Association of common thrombophilias and antiphospholipid antibodies with success rate of in vitro fertilisation

The relevance of prothrombotic genetic variants in women who experienced pregnancy loss or embryo implantation failure: A retrospective analysis of 1922 cases

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was that to assess the allelic and genotype frequencies of nine prothrombotic gene variants in patients with a history of pregnancy loss and recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL). Women who underwent assisted reproductive technology (ART) with ongoing pregnancy and those with recurrent implantation failure (RIF) were also included.

METHODS

Nine prothrombotic gene variants were evaluated: factor V Leiden (FVL), factor V, H1299R variant (FVR2), factor II (FII) G20210A, methylene-tetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) C677T and A1298C, beta-fibrinogen -455G>A, factor XIII (FXIII) V34L, human platelet antigen-1 (HPA-1) L33P variants, and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) 4G/5G. The following study groups were assessed: (1) women who experienced one (n = 334) or two (n = 264) episodes of pregnancy loss; (2) 468 women who experienced RPL; (3) 214 women who underwent ART followed by ongoing pregnancies; and (4) 282 women who experienced RIF after ART, that is, three or more consecutive implantation failures following high-quality embryo transfers to the uterus with an appropriate endometrium. As control group, 430 subjects from the general population were enrolled.

RESULTS

FVL, the -455G>A variant of beta-fibrinogen, and PAI-1 4G were associated with a higher risk of developing RPL compared with the general population. Furthermore, FVL, FVR2, FII G20210A and MTHFR C677T conferred a significantly higher risk of RIF in women who performed ART compared with the general population. No statistical differences between the general population and other study groups were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Specific prothrombotic genetic variants are more frequently expressed in women with RPL and RIF, supporting their role in the development of polimicrothrombosis and impairing the invasion during embryo implantation.

Predictive models of recurrent implantation failure in patients receiving ART treatment based on clinical features and routine laboratory data

STUDY QUESTION

The objective was to construct a model for predicting the probability of recurrent implantation failure (RIF) after assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment based on the clinical characteristics and routine laboratory test data of infertile patients. A model was developed to predict RIF. The model showed high calibration in external validation, helped to identify risk factors for RIF, and improved the efficacy of ART therapy.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Research on the influencing factors of RIF has focused mainly on embryonic factors, endometrial receptivity, and immune factors. However, there are many kinds of examinations regarding these aspects, and comprehensive screening is difficult because of the limited time and economic conditions. Therefore, we should try our best to analyse the results of routine infertility screenings to make general predictions regarding the occurrence of RIF.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A retrospective study was conducted with 5212 patients at the Reproductive Center of the First Affiliated Hospital of USTC from January 2018 to June 2022.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

This study included 462 patients in the RIF group and 4750 patients in the control group. The patients' basic characteristics, clinical treatment data, and laboratory test indices were compared. Logistic regression was used to analyse RIF-related risk factors, and the prediction model was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the corresponding areas under the curve (AUCs). Further analysis of the influencing factors of live births in the first cycle of subsequent assisted reproduction treatment in RIF patients was performed, including the live birth subgroup (n = 116) and the no live birth subgroup (n = 200).

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

(1) An increased duration of infertility (1.978; 95% CI, 1.264-3.097), uterine cavity abnormalities (2.267; 95% CI, 1.185-4.336), low AMH levels (0.504; 95% CI, 0.275-0.922), insulin resistance (3.548; 95% CI, 1.931-6.519), antinuclear antibody (ANA)-positive status (3.249; 95% CI, 1.20-8.797) and anti-β2-glycoprotein I antibody (A-β2-GPI Ab)-positive status (5.515; 95% CI, 1.481-20.536) were associated with an increased risk of RIF. The area under the curve of the logistic regression model was 0.900 (95% CI, 0.870-0.929) for the training cohort and 0.895 (95% CI, 0.865-0.925) for the testing cohort. (2) Advanced age (1.069; 95% CI, 1.015-1.126) was a risk factor associated with no live births after the first cycle of subsequent assisted reproduction treatment in patients with RIF. Blastocyst transfer (0.365; 95% CI = 0.181-0.736) increased the probability of live birth in subsequent cycles in patients with RIF. The area under the curve of the logistic regression model was 0.673 (95% CI, 0.597-0.748).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

