A1 Refereed original research article in a scientific journal
Comparative study between obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome and obstetric morbidity related with antiphospholipid antibodies
Authors: Alijotas-Reig, Esteve-Valverde, Ferrer-Oliveras, LLurba, Ruffatti, Tincani, Lefkou, Bertero, Espinosa, de Carolis, Rovere-Querini, Lundelin, Picardo, Mekinian, Mekinian
Publication year: 2017
Journal: Medicina Clínica
Journal name in source: Medicina clinica
Journal acronym: Med Clin (Barc)
Volume: 151
Issue: 6
Number of pages: 8
ISSN: 1578-8989
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medcli.2017.11.017(external)
Abstract
Retrospective and prospective multicentre study. Data comparison between groups from The European Registry on Antiphospholipid Syndrome included within the framework of the European Forum on Antiphospholipid Antibody projects.
To compare clinical, laboratory, treatment and live birth rate data between women with aPL-related obstetric complications (OMAPS) not fulfilling the Sydney criteria and women fulfilling them (OAPS).
Significant differences were found among aPL categories between groups. Treatment rates were higher in OAPS. Both OAPS and OMAPS groups had similarly good foetal-maternal outcomes when treated. The proposal to modify OAPS classification criteria, mostly laboratory requirements, is reinforced by these results.
338 women were analysed: 247 fulfilled the Sydney criteria (OAPS group) and 91 did not (OMAPS group). In the OMAPS group, 24/91 (26.37%) fulfilled laboratory Sydney criteria (subgroup A) and 67/91 (74.63%) had a low titre and/or non-persistent aPL-positivity (subgroup B). Overall, aPL laboratory categories in OAPS vs. OMAPS showed significant differences: 34% vs. 11% (p<0.0001) for category I, 66% vs. 89% (p<0.0001) for category II. No differences were observed when current obstetric complications were compared (p=0.481). 86.20% of OAPS women were treated vs. 75.82% of OMAPS (p=0.0224), particularly regarding the LDA+LMWH schedule (p=0.006). No differences between groups were observed in live births, gestational, puerperal arterial and/or venous thrombosis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
CONCLUSIONS
RESULTS
Retrospective and prospective multicentre study. Data comparison between groups from The European Registry on Antiphospholipid Syndrome included within the framework of the European Forum on Antiphospholipid Antibody projects.
To compare clinical, laboratory, treatment and live birth rate data between women with aPL-related obstetric complications (OMAPS) not fulfilling the Sydney criteria and women fulfilling them (OAPS).
Significant differences were found among aPL categories between groups. Treatment rates were higher in OAPS. Both OAPS and OMAPS groups had similarly good foetal-maternal outcomes when treated. The proposal to modify OAPS classification criteria, mostly laboratory requirements, is reinforced by these results.
338 women were analysed: 247 fulfilled the Sydney criteria (OAPS group) and 91 did not (OMAPS group). In the OMAPS group, 24/91 (26.37%) fulfilled laboratory Sydney criteria (subgroup A) and 67/91 (74.63%) had a low titre and/or non-persistent aPL-positivity (subgroup B). Overall, aPL laboratory categories in OAPS vs. OMAPS showed significant differences: 34% vs. 11% (p<0.0001) for category I, 66% vs. 89% (p<0.0001) for category II. No differences were observed when current obstetric complications were compared (p=0.481). 86.20% of OAPS women were treated vs. 75.82% of OMAPS (p=0.0224), particularly regarding the LDA+LMWH schedule (p=0.006). No differences between groups were observed in live births, gestational, puerperal arterial and/or venous thrombosis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
CONCLUSIONS
RESULTS
UTU Research Portal