University of Utah Health Sciences Center and Intermountain Healthcare, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
Lupus. 2010 Apr;19(4):446-52. doi: 10.1177/0961203310361490.
The subject of obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) has been reviewed dozens of times, and there is little doubt that the international APS community has done well in bringing APS to the attention of clinicians around the world. However, the evolution of clinical practice, at least in the US, also has convinced us that our field would benefit from further clinical study. For example, the number of women diagnosed with 'APS', but who do not meet the revised Sapporo criteria, seems to have increased. It is now common practice for women with recurrent miscarriage or prior fetal death to be treated with heparin, even in the presence of indeterminate or low titer antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) levels and even after only one positive test. In part, this common practice derives from confusion on the part of many clinicians and patients regarding the diagnosis of APS as well as the clinical and laboratory criteria for the syndrome. In part, this derives from the common practice of so-called 'empiric treatment' in US reproductive medicine, often driven as much by patients as by clinicians. This brief commentary focuses on areas of uncertainty that we see as deserving of new or renewed study for the sake of improving our understanding of APS and best patient care.
产科抗磷脂综合征(APS)这一主题已经被数十次审查,毫无疑问,国际 APS 社区在引起全世界临床医生对 APS 的关注方面做得很好。然而,临床实践的发展,至少在美国,也使我们相信,我们的领域将受益于进一步的临床研究。例如,被诊断为“APS”但不符合修订后的 Sapporo 标准的女性数量似乎有所增加。现在,对于反复流产或先前胎儿死亡的女性,即使存在不确定或低滴度抗磷脂抗体(aPL)水平,甚至只有一次阳性检测,也常常规用肝素治疗。部分原因是许多临床医生和患者对 APS 的诊断以及该综合征的临床和实验室标准存在混淆。部分原因是美国生殖医学中所谓的“经验性治疗”的常见做法,这在很大程度上是由患者和临床医生共同推动的。这篇简短的评论集中在我们认为值得进行新的或重新研究的不确定领域,以提高我们对 APS 的认识和最佳患者护理。