This was a single-centre regression study, for which the results need to be evaluated and verified by prospective large-scale randomized controlled studies. The small sample size for the analysis of factors influencing pregnancy outcomes in subsequent assisted reproduction cycles for RIF patients resulted in the inclusion of fewer covariates, and future studies with larger samples and the inclusion of more factors are needed for assessment and validation.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Prediction of embryo implantation prior to transfer will facilitate the clinical management of patients and disease prediction and further improve ART treatment outcomes.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This work was supported by the General Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 82,201,792, 82,301,871, 81,971,446, and 82,374,212) and the Natural Science Foundation of Anhui Province (No. 2208085MH206). There are no conflicts of interest to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

This study was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Register (Clinical Trial Number: ChiCTR1800018298 ).

Evidence-based guideline: unexplained infertility†

STUDY QUESTION

What is the recommended management for couples presenting with unexplained infertility (UI), based on the best available evidence in the literature?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The evidence-based guideline on UI makes 52 recommendations on the definition, diagnosis, and treatment of UI.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

UI is diagnosed in the absence of any abnormalities of the female and male reproductive systems after 'standard' investigations. However, a consensual standardization of the diagnostic work-up is still lacking. The management of UI is traditionally empirical. The efficacy, safety, costs, and risks of treatment options have not been subjected to robust evaluation.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

The guideline was developed according to the structured methodology for ESHRE guidelines. Following formulation of key questions by a group of experts, literature searches, and assessments were undertaken. Papers written in English and published up to 24 October 2022 were evaluated.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Based on the available evidence, recommendations were formulated and discussed until consensus was reached within the guideline development group (GDG). Following stakeholder review of an initial draft, the final version was approved by the GDG and the ESHRE Executive Committee.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

This guideline aims to help clinicians provide the best care for couples with UI. As UI is a diagnosis of exclusion, the guideline outlined the basic diagnostic procedures that couples should/could undergo during an infertility work-up, and explored the need for additional tests. The first-line treatment for couples with UI was deemed to be IUI in combination with ovarian stimulation. The place of additional and alternative options for treatment of UI was also evaluated. The GDG made 52 recommendations on diagnosis and treatment for couples with UI. The GDG formulated 40 evidence-based recommendations-of which 29 were formulated as strong recommendations and 11 as weak-10 good practice points and two research only recommendations. Of the evidence-based recommendations, none were supported by high-quality evidence, one by moderate-quality evidence, nine by low-quality evidence, and 31 by very low-quality evidence. To support future research in UI, a list of research recommendations was provided.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Most additional diagnostic tests and interventions in couples with UI have not been subjected to robust evaluation. For a large proportion of these tests and treatments, evidence was very limited and of very low quality. More evidence is required, and the results of future studies may result in the current recommendations being revised.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The guideline provides clinicians with clear advice on best practice in the care of couples with UI, based on the best evidence currently available. In addition, a list of research recommendations is provided to stimulate further studies in the field. The full guideline and a patient leaflet are available in www.eshre.eu/guideline/UI.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The guideline was developed by ESHRE, who funded the guideline meetings, literature searches, and dissemination of the guideline in collaboration with the Monash University led Australian NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Women's Health in Reproductive Life (CREWHIRL). The guideline group members did not receive any financial incentives; all work was provided voluntarily. D.R. reports honoraria from IBSA and Novo Nordisk. B.A. reports speakers' fees from Merck, Gedeon Richter, Organon and Intas Pharma; is part of the advisory board for Organon Turkey and president of the Turkish Society of Reproductive Medicine. S.B. reports speakers' fees from Merck, Organon, Ferring, the Ostetric and Gynaecological Society of Singapore and the Taiwanese Society for Reproductive Medicine; editor and contributing author, Reproductive Medicine for the MRCOG, Cambridge University Press; is part of the METAFOR and CAPE trials data monitoring committee. E.B. reports research grants from Roche diagnostics, Gedeon Richter and IBSA; speaker's fees from Merck, Ferring, MSD, Roche Diagnostics, Gedeon Richter, IBSA; E.B. is also a part of an Advisory Board of Ferring Pharmaceuticals, MSD, Roche Diagnostics, IBSA, Merck, Abbott and Gedeon Richter. M.M. reports consulting fees from Mojo Fertility Ltd. R.J.N. reports research grant from Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC); consulting fees from Flinders Fertility Adelaide, VinMec Hospital Hanoi Vietnam; speaker's fees from Merck Australia, Cadilla Pharma India, Ferring Australia; chair clinical advisory committee Westmead Fertility and research institute MyDuc Hospital Vietnam. T.P. is a part of the Research Council of Finland and reports research grants from Roche Diagnostics, Novo Nordics and Sigrid Juselius foundation; consulting fees from Roche Diagnostics and organon; speaker's fees from Gedeon Richter, Roche, Exeltis, Organon, Ferring and Korento patient organization; is a part of NFOG, AE-PCOS society and several Finnish associations. S.S.R. reports research grants from Roche Diagnostics, Organon, Theramex; consulting fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, MSD and Organon; speaker's fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, MSD/Organon, Besins, Theramex, Gedeon Richter; travel support from Gedeon Richter; S.S.R. is part of the Data Safety Monitoring Board of TTRANSPORT and deputy of the ESHRE Special Interest Group on Safety and Quality in ART; stock or stock options from IVI Lisboa, Clínica de Reprodução assistida Lda; equipment/medical writing/gifts from Roche Diagnostics and Ferring Pharmaceuticals. S.K.S. reports speakers' fees from Merck, Ferring, MSD, Pharmasure. HRV reports consulting and travel fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

