTION: We aimed to assess the association between a possible risk factor (Müllerian anomalies) and reproductive outcomes and that between having surgery for septate uterus and achieving a live birth. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome is live birth rate in RPL patients with Müllerian anomalies compared with those without; secondary outcome measures include rates of full-term live birth, preterm live birth, first and second trimester pregnancy loss, and stillbirth. After adjusting for patient age at the initial RPL visit, the number of pregnancy losses, and the presence of any other abnormal RPL investigation, the odds of achieving live birth were on average 49.4% lower for patients with a septate uterus than those without Müllerian anomalies (odds ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.30-0.86) in the studied cohort (n = 377). A subanalysis of 72 patients with septate uterus demonstrated a higher likelihood of live birth in those who underwent septum resection (46/72; 63.9%) than those who elected to go for expectant management (26/72; 36.1%), yet this study was underpowered to establish a significant difference (52.2% vs 34.6%; p = .22). CONCLUSION: In RPL patients, having a septate uterus significantly decreased the chances of achieving live birth. Patients with septate uterus who received hysteroscopic septum division had a higher tendency to achieve more live births than those who elected expectant management. However, our study was underpowered to detect a statistically significant difference.

Reproductive and treatment outcomes in chronic intervillositis of unknown etiology: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Chronic Intervillositis of Unknown Etiology (CIUE) is a rare idiopathic inflammatory disorder of the placenta. The evidence suggests an increased risk for poor obstetrical outcomes and a risk of recurrence as high as 100 %. This meta-analysis examined CIUE prevalence, recurrence, association with autoimmune disorders, reproductive outcomes, pregnancy complications, and the benefits of medical treatments. A systematic review, following PRISMA guidelines, involved a thorough search across multiple databases including Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Evidence Based Medical Reviews, and Scopus. Out of 590 initially identified studies, 19 studies were included for both qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis after full-text review. Risk of bias was assessed using appropriate tools: The Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool was applied to twelve studies, while the Joanna Briggs Institute case series critical appraisal tool was used for seven studies. Our findings confirm that CIUE is a rare condition (0.7 %). CIUE is associated with decreased live birth rates (53 %), increased recurrent pregnancy loss (23 %), fetal loss beyond 22 weeks gestation (25 %), a higher prevalence of autoimmune diseases (14 %), and a recurrence rate of 30 % in subsequent pregnancies. Moreover, individuals with CIUE had higher rates of pregnancy complications, including gestational hypertension (19 %), intrauterine growth restriction (45 %), and preterm births (43 %). No significant improvement in live birth rate was observed among treated CIUE patients; however, caution is warranted when interpreting these findings due to the limited sample size. Future research in CIUE is crucial given its rarity and complexity.