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.

Standardized protocol for quantification of nerve bundle density as a biomarker for endometriosis.

Introduction: We propose a standardized protocol for measurement of nerve bundle density in endometriosis as a potential biomarker, including in deep endometriosis (DE), ovarian endometriomas (OMA) and superficial peritoneal endometriosis (SUP). Methods: This was a prospective cohort of surgically excised endometriosis samples from Dec 1st 2013 and Dec 31st 2017 at a tertiary referral center for endometriosis in Vancouver, BC, Canada. Surgical data were available from linked patient registry. Protein gene product 9.5 (PGP9.5) was used to identify nerve bundles on immunohistochemistry. PGP9.5 nerve bundles were counted visually. To calculate nerve bundle density, PGP9.5 nerve bundle count was divided by the tissue surface area (total on the slide). All samples were assessed using NHS Elements software for semi-automated measurement of the tissue surface area. For a subset of samples, high power fields (HPFs) were also counted as manual measurement of the tissue surface area. Intraclass correlation was used to assess intra observer and inter observer reliability. Generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) with random intercepts only was conducted to assess differences in PGP9.5 nerve bundle density by endometriosis type (DE, OMA, SUP). Results: In total, 236 tissue samples out of 121 participants were available for analysis in the current study. Semi-automated surface area measurement could be performed in 94.5% of the samples and showed good correlation with manually counted HPFs (Spearman's rho = 0.781, p < 0.001). To assess intra observer reliability, 11 samples were assessed twice by the same observer; to assess inter observer reliability, 11 random samples were blindly assessed by two observers. Intra observer reliability and inter observer reliability for nerve bundle density were excellent: 0.979 and 0.985, respectively. PGP9.5 nerve bundle density varied among samples and no nerve bundles could be found in 24.6% of the samples. GLMM showed a significant difference in PGP9.5 nerve bundle density between the different endometriosis types (X2 = 87.6, P < 0.001 after adjusting for hormonal therapy, with higher density in DE and SUP in comparison to OMA). Conclusion: A standardized protocol is presented to measure PGP9.5 nerve bundle density in endometriosis, which may serve as a biomarker reflecting local neurogenesis in the endometriosis microenvironment.

Maternal and perinatal outcomes in primiparous singleton pregnancies conceived with assisted reproductive technology in British Columbia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the odds of developing adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes in primiparous singleton pregnancies conceived with assisted reproductive technology (ART) compared with pregnancies conceived without ART. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective population-based cohort study using data from the British Columbia Perinatal Data Registry. The population included primiparous women with singleton live or stillbirths delivering at or after 20 weeks' gestation between April 1st 2008-March 31st, 2021. Women who conceived with ART were compared with those who conceived without ART. The main outcome measures were gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, preterm birth, low birth weight, neonatal intensive care unit admission, stillbirth, and 5-minute Apgar score. Adjusted odds ratios were calculated. RESULTS: The study population included 191,059 primiparous women: 183,819 conceived without ART, 7,240 conceived using ART. After controlling for age, body mass index, pre-gestational diabetes, and smoking status, singleton pregnancies conceived by ART had significantly higher odds of gestational diabetes (OR 1.18, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.26) and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (OR 1.39, 95 % CI 1.29-1.51). There were also significantly increased odds of preterm birth (OR 1.35, 95 % CI 1.25-1.46), low birth weight (OR 1.35, 95 % CI 1.23-1.49), and neonatal intensive care unit admission (OR 1.21, 95 % CI 1.11-1.32). There was not a statistically significant difference in the odds of stillbirth (OR 1.06, 95 % CI 0.72-1.57) or 5-minute Apgar score < 7 (OR 1.10, 95 % CI 0.97-1.26). CONCLUSION: There is an increased odds of developing several adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes in primiparous singleton pregnancies conceived by ART including gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, preterm birth, low birth weight, and increased incidence of neonatal intensive care unit admissions.

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.

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.

KRAS mutations and endometriosis burden of disease.

The clinical phenotype of somatic mutations in endometriosis is unknown. The objective was to determine whether somatic KRAS mutations were associated with greater disease burden in endometriosis (i.e. more severe subtypes and higher stage). This prospective longitudinal cohort study included 122 subjects undergoing endometriosis surgery at a tertiary referral center between 2013 and 2017, with 5-9 years of follow-up. Somatic activating KRAS codon 12 mutations were detected in endometriosis lesions using droplet digital PCR. KRAS mutation status for each subject was coded as present (KRAS mutation in at least one endometriosis sample in a subject) or absent. Standardized clinical phenotyping for each subject was carried out via linkage to a prospective registry. Primary outcome was anatomic disease burden, based on distribution of subtypes (deep infiltrating endometriosis, ovarian endometrioma, and superficial peritoneal endometriosis) and surgical staging (Stages I-IV). Secondary outcomes were markers of surgical difficulty, demographics, pain scores, and risk of re-operation. KRAS mutation presence was higher in subjects with deep infiltrating endometriosis or endometrioma lesions only (57.9%; 11/19) and subjects with mixed subtypes (60.6%; 40/66), compared with those with superficial endometriosis only (35.1%; 13/37) (p = 0.04). KRAS mutation was present in 27.6% (8/29) of Stage I cases, in comparison to 65.0% (13/20) of Stage II, 63.0% (17/27) of Stage III, and 58.1% (25/43) of Stage IV cases (p = 0.02). KRAS mutation was also associated with greater surgical difficulty (ureterolysis) (relative risk [RR] = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.02-2.11) and non-Caucasian ethnicity (RR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.47-0.89). Pain severities did not differ based on KRAS mutation status, at either baseline or follow-up. Re-operation rates were low overall, occurring in 17.2% with KRAS mutation compared with 10.3% without (RR = 1.66, 95% CI: 0.66-4.21). In conclusion, KRAS mutations were associated with greater anatomic severity of endometriosis, resulting in increased surgical difficulty. Somatic cancer-driver mutations may inform a future molecular classification of endometriosis.