DISCLAIMER

This guideline represents the views of ESHRE, which were achieved after careful consideration of the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. In the absence of scientific evidence on certain aspects, a consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders has been obtained. Adherence to these clinical practice guidelines does not guarantee a successful or specific outcome, nor does it establish a standard of care. Clinical practice guidelines do not replace the need for application of clinical judgment to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type. ESHRE makes no warranty, express or implied, regarding the clinical practice guidelines and specifically excludes any warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular use or purpose. (Full disclaimer available at www.eshre.eu/guidelines.).

Recurrent implantation failure: A comprehensive summary from etiology to treatment

Implantation is the first step in human reproduction. Successful implantation depends on the crosstalk between embryo and endometrium. Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) is a clinical phenomenon characterized by a lack of implantation after the transfer of several embryos and disturbs approximately 10% couples undergoing in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Despite increasing literature on RIF, there is still no widely accepted definition or standard protocol for the diagnosis and treatment of RIF. Progress in predicting and preventing RIF has been hampered by a lack of widely accepted definitions. Most couples with RIF can become pregnant after clinical intervention. The prognosis for couples with RIF is related to maternal age. RIF can be caused by immunology, thrombophilias, endometrial receptivity, microbiome, anatomical abnormalities, male factors, and embryo aneuploidy. It is important to determine the most possible etiologies, and individualized treatment aimed at the primary cause seems to be an effective method for increasing the implantation rate. Couples with RIF require psychological support and appropriate clinical intervention. Further studies are required to evaluate diagnostic method and he effectiveness of each therapy, and guide clinical treatment.

The role of thrombophilias in reproduction: A swot analysis

Thrombophilia is a group of inherited or acquired coagulation disorders that have been associated with reproductive failure. However, there are still no clear recommendations on whether its inclusion in the initial study of the infertile couple or patients with recurrent implantation failure is necessary. In this discussion paper, based on a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis, the different aspects of the repercussions of thrombophilia screening and treatment in reproduction are evaluated. To avoid possible subjectivity in the analysis and results of this study, researchers followed Oxford criteria for the evaluation of evidence. The results from the evaluation of the reviewed bibliography seem to indicate that, pending new evidence, it would be advisable not to include thrombophilia screening in the initial baseline study of the infertile couple. There is no evidence to support a clear association between thrombophilia and implantation failure or infertility. Thrombophilia testing in this setting may increase cost, with minimal potential benefit and lead to inappropriate use of anticoagulants with possible deleterious adverse effects. Future well-designed studies are needed to assess the possible benefit of anticoagulant therapy in infertile thrombophilic patients with implantation failure.

Presence of antiphospholipid antibodies is associated with increased implantation failure following in vitro fertilization technique and embryo transfer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted comparing the presence of anti-phospholipid (anti-PL) antibodies between women of reproductive age, without diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome, who experienced at least two implantation failures following in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET), and either women who had a successful implantation after IVF-ET or women with at least one successful spontaneous pregnancy or unselected healthy fertile women with no history of IVF-ET.

