Department of Epidemiology and Environmental Health, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY.ROR
We sought to assess the relationship between a short interpregnancy interval (IPI) following a pregnancy loss and subsequent live birth and pregnancy outcomes.
Study Design
A secondary analysis of women enrolled in the Effects of Aspirin in Gestation and Reproduction trial with a human chorionic gonadotropin-positive pregnancy test and whose last reproductive outcome was a loss were included in this analysis (n = 677). IPI was defined as the time between last pregnancy loss and last menstrual period of the current pregnancy and categorized by 3-month intervals. Pregnancy outcomes include live birth, pregnancy loss, and any pregnancy complications. These were compared between IPI groups using multivariate relative risk estimation by Poisson regression.
Results
Demographic characteristics were similar between IPI groups. The mean gestational age of prior pregnancy loss was 8.6 ± 2.8 weeks. The overall live birth rate was 76.5%, with similar live birth rates between those with IPI ≤3 months as compared to IPI >3 months (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98-1.16). Rates were also similar for periimplantation loss (aRR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.51-1.80), clinically confirmed loss (aRR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.51-1.10), and any pregnancy complication (aRR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.71-1.09) for those with IPI ≤3 months as compared to IPI >3 months.
Conclusion
Live birth rates and adverse pregnancy outcomes, including pregnancy loss, were not associated with a very short IPI after a prior pregnancy loss. The traditional recommendation to wait at least 3 months after a pregnancy loss before attempting a new pregnancy may not be warranted.
interpregnancy interval pregnancy loss, short interval after miscarriage outcomes, EAGeR trial interpregnancy spacing, pregnancy loss subsequent live birth, conception timing after miscarriage, interpregnancy interval complications, rapid reconception after loss, pregnancy spacing fertility outcomes, miscarriage recovery conception timing
PMID 25246378 25246378 DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.09.020 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.09.020
Cite this article
Wong, L. F., Schliep, K. C., Silver, R. M., Mumford, S. L., Perkins, N. J., Ye, A., Galai, N., Wactawski-Wende, J., Lynch, A. M., Townsend, J. M., Faraggi, D., & Schisterman, E. F. (2015). The effect of a very short interpregnancy interval and pregnancy outcomes following a previous pregnancy loss. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 212(3), 375.e1-375.e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2014.09.020
Wong LF, Schliep KC, Silver RM, Mumford SL, Perkins NJ, Ye A, et al. The effect of a very short interpregnancy interval and pregnancy outcomes following a previous pregnancy loss. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212(3):375.e1-375.e11. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2014.09.020
Wong, L. F., et al. "The effect of a very short interpregnancy interval and pregnancy outcomes following a previous pregnancy loss." American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, vol. 212, no. 3, 2015, pp. 375.e1-375.e11.
Objective Complicated grief reactions follow some pregnancy outcomes, like miscarriage, stillbirth, neonatal death, infant death, selective reduction, or termination of pregnancy. Stigma can delay treatment and worsen outcomes. Screening tools such as the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale detect complicated grief poorly, and specific tools for prolonged or complicated grief after a reproductive loss are cumbersome. In this study, a five-item questionnaire to detect complicated grief after reproductive loss of any type was designed and preliminary validated. Methods A questionnaire patterned after the extensively validated Brief Grief Questionnaire (BGQ) was created by a group of physicians and lay advocates to employ non-traumatic but specific language related to grief after miscarriage, stillbirth, neonatal death, infant death, selective reduction, or termination of pregnancy. One hundred and forty women at a large academic center were recruited in person and via social media to validate the questionnaire with well-studied instruments for anxiety (7-item Panic Disorder Severity Scale, PDSS), trauma (22-item Impact of Events Scale), and reproductive grief and depressive symptoms (33-item Perinatal Grief Scale [PGS]). Results The response rate was 74.9%. Of the 140 participants, 18 (12.8%) experienced their loss during high-risk pregnancies, and 65 (46.4%) were recruited via social media. Seventy-one (51%) respondents had a score > 4, a positive screen for the BGQ. On average, women experienced their loss 2 years prior to participation (IQR 1-5 years). Cronbach's alpha was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.69-0.83). The goodness of fit indices of the model met Fornell and Larker criteria (RMSEA = 0.167, CFI = 0.89, SRMR = 0.06). The AVE was 0.42 and the CR 0.78. Conclusions This investigator-created screening tool is internally consistent and meets preliminary criteria for discriminant validity. This tool can be refined prior to testing for sensitivity and specificity in screening for complicated grief after a reproductive loss.
