• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

反复妊娠丢失患者的超生育力和低生育力:基于生育能力差异的临床特征和病因的对比分析。

Superfertility and subfertility in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss: A comparative analysis of clinical characteristics and etiology based on differences in fertile ability.

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nippon Medical School, 1-1-5 Sendagi, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8603, Japan.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nippon Medical School, 1-1-5 Sendagi, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8603, Japan.

出版信息

J Reprod Immunol. 2023 Sep;159:104129. doi: 10.1016/j.jri.2023.104129. Epub 2023 Aug 6.

DOI:10.1016/j.jri.2023.104129
PMID:37598542
Abstract

This study aimed to elucidate the etiologies of and risk factors for recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) according to fertile ability, focusing on the differences between superfertile and subfertile patients. This retrospective observational study included 828 women with RPL between July 2017 and February 2020. Patients were divided into three groups based on time to pregnancy (TTP): superfertile (SUP) (TTP ≤3 months for all previous pregnancies), subfertile (SUB) (previous TTP ≥12 months and use of assisted reproductive technology [ART]), and Normal (N) (TTP >3 or <12 months without ART). All patients were assessed for uterine anatomy, antiphospholipid antibodies (APAs), thyroid function, and thrombophilia. Of the 828 patients, 22%, 44%, and 34% were assigned to the SUP, SUB, and N groups, respectively. The mean ages were 33.9, 38.2, and 35.9 years in the SUP, SUB, and N groups, respectively, revealing a significant difference (P < 0.001). The anti-CL β2GPI antibody positivity rate was significantly higher in the SUP group (4.6%) than in the N group (0.8%; P = 0.016). The prevalence of APA positivity was lowest in the N group. Overall, the clinical characteristics and etiologies of RPL associated with superfertility and subfertility were strikingly similar, with comparable positivity rates after adjusting for maternal age. Further investigation including chromosomal analysis of products of conception is needed to elucidate the clinical impact of differences in fertility on patients with RPL.

摘要

本研究旨在阐明复发性妊娠丢失(RPL)的病因和危险因素,并根据生育能力进行分组,重点关注超生育力和低生育力患者之间的差异。这是一项回顾性观察性研究,纳入了 2017 年 7 月至 2020 年 2 月期间 828 例 RPL 患者。根据妊娠时间(TTP)将患者分为三组:超生育力组(SUP)(所有既往妊娠 TTP ≤3 个月)、低生育力组(SUB)(既往 TTP ≥12 个月且使用辅助生殖技术[ART])和正常组(N)(TTP >3 或 <12 个月且无 ART)。所有患者均评估子宫解剖结构、抗磷脂抗体(APAs)、甲状腺功能和血栓形成倾向。在 828 例患者中,分别有 22%、44%和 34%的患者被分配到 SUP、SUB 和 N 组。SUP、SUB 和 N 组的平均年龄分别为 33.9 岁、38.2 岁和 35.9 岁,差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。SUP 组抗-CL β2GPI 抗体阳性率(4.6%)显著高于 N 组(0.8%;P=0.016)。N 组 APA 阳性率最低。总的来说,与超生育力和低生育力相关的 RPL 的临床特征和病因非常相似,在调整了母亲年龄后,阳性率相当。需要进一步进行包括对妊娠产物的染色体分析在内的研究,以阐明生育能力差异对 RPL 患者的临床影响。

相似文献

1
Superfertility and subfertility in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss: A comparative analysis of clinical characteristics and etiology based on differences in fertile ability.反复妊娠丢失患者的超生育力和低生育力:基于生育能力差异的临床特征和病因的对比分析。
J Reprod Immunol. 2023 Sep;159:104129. doi: 10.1016/j.jri.2023.104129. Epub 2023 Aug 6.
2
Is superfertility associated with recurrent pregnancy loss?高生育力与复发性流产有关吗?
Am J Reprod Immunol. 2014 Dec;72(6):549-54. doi: 10.1111/aji.12280. Epub 2014 Jun 25.
3
Pregnancy, birth, and infant outcomes by maternal fertility status: the Massachusetts Outcomes Study of Assisted Reproductive Technology.孕产妇生育状况与妊娠、分娩及婴儿结局:马萨诸塞州辅助生殖技术结局研究
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Sep;217(3):327.e1-327.e14. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.04.006. Epub 2017 Apr 8.
4
Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: a comparison of live birth rates in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss due to embryonic aneuploidy or recurrent implantation failure.胚胎植入前遗传学检测非整倍体:胚胎非整倍体性复发性流产或反复着床失败患者活产率的比较。
Hum Reprod. 2019 Dec 1;34(12):2340-2348. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dez229.
5
Pregnancy outcomes following in vitro fertilization frozen embryo transfer (IVF-FET) with or without preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) in women with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL): a SART-CORS study.反复妊娠丢失(RPL)患者行体外受精-冻融胚胎移植(IVF-FET)后是否进行植入前胚胎遗传学检测(PGT-A)对妊娠结局的影响:一项 SART-CORS 研究。
Hum Reprod. 2021 Jul 19;36(8):2339-2344. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deab117.
6
Adverse pregnancy, birth, and infant outcomes in twins: effects of maternal fertility status and infant gender combinations; the Massachusetts Outcomes Study of Assisted Reproductive Technology.双胞胎妊娠、分娩及婴儿不良结局:母体生育状况与婴儿性别组合的影响;马萨诸塞州辅助生殖技术结局研究
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Sep;217(3):330.e1-330.e15. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.04.025. Epub 2017 Apr 25.
7
Evaluation of platelet parameters, coagulation markers, antiphospholipid syndrome, and thyroid function in palestinian women with recurrent pregnancy loss.评估血小板参数、凝血标志物、抗磷脂综合征和甲状腺功能在反复妊娠丢失的巴勒斯坦妇女中的作用。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2023 Jun 20;23(1):459. doi: 10.1186/s12884-023-05764-6.
8
Effect of infertility, maternal age, and number of previous miscarriages on the outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for idiopathic recurrent pregnancy loss.不孕、产妇年龄及既往流产次数对不明原因复发性流产患者胚胎植入前遗传学诊断结局的影响。
Fertil Steril. 2009 Jul;92(1):288-95. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.05.056. Epub 2008 Aug 9.
9
Placenta specific protein-1 in recurrent pregnancy loss and in Fertilisation failure: a prospective observational case-control study.胎盘特异性蛋白 1 在复发性妊娠丢失和受精失败中的作用:一项前瞻性观察性病例对照研究。
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2020 Aug;40(6):843-848. doi: 10.1080/01443615.2019.1674263. Epub 2019 Dec 3.
10
Etiology of recurrent pregnancy loss in women over the age of 35 years.35 岁以上女性复发性流产的病因。
Fertil Steril. 2010 Sep;94(4):1473-1477. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.06.041. Epub 2009 Jul 30.

引用本文的文献

1
Can predicting future pregnancies after loss personalise miscarriage care?流产后预测未来妊娠能否使流产护理个性化?
Lancet Reg Health Eur. 2025 Jul 18;55:101394. doi: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2025.101394. eCollection 2025 Aug.