Methods

Systematic search of the literature and meta-analysis of the relevant studies studying presence of antiphospholipid antibodies in women experiencing at least two implantation failures in IVF-ET as compared to either women who had a successful implantation after IVF-ET or/and women with at least one successful spontaneous pregnancy or unselected healthy fertile women with no history of IVF-ET. Six hundred ninety-four published reports were retrieved; 17 of them fulfilled the inclusion criteria set.

Results

Presence of either any type of anti-phospholipid or anticardiolipin antibodies or lupus-anticoagulant in women experiencing at least two implantation failures in IVF-ET was associated with increased implantation failure compared to women who had a successful implantation after IVF-ET (relative risk, RR: 3.06, 5.06 and 5.81, respectively). Presence of either anticardiolipin or lupus-anticoagulant or anti-beta₂ glycoprotein-I or anti-phosphatidylserine antibodies in women experiencing at least two implantation failures in IVF-EΤ was associated with increased implantation failure compared to unselected healthy fertile women with no history of IVF-ET (RR:13.92, 6.37, 15.04 and 164.58, respectively).

Conclusion

The prevalence of antiphospholipid antibodies, particularly that of anti-beta₂ glycoprotein-I and anti-phosphatidylserine antibodies, in women experiencing at least two implantation failures in IVF-ET without diagnosis of antiphospholipid syndrome is significantly greater than either in women who had a successful implantation after IVF-ET or women with at least one successful spontaneous pregnancy or unselected healthy fertile women with no history of IVF-ET.

Trial registration number

PROSPERO ID: CRD42018081458

A retrospective study on IVF/ICSI outcomes in patients with persisted positive of anticardiolipin antibody: Effects of low-dose aspirin plus low molecular weight heparin adjuvant treatment

Antiphospholipid (aPL) antibodies are more frequently detected among infertile women, but the association between aPL and in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) outcomes and whether need to get routine treatment are still controversial. The present study aims to find out whether infertile population with persistent aPL positive need treatment and which therapy is more effective. This retrospective study included 181 persistent aPL positive women, including 149 cases receiving anticoagulant treatment, either low-dose aspirin, low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or aspirin plus LMWH adjuvant treatment (treated group), and 32 cases not receiving any treatment (untreated group). The treated group were further divided by combination therapy group (using both aspirin and LMWH，52 cases) and monotherapy group (only using aspirin，76 cases). The live birth rate and other clinical outcomes, including pregnancy rate, implantation rate, ongoing pregnancy rate and miscarriage rate were compared. The results show anticoagulant therapy can significantly improve live birth rate (59.06 % VS 34.48 %, P = 0.019), implantation rate (59.64 % VS 46.15 %, P＜0.001), ongoing pregnancy rate (59.73 % VS 34.38 %, P = 0.016), as well as reduce miscarriage rate (8.25 % VS 31.25 %, P＜0.001). Combination treatment of aspirin and LMWH exerts a higher live birth rate than monotherapy (75.00 % VS 53.95 %, P = 0.026). Infertile women with aPL positive might be classified as high-risk and low-risk aPL profiles. Those high-risk aPL positive infertile populations should be identified during IVF/ICSI and given corresponding thromboprophylaxis, and aspirin plus LMWH adjuvant treatment might be recommended.

A review of the pathophysiology of recurrent implantation failure

Implantation is a critical step in human reproduction. The success of this step is dependent on a competent blastocyst, receptive endometrium, and successful cross talk between the embryonic and maternal interfaces. Recurrent implantation failure is the lack of implantation after the transfer of several embryo transfers. As the success of in vitro fertilization has increased and failures have become more unacceptable for patients and providers, the literature on recurrent implantation failure has increased. While this clinical phenomenon is often encountered, there is not a universally agreed-on definition-something addressed in an earlier portion of this Views and Reviews. Implantation failure can result from several different factors. In this review, we discuss factors including the maternal immune system, genetics of the embryo and parents, anatomic factors, hematologic factors, reproductive tract microbiome, and endocrine milieu, which factors into embryo and endometrial synchrony. These potential causes are at various stages of research and not all have clear implications or immediately apparent treatment.