What is the association between perceived stress during peri-conception and early pregnancy and pregnancy loss among women who have experienced a prior pregnancy loss? Daily perceived stress above the median is associated with over a 2-fold risk of early pregnancy loss among women who have experienced a prior loss. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY? Women who have experienced a pregnancy loss may be more vulnerable to stress while trying to become pregnant again. While prior research has indicated a link between psychological stress and clinically confirmed miscarriages, research is lacking among a pre-conceptional cohort followed prospectively for the effects of perceived stress during early critical windows of pregnancy establishment on risk of both hCG-detected pregnancy losses and confirmed losses, while considering important time-varying confounders. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, Secondary data analysis of the EAGeR trial (2007-2011) among women with an hCG-detected pregnancy (n = 797 women). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, Women from four US clinical centers enrolled pre-conceptionally and were followed ≤6 cycles while attempting pregnancy and, as applicable, throughout pregnancy. Perceived stress was captured via daily diaries and end-of-month questionnaires. Main outcome measures include hCG-detected and clinically recognized pregnancy losses. MAIN Among women who had an hCG-confirmed pregnancy, 188 pregnancies (23.6%) ended in loss. Women with high (>50th percentile) versus low (≤50th percentile) peri-implantation or early pregnancy weekly perceived stress had an elevated risk of experiencing any pregnancy loss (hazard ratio (HR): 1.69, 95% CI: 1.13, 2.54) or clinical loss (HR: 1.58, 95% CI: 0.96, 2.60), with higher risks observed for women experiencing an hCG-detected loss (HR: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.04, 4.46). Models accounted for women's age, BMI, employment, marital status, income, education, race, parity, prior losses, exercise and time-varying nausea/vomiting, caffeine, alcohol and smoking. LIMITATIONS, We were limited in our ability to clearly identify the mechanisms of stress on pregnancy loss due to our sole reliance on self-reported perceived stress, and the lack of biomarkers of different pathways of stress. This study provides new insight on early pregnancy perceived stress and risk of pregnancy loss, most notably hCG-detected losses, among women with a history of a prior loss. Our study is an improvement over past studies in its ability to account for time-varying early pregnancy symptoms, such as nausea/vomiting, and lifestyle factors, such as caffeine, alcohol and smoking, which are also risk factors for psychological stress and pregnancy loss. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (Contract HHSN267200603423, HHSN267200603424, HHSN267200603426, HHSN275201300023I). Additionally, K.C.S. was supported by the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number K01AG058781. The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. #NCT00467363.
In vitro fertilization (IVF) births contribute to a considerable proportion of preterm birth (PTB) each year. However, there is no formal surveillance of adverse perinatal outcomes for less invasive fertility treatments. The study objective was to describe associations between fertility treatment (in vitro fertilization, intrauterine insemination, usually with ovulation drugs (IUI), or ovulation drugs alone) and preterm birth, compared to no treatment in subfertile women. The Fertility Experiences Study (FES) is a retrospective cohort study conducted at the University of Utah between April 2010 and September 2012. Women with a history of primary subfertility self-reported treatment data via survey and interviews. Participant data were linked to birth certificates and fetal death records to asses for perinatal outcomes, particularly preterm birth. A total 487 birth certificates and 3 fetal death records were linked as first births for study participants who completed questionnaires. Among linked births, 19% had a PTB. After adjustment for maternal age, paternal age, maternal education, annual income, religious affiliation, female or male fertility diagnosis, and duration of subfertility, the odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for PTB were 2.17 (CI 0.99, 4.75) for births conceived using ovulation drugs, 3.17 (CI 1.4, 7.19) for neonates conceived using IUI and 4.24 (CI 2.05, 8.77) for neonates conceived by IVF, compared to women with subfertility who used no treatment during the month of conception. A reported diagnosis of female factor infertility increased the adjusted odds of having a PTB 2.99 (CI 1.5, 5.97). Duration of pregnancy attempt was not independently associated with PTB. In restricting analyses to singleton gestation, odds ratios were not significant for any type of treatment. IVF, IUI, and ovulation drugs were all associated with a higher incidence of preterm birth and low birth weight, predominantly related to multiple gestation births.
PregnancyInfertilityReproductive Endocrinology
Open Access
Does the OPtimization of Thyroid function, Thrombophilia, Immunity, and Uterine Milieu (OPTIMUM) treatment strategy, developed for treating repeated implantation failure (RIF), contribute to improving pregnancy outcomes in patients with a history of recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL)? Between 2018 and 2019, women with RPL after two or more clinical pregnancy losses underwent RPL testing. We treated chronic endometritis with antibiotics, high Th1/Th2 cell ratios with vitamin D and/or tacrolimus, overt/subclinical hypothyroidism with levothyroxine, and thrombophilia with low-dose aspirin. Of 168 consecutive women aged ≤43 years, 115 underwent RPL testing. We compared 100 pregnancies (90 women) and 46 pregnancies (41 women) with and without the OPTIMUM treatment strategy, respectively. RPL testing identified intrauterine abnormalities in 66 (57.4%), elevated Th1/Th2 cell ratios in 50 (43.5%), thyroid dysfunction in 33 (28.7%), and thrombophilia in 33 (28.7%). The live birth rate in the OPTIMUM group was significantly higher than that in the control group among women aged <40 years (78.1% and 42.3%, respectively; p = 0.002), but no significant difference was observed in women aged ≥40 years (55.6% and 30.0%, respectively; p = 0.09). The OPTIMUM treatment strategy improved pregnancy outcomes in patients with not only RIF but also RPL.