METHODS: A case-control study was conducted by interviewing 350 women who were admitted to the university gynaecological unit for spontaneous abortion and 350 women who delivered normally at the university obstetric unit. Odds ratios, as the estimators of relative risks, were calculated.
RESULTS: The relative risk for spontaneous abortion among women in the age-group 30 to 39 years was 1.61 and among women above 40 years of age was 3.68 when compared to those below 30 years of age. In relation to career women, the relative risk of spontaneous abortion for housewives was 0.45. Ethnic group, parity, subfertility, previous induced abortion, ectopic pregnancy, contraception and menarcheal age did not influence the risk of spontaneous abortion.
CONCLUSION: Increasing age and a woman's career are significant risk factors of spontaneous abortion.
DATA SOURCES: We searched studies published between 1980 and 2014 on endometriosis and ART outcome. We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane databases and performed a manual search.
METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: A total of 1,346 articles were identified, and 36 studies were eligible to be included for data synthesis. We included published cohort studies and randomized controlled trials.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Compared with women without endometriosis, women with endometriosis undertaking in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection have a similar live birth rate per woman (odds ratio [OR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-1.06, 13 studies, 12,682 patients, I=35%), a lower clinical pregnancy rate per woman (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65-0.94), 24 studies, 20,757 patients, I=66%), a lower mean number of oocyte retrieved per cycle (mean difference -1.98, 95% CI -2.87 to -1.09, 17 studies, 17,593 cycles, I=97%), and a similar miscarriage rate per woman (OR 1.26, 95% CI (0.92-1.70, nine studies, 1,259 patients, I=0%). Women with more severe disease (American Society for Reproductive Medicine III-IV) have a lower live birth rate, clinical pregnancy rate, and mean number of oocytes retrieved when compared with women with no endometriosis.
CONCLUSION: Women with and without endometriosis have comparable ART outcomes in terms of live births, whereas those with severe endometriosis have inferior outcomes. There is insufficient evidence to recommend surgery routinely before undergoing ART.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and the safety of progestogens in the treatment of threatened miscarriage.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (8 August 2017) and reference lists of retrieved trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised, quasi-randomised or cluster-randomised controlled trials, that compared progestogen with placebo, no treatment or any other treatment for the treatment of threatened miscarriage in women carrying singleton pregnancy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors assessed the trials for inclusion in the review, assessed trial quality and extracted the data and graded the body of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS: We included seven trials (involving 696 participants) in this update of the review. The included trials were conducted in different countries, covering the full spectrum of the World Bank's economic classification, which enhances the applicability of evidence drawn from this review. Two trials were conducted in Germany and Italy which are high-income countries, while four trials were conducted in upper-middle income countries; two in Iran, one in Malaysia and the fourth in Turkey, and the seventh trial was conducted in Jordan, which is a lower-middle income country. In six trials all the participants met the inclusion criteria and in the seventh study, we included in the meta-analysis only the subgroup of participants who met the inclusion criteria. We assessed the body of evidence for the main outcomes using the GRADE tool and the quality of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Downgrading of evidence was based on the high risk of bias in six of the seven included trials and a small number of events and wide confidence intervals for some outcomes.Treatment of miscarriage with progestogens compared to placebo or no treatment probably reduces the risk of miscarriage; (risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 0.87; 7 trials; 696 women; moderate-quality evidence). Treatment with oral progestogen compared to no treatment also probably reduces the miscarriage rate (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.85; 3 trials; 408 women; moderate-quality evidence). However treatment with vaginal progesterone compared to placebo, probably has little or no effect in reducing the miscarriage rate (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.21; 4 trials; 288 women; moderate-quality evidence). The subgroup interaction test indicated no difference according to route of administration between the oral and vaginal subgroups of progesterone.Treatment of preterm birth with the use of progestogens compared to placebo or no treatment may have little or no effect in reducing the rate of preterm birth (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.44; 5 trials; 588 women; low-quality evidence).We are uncertain if treatment of threatened miscarriage with progestogens compared to placebo or no treatment has any effect on the rate of congenital abnormalities because the quality of the evidence is very low (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.10 to 4.82; 2 trials; 337 infants; very-low quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results of this Cochrane Review suggest that progestogens are probably effective in the treatment of threatened miscarriage but may have little or no effect in the rate of preterm birth. The evidence on congenital abnormalities is uncertain, because the quality of the evidence for this outcome was based on only two small trials with very few events and was found to be of very low quality.