Association of Central Sensitization Inventory Scores With Pain Outcomes After Endometriosis Surgery.

Importance: A subset of people who undergo surgery for endometriosis have persistent pain, suggesting that other factors besides the endometriosis, such as central sensitization, may play a role in this pain. The Central Sensitization Inventory, a validated self-reported questionnaire of central sensitization symptoms, may identify individuals with endometriosis who have more pain after surgery due to pain sensitization. Objective: To examine whether greater baseline Central Sensitization Inventory scores are associated with postsurgical pain outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, longitudinal cohort study performed at a tertiary center for endometriosis and pelvic pain in British Columbia, Canada, included all patients aged 18 to 50 years with diagnosed or suspected endometriosis and a baseline visit between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019, who underwent surgery after the baseline visit. Individuals who were menopausal, had a prior hysterectomy, or were missing data for outcomes or measures were excluded. Data analysis was performed from July 2021 to June 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was chronic pelvic pain at follow-up measured on a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 to 3 indicating no pain or mild pain, 4 to 6 indicating moderate pain, and 7 to 10 indicating severe pain. Secondary outcomes were deep dyspareunia, dysmenorrhea, dyschezia, and back pain at follow-up. The main variable of interest was baseline Central Sensitization Inventory score (measured from 0 to 100, consisting of 25 self-reported questions rated from 0 to 4 [never, rarely, sometimes, often, and always, respectively]). Results: A total of 239 patients (mean [SD] age, 34 [7] years; 189 [79.1%] White [11 (5.8%) identified as White mixed with another ethnicity], 1 [0.4%] Black or African American, 29 [12.1%] Asian, 2 [0.8%] Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 16 [6.7%] other, and 2 [0.8%] mixed race or ethnicity) with follow-up data at more than 4 months after surgery were included in this study (71.0% follow-up rate). The mean (SD) baseline Central Sensitization Inventory score was 43.8 (18.2), and the mean (SD) follow-up was 16.1 (6.1) months. Higher baseline Central Sensitization Inventory scores were significantly associated with higher chronic pelvic pain (odds ratio [OR], 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.03; P = .02), deep dyspareunia (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; P = .004), dyschezia (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; P < .001), and back pain (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.03; P = .02) at follow-up, when controlling for baseline pain scores. The Central Sensitization Inventory scores themselves decreased slightly from baseline to follow-up (mean [SD] score, 43.8 [18.2] vs 41.7 [18.9]; P = .05); however, individuals with high baseline Central Sensitization Inventory scores still had high scores at follow-up. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of 239 patients with endometriosis, higher Central Sensitization Inventory scores at baseline were associated with worse pain outcomes after endometriosis surgery, when controlling for baseline pain scores. The Central Sensitization Inventory could be used to counsel patients with endometriosis on their expected outcomes after surgery.

A Novel Approach to Depression Care: Efficacy of an Adapted Interpersonal Therapy in a Large, Urban Primary Care Setting.

The Collaborative Care Model (CoCM), in which social workers, primary care physicians, and a consulting psychiatrist work as a team, is an established approach to the treatment of common mental health conditions in primary care settings. Following implementation of a CoCM depression care program at our hospital-based academic primary care practice, we observed a low rate of retention with the use of problem solving therapy/behavioral activation (PST/BA). Our aim in this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT), an evidence-based, flexible strategy that focuses on the relationship between depression and interpersonal challenges, compared to PST/BA. In 2015, most patients enrolled in our CoCM received PST/BA. In 2016, most patients received IPT. Patients who were enrolled and discharged from our CoCM depression care program in the years 2015 and 2016 and received either PST/BA or IPT, were included. Our primary measure was the difference in change in PHQ-9 score between the PST/BA and the IPT groups. Secondary outcomes included the difference in the change in GAD-7 score and measures of glycemic and blood pressure control between the two groups. Two hundred thirty four patients were included in our analysis. One hundred sixty five received PST/BA and 69 received IPT. There was no difference between groups in baseline demographics or measures of depression, anxiety, presence of hypertension, or presence of prediabetes/diabetes. Our primary analysis demonstrated a greater decrease in PHQ-9 score in patients receiving IPT (9.93) compared to those receiving PST/BA (5.41) (p < 0.0001). The proportion of patients achieving a clinical response (PHQ-9 < 10) was also greater in the IPT group (71%) compared to the PST/BA group (44%). In a CoCM depression care program, IPT was a more effective strategy in improving depression symptoms as measured by PHQ-9 scores than PST/BA.