经历过流产的女性连续妊娠的时间。

Successive time to pregnancy among women experiencing pregnancy loss.

作者信息

Sapra K J, McLain A C, Maisog J M, Sundaram R, Buck Louis G M

机构信息

Division of Intramural Population Health Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 6100 Executive Blvd., Room 7B05, Rockville, MD 20852, USA

Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.

出版信息

Hum Reprod. 2014 Nov;29(11):2553-9. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deu216. Epub 2014 Aug 27.

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION

Is time to pregnancy (TTP) similar across successive pregnancy attempts among women experiencing pregnancy loss?

SUMMARY ANSWER

TTP after a loss may be longer compared with TTP before a loss.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Two pregnancy cohort studies have reported that TTP is similar across pregnancy attempts in fertile women. However, this has not been investigated among women experiencing pregnancy losses.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Data for this analysis come from the Longitudinal Investigation of Fertility and the Environment Study, a population-based, preconception cohort of couples attempting pregnancy. During 2005-2009, recruitment was targeted to 16 counties in Michigan and Texas with reported exposures to persistent environmental chemicals. A total of 501 couples were recruited and followed for up to 12 months of pregnancy attempts allowing for continued participation of women with pregnancy losses until censoring.

PARTICIPANTS, SETTING, METHODS: We assessed TTP among 70 couples recruited upon discontinuing contraception for purposes of becoming pregnant and experiencing ≥1 prospectively observed pregnancy losses during 12 months of trying. There were 61 couples who contributed two pregnancy attempts and 9 who contributed three. Women were instructed in the use of urine-based home fertility monitors to time intercourse relative to ovulation and recorded their bleeding patterns in daily journals. TTP was defined as the number of menstrual cycles taken to achieve pregnancy. Women were also instructed in the use of home digital pregnancy tests and asked to begin pregnancy testing on the day of expected menses. Women recorded the results of their pregnancy tests in a daily journal with a single positive pregnancy test result indicating an hCG-confirmed pregnancy. Pregnancy losses were ascertained from a subsequent recorded negative pregnancy test or clinically confirmed loss. We estimated fecundability odds ratios (FORs) comparing subsequent to first TTP using discrete Cox models with robust standard errors, accounting for cycles off contraception before study entry and adjusting for maternal age, body mass index, reproductive history and time-varying cigarette, alcohol and caffeine usage while trying.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The mean female age was 30.3 ± 4.3 years; 21% had a prior pregnancy loss before study entry. Of the second and third attempts, 59 and 43%, respectively, were longer compared with the first attempt. FORs <1 suggest reduced fecundability or a longer TTP when comparing the second with the first attempt (0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.28, 0.65), and similarly for the third relative to the first attempt (0.64, 95% CI: 0.18, 2.36). TTP in the second attempt was a median of 1 cycle longer (interquartile range: 0, 3 cycles) compared with TTP in the first attempt.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: As this is the first study to investigate successive TTP exclusively among women experiencing pregnancy loss, our findings await corroboration since most losses occurred early in gestation. As such, the generalizability of our findings for all pregnancy losses awaits further research. We also had limited power to detect a reduction in fecundability for the third compared with first pregnancy attempt.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Unlike fertile women, TTP in women experiencing early pregnancy losses may trend towards longer subsequent attempts. If the findings are corroborated, women experiencing losses may benefit from counselling regarding trying times.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (contracts N01-HD-3-3355, N01-HD-3-3356 and NOH-HD-3-3358). K.J.S. was supported by an Intramural Research Training Award from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Division of Intramural Population Health Research. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

摘要

研究问题

经历过流产的女性在连续几次备孕尝试中,其受孕所需时间(TTP)是否相似?

简要回答

流产后的TTP可能比流产前的TTP更长。

已知信息

两项妊娠队列研究报告称,在可生育女性中,每次备孕尝试的TTP相似。然而,尚未对经历过流产的女性进行过此项调查。

研究设计、规模、持续时间:本分析的数据来自生育与环境纵向调查研究,这是一项基于人群的孕前队列研究,研究对象为尝试怀孕的夫妇。在2005年至2009年期间,研究招募对象为密歇根州和得克萨斯州16个县报告接触过持久性环境化学物质的人群。共招募了501对夫妇,并对其进行长达12个月的备孕随访,允许经历流产的女性继续参与,直至审查结束。

研究对象、研究地点、研究方法:我们评估了70对夫妇的TTP,这些夫妇为怀孕而停止避孕,且在12个月的备孕期间经历了≥1次前瞻性观察到的流产。其中61对夫妇进行了两次备孕尝试,9对夫妇进行了三次备孕尝试。指导女性使用基于尿液的家用生育监测仪来确定相对于排卵的性交时间,并在日常日志中记录她们的出血模式。TTP定义为实现怀孕所需的月经周期数。还指导女性使用家用数字妊娠试验,并要求她们在预期月经日开始进行妊娠试验。女性在日常日志中记录妊娠试验结果,单次阳性妊娠试验结果表明为经人绒毛膜促性腺激素(hCG)确认的怀孕。通过随后记录的阴性妊娠试验或临床确认的流产来确定流产情况。我们使用具有稳健标准误的离散Cox模型,比较首次TTP后的受孕几率比(FORs),该模型考虑了研究开始前停用避孕措施的周期数,并对母亲年龄、体重指数、生殖史以及备孕期间随时间变化的吸烟、饮酒和咖啡因摄入量进行了调整。

主要结果及偶然性的作用

女性平均年龄为30.3±4.3岁;21%的女性在研究开始前有过流产史。在第二次和第三次备孕尝试中,分别有59%和43%的尝试时间比第一次更长。FORs<1表明,与第一次尝试相比,第二次尝试时受孕能力降低或TTP更长(0.42,95%置信区间(CI):0.28,0.65),第三次尝试相对于第一次尝试时情况类似(0.64,95%CI:0.18,2.36)。第二次尝试的TTP中位数比第一次尝试长1个周期(四分位间距:0,3个周期)。

局限性、需谨慎的原因:由于这是第一项专门针对经历过流产的女性连续TTP进行调查的研究,我们的研究结果有待证实,因为大多数流产发生在妊娠早期。因此,我们的研究结果对所有流产情况的普遍性有待进一步研究。我们检测第三次与第一次备孕尝试相比受孕能力降低的能力也有限。

研究结果的更广泛影响

与可生育女性不同,经历过早期流产的女性随后的备孕尝试时间可能会更长。如果研究结果得到证实,经历过流产的女性可能会从关于备孕时间的咨询中受益。

研究资金/利益冲突:本研究由尤妮斯·肯尼迪·施赖弗国家儿童健康与人类发展研究所的内部研究项目资助(合同编号:N01-HD-3-3355、N01-HD-3-3356和NOH-HD-3-3358)。K.J.S.得到了尤妮斯·肯尼迪·施赖弗国家儿童健康与人类发展研究所内部研究培训奖以及内部人群健康研究部的支持。作者声明无利益冲突。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索