Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Sciences and Dentistry, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Feb;214(2):225-234. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.09.080. Epub 2015 Oct 9.
The aim of this metaanalysis was to evaluate the risk of the development of obstetric complications in women with celiac disease. We searched electronic databases from their inception until February 2015. We included all cohort studies that reported the incidence of obstetric complications in women with celiac disease compared with women without celiac disease (ie, control group). Studies without a control group and case-control studies were excluded. The primary outcome was defined a priori and was the incidence of a composite of obstetric complications that included intrauterine growth restriction, small for gestational age, low birthweight, preeclampsia and preterm birth. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, stillbirth, preeclampsia, small for gestational age, and low birthweight. The review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42015017263) before data extraction. All authors were contacted to obtain the original databases and perform individual participant data metaanalysis. Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed in the aggregate data analysis and in the individual participant data metaanalysis. We included 10 cohort studies (4,844,555 women) in this metaanalysis. Four authors provided the entire databases for the individual participant data analysis. Because none of the included studies stratified data for the primary outcome (ie, composite outcome), the assessment of this outcome for the aggregate analysis was not feasible. Aggregate data analysis showed that, compared with women in the control group, women with celiac disease (both treated and untreated) had a significantly higher risk of the development of preterm birth (adjusted odds ratio, 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.66), intrauterine growth restriction (odds ratio, 2.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.32-4.67), stillbirth (odds ratio, 4.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-21.75), low birthweight (odds ratio, 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.51), and small for gestational age (odds ratio, 4.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-20.08); no statistically significant difference was found in the incidence of preeclampsia (odds ratio, 2.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-6.70). The risk of preterm birth was still significantly higher both in the subgroup analysis of only women with diagnosed and treated celiac disease (odds ratio, 1.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.48) and in the subgroup analysis of only women with undiagnosed and untreated celiac disease (odds ratio, 2.50; 95% confidence interval; 1.06-5.87). Women with diagnosed and treated celiac disease had a significantly lower risk of the development of preterm birth, compared with undiagnosed and untreated celiac disease (odds ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.99). The individual participant data metaanalysis showed that women with celiac disease had a significantly higher risk of composite obstetric complications compared with control subjects (odds ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.94). Our individual participant data concurs with the aggregate analysis for all the secondary outcomes. In summary, women with celiac disease had a significantly higher risk of the development of obstetric complications that included preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, stillbirth, low birthweight, and small for gestational age. Since the treatment with gluten-free diet leads to a significant decrease of preterm delivery, physicians should warn these women about the importance of a strict diet to improve obstetric outcomes. Future studies calculating cost-effectiveness of screening for celiac disease during pregnancy, which could be easily performed, economically and noninvasively, are needed. In addition, further studies are required to determine whether women with adverse pregnancy outcomes should be screened for celiac disease, particularly in countries where the prevalence is high.
本荟萃分析的目的是评估乳糜泻女性发生产科并发症的风险。我们检索了电子数据库,从其建立到 2015 年 2 月。我们纳入了所有报告乳糜泻女性与无乳糜泻女性(即对照组)产科并发症发生率的队列研究。排除了无对照组和病例对照研究。主要结局是预先定义的,是包括宫内生长受限、小于胎龄儿、低出生体重、子痫前期和早产在内的产科并发症复合结局的发生率。次要结局包括早产、宫内生长受限、死胎、子痫前期、小于胎龄儿和低出生体重的发生率。在提取数据之前,该研究已在 PROSPERO(CRD42015017263)上进行了注册。我们联系了所有作者以获取原始数据库并进行个体参与者数据荟萃分析。在汇总数据分析和个体参与者数据荟萃分析中评估了主要和次要结局。我们纳入了 10 项队列研究(4844555 名女性)进行荟萃分析。有 4 位作者提供了个体参与者数据的完整数据库。由于纳入的研究均未对主要结局(即复合结局)进行分层数据,因此无法对汇总分析进行该结局的评估。汇总数据分析显示,与对照组女性相比,乳糜泻女性(治疗和未治疗)发生早产的风险显著增加(调整后的优势比,1.35;95%置信区间,1.09-1.66)、宫内生长受限(比值比,2.48;95%置信区间,1.32-4.67)、死胎(比值比,4.84;95%置信区间,1.08-21.75)、低出生体重(比值比,1.63;95%置信区间,1.06-2.51)和小于胎龄儿(比值比,4.52;95%置信区间,1.02-20.08);子痫前期的发生率无统计学显著差异(比值比,2.45;95%置信区间,0.90-6.70)。仅诊断和治疗的乳糜泻女性亚组分析(比值比,1.26;95%置信区间,1.06-1.48)和未诊断和未治疗的乳糜泻女性亚组分析(比值比,2.50;95%置信区间,1.06-5.87)中,早产的风险仍然显著升高。与未诊断和未治疗的乳糜泻相比,诊断和治疗的乳糜泻女性发生早产的风险显著降低(比值比,0.80;95%置信区间,0.64-0.99)。个体参与者数据荟萃分析显示,与对照组相比,乳糜泻女性发生复合产科并发症的风险显著增加(比值比,1.51;95%置信区间,1.17-1.94)。我们的个体参与者数据与所有次要结局的汇总分析结果一致。总之,乳糜泻女性发生包括早产、宫内生长受限、死胎、低出生体重和小于胎龄儿在内的产科并发症的风险显著增加。由于无麸质饮食治疗可显著降低早产的发生,医生应警告这些女性严格饮食的重要性,以改善产科结局。需要进一步研究计算妊娠期乳糜泻筛查的成本效益,该筛查可在经济上和非侵入性地进行,并且易于操作。此外,需要进一步研究确定是否应筛查不良妊娠结局的女性是否患有乳糜泻,特别是在患病率较高的国家。