Long-term pituitary downregulation before frozen embryo transfer improves clinical outcomes in women positive for serum autoantibodies

OBJECTIVE

Autoantibodies are associated with worse outcomes in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), including increasing miscarriage rate, lowering pregnancy rate, and lowering delivery rate. However, little is known about improving IVF/ICSI outcomes for autoantibody-positive women, especially in frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles. This study aimed to investigate whether pituitary suppression before FET improves the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and live birth rate (LBR) for IVF/ICSI women positive for serum autoantibodies.

STUDY DESIGN

A total of 181 infertile women positive for serum autoantibodies were recruited, including 65 women receiving GnRHa and hormone replacement therapy protocols (G-HRT group) and 116 women using modified natural cycles (MNC)/mild stimulated cycles (MSC) as FET protocols (MNC/MSC group). The outcomes were compared between two groups, including CPR, implantation rate (IR), miscarriage rate (MR), ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR), LBR, and gestational age (GA). The primary outcome of the study was CPR.

RESULTS

CPR, OPR, and LBR per embryo transferred in the G-HRT groups were significantly higher than those in the MNC/MSC group. No statistically significant differences were observed in the IR and MR. The CPR, IR, MR, OPR, and LBR was 72.23%, 64.00%, 12.77%, 63.07%, and 63.07% in the G-HRT group, respectively, while that was 56.90%, 53.07%, 10.60%, 50.00%, and 50.00% in the MNC/MSC group, respectively. After adjusting for partial potential confounding factors using multiple logistic regression, the type of endometrial preparation is the factor independently associated with enhanced CPR (OR = 0.48, 95%CI: 0.24-0.96, P = 0.039).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study showed that prior long-term GnRHa suppression could benefit patients with high serum autoantibody levels during IVF/ICSI FET cycles.

Treatment following hysteroscopy and endometrial diagnostic biopsy increases the chance for live birth in women with chronic endometritis

Problem

Repeated implantation failure and recurrent pregnancy loss are associated with chronic endometritis, a persistent endometrial inflammation. Its diagnosis and treatment may increase pregnancy and live birth rates. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of endometrial diagnostic biopsy and subsequent antibiotic treatment in cases of chronic endometritis on reproductive outcomes over a long observation period.

Method of Study

We conducted a historical cohort study (2014–2018) at our University‐based infertility center that included women (n = 108) with repeated implantation failure or recurrent pregnancy loss without known pathologies associated with either condition. Forty‐one women underwent a hysteroscopy only (reference group); the remaining 67 women underwent, in addition to the hysteroscopy, an endometrial diagnostic biopsy with immunohistochemically staining for CD138 to detect plasma cells (biopsy group). If one or more plasma cells were detected, the women were treated with doxycycline 100 mg twice a day orally for 2 weeks. We performed stratified survival analysis (Kaplan‐Meier) and Cox regression.

Results

The biopsy group had higher chances of pregnancy (hazard ratio 2.28; 95% confidence interval 1.23–4.24; p = .009) and of live birth (hazard ratio 2.76; 95% confidence interval 1.30–5.87; p = .008) compared with the reference group. In the sensitivity analysis, repeated implantation failure or recurrent pregnancy loss did not affect the outcome.

Conclusion

Endometrial diagnostic biopsy followed by antibiotic treatment in case of chronic endometritis in women with repeated implantation failure or recurrent pregnancy loss may increase the chances for live birth.

Recurrent implantation failure in IVF: A Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society Clinical Practice Guideline

Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) after IVF is a challenging topic for clinicians and can be a devastating reality for some patients with infertility. The purpose of this guideline from the Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society (CFAS) is to provide the most relevant evidence to date for the assessment and management of RIF. This guideline was developed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. This guideline recognizes the presence of heterogeneity in the definition of RIF. Recommendations are offered here on the investigation of RIF and management options that may increase the chance of a live birth.

Interaction of thrombophilic SNPs in patients with unexplained infertility-multifactor dimensionality reduction (MDR) model analysis

PURPOSE

Our aim was to evaluate the frequency and SNP-SNP interactions between factor V Leiden (FVL) G1691A, prothrombin G20210A mutation, and C677T MTHFR and PAI-1 4G/5G gene polymorphisms in female IVF patients with unexplained infertility (UI) by using a multifactor dimensionality reduction (MDR) model analysis.

