Departments of Medicine and Neurology, University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Epilepsia. 2013 Jan;54(1):181-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1528-1167.2012.03625.x. Epub 2012 Aug 6.
Considerable information is now available concerning the risk of teratogenesis in the individual pregnancy exposed to antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). However, there is comparatively little information available concerning the risk in the subsequent pregnancies of women who continue to take the AED associated with a fetal malformation in a previous pregnancy. This article addresses this matter.
Analysis of data concerning fetal abnormalities in 1,243 women who had 2,637 pregnancies between mid-1999 and 2010 recorded in the Australian Register of Antiepileptic Drugs in Pregnancy. Of the 2,637 pregnancies, 1,114 had been completed before initial enrolment in the Register.
Women taking any AED who had given birth to a malformed baby in their first enrolled pregnancy and who continue taking the same drug were at increased risk of having a malformed offspring in their next pregnancy (35.7% vs. 3.1%; odds ratio [OR] 17.6; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 4.5-68.7). Among these women, those taking valproate (VPA) were more likely to have malformed fetuses in their next pregnancies than those who had taken VPA without fetal abnormalities (57.2% vs. 7.0%, OR 17.8; 95% CI 2.7, 119.1). There were similar although not statistically significant trends in those who had taken AEDs other than VPA. Similar, although again not statistically significant, trends were found, when considering the pairings of the most recent preenrollment pregnancy and the following one. If a woman had two or more pregnancies that resulted in AED-associated fetal malformation, the types of malformation were often different.
Women whose last pregnancy resulted in a fetal malformation have a substantially increased risk of having further malformed fetuses if they become pregnant again while taking the same AED, particularly VPA. This suggests that maternal factors, perhaps genomic, predispose to at least VPA-associated malformations. This knowledge, together with information about the outcome of any previous pregnancy, should help in advising women with AED-treated epilepsy who plan further pregnancies.
现在已经有大量信息涉及到个体妊娠暴露于抗癫痫药物(AEDs)时的致畸风险。然而,对于先前妊娠中因 AED 而导致胎儿畸形后继续服用相关 AED 的女性,其后续妊娠中的风险信息则相对较少。本文讨论了这个问题。
对 1999 年中期至 2010 年间在澳大利亚妊娠抗癫痫药物登记处记录的 1243 名女性的 2637 次妊娠中胎儿异常的相关数据进行分析。在这 2637 次妊娠中,有 1114 次是在首次登记入组前完成的。
在首次登记入组的妊娠中生育了畸形婴儿且继续服用同一药物的女性,其下一胎发生畸形的风险增加(35.7% vs. 3.1%;比值比[OR] 17.6;95%置信区间[95%CI] 4.5-68.7)。在这些女性中,与服用 VPA 但无胎儿异常的女性相比,下一胎发生畸形的可能性更高(57.2% vs. 7.0%,OR 17.8;95%CI 2.7,119.1)。而服用 VPA 以外的 AED 的女性也存在类似但无统计学意义的趋势。在考虑最近一次登记前妊娠和随后一次妊娠的配对时,也发现了类似的趋势,尽管无统计学意义。如果一名女性有两次或更多次因 AED 导致胎儿畸形的妊娠,那么她在再次怀孕且继续服用相同的 AED 时,胎儿畸形的风险会大大增加,特别是 VPA。这表明,母体因素,可能是基因组因素,容易导致至少与 VPA 相关的畸形。这些知识,连同任何先前妊娠的结果信息,应有助于为接受 AED 治疗的癫痫女性提供进一步妊娠的建议。