METHODS

A total of 225 subjects were enrolled in the study. There were 105 females in UI group and 120 healthy controls. Designated SNPs were determined by using allele-specific PCR methods. The difference in thrombophilia prevalence was assessed by a chi-square test and logistic regression analysis. Four-locus SNP interaction model was tested using the MDR approach. A ten-fold cross-validation consistency (CVC) and permutation testing were performed.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference of MTHFR C677T polymorphism frequency between the groups. Significantly less UI patients had MTHFR CC genotype (p = 0.005), while the risk allele T was more frequent (OR = 1.83, p = 0.0018). Logistic regression determined a significant association only for MTHFR C677T in our patients (TT genotype OR = 2.99). The MDR analysis confirmed the significance of a single-locus model for MTHFR C677T polymorphism (p = 0.015; OR = 2.93). However, the best, significant predictive model was the two-locus model comprising MTHFR C677T and FVL (CVC = 10/10, testing accuracy = 60.95%, p = 0.013; OR = 3.02).

CONCLUSION

The MTHFR C677T polymorphism was significantly associated with UI, with minor allele T being more frequent. Additionally, there was a significantly increased presence of MTHFR C677T with FVL mutation in these patients. Therefore, MTHFR and its interaction with FVL should be recognized as contributing factors in the pathogenesis of infertility.

Antiphospholipid syndrome and infertility

Antiphospholipid syndrome is a systemic autoimmune disease associated with obstetric complications along with vascular events affecting multiple organ systems in patients having positive titers of antiphospholipid antibodies. Eight to 20% of infertility cases have an unknown cause, part of which could be due to antiphospholipid syndrome. Although still debatable, many studies have addressed the relation between reproductive failure and antiphospholipid antibodies through the relation between antiphospholipid antibodies and unexplained infertility as well as the effect of antiphospholipid antibodies on the outcome of in vitro fertilization–embryo transfer. Few studies and cases have associated the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies with male infertility, describing morphofunctional penile abnormalities and testicular infarction. There are not enough data to support the routine practice of testing antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with infertility.

Effects of multiple inherited and acquired thrombophilia on outcomes of in-vitro fertilization

INTRODUCTION

The effects of multiple inherited and acquired thrombophilic defects on the outcome of in-vitro fertilization (IVF) remain unexplored. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between multiple thrombophilia and clinical outcomes in a large prospective cohort of women undergoing IVF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive women scheduled for IVF were eligible. The primary study outcome was live birth. Secondary outcomes included spontaneous abortion, clinical pregnancy, and symptomatic venous thromboembolism.

RESULTS

687 women with a mean age of 34.6 (±3.2) years were included. Overall, 22 women (3.2%) had two or more thrombophilic defects. The probability of live birth was not statistically significantly different between women with ≥2 thrombophilia (odds ratio [OR] 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18 to 2.11) or ≥1 thrombophilia (OR 0.67;95% CI, 0.41 to 1.09) and women without any thrombophilia. None of the individual inherited thrombophilia nor positivity to antiphospholipid antibodies or lupus anticoagulant were associated with live birth. Single positivity for lupus anticoagulant carried a more than threefold higher risk of abortion (OR 3.74; 95% CI, 1.30 to 10.75). There were no statistically significant associations between individual or multiple thrombophilic defects and clinical pregnancy or pregnancy test results. No woman had a history of venous thromboembolism and none developed a thrombotic event during the study.

CONCLUSIONS

In women undergoing IVF, the presence of two or more thrombophilic defects was rare and showed no statistically significant associations with IVF outcomes.

Impact of presence of antiphospholipid antibodies on in vitro fertilization outcome

Objective

To investigate prevalence of antiphospholipid antibody (APA) in Korean infertile women undergoing the first in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment and to evaluate the influence of APA on the subsequent IVF outcomes.

Method

Two hundred nineteen infertile women who destined the first IVF were prospectively enrolled in 2 infertility centers. Male factor or uterine factor infertility and women with past or current endocrine or immunologic disorders were completely excluded. Plasma concentration of lupus anticoagulant was measured by clot-based method, and anticardiolipin antibody (IgG/IgM), and anti-β2-glycoprotein 1 antibody (IgG/IgM) was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay method before starting ovarian stimulation for IVF.

Results

APA was positive in 13 women (5.9%). Lupus anticoagulant was positive in 2 women (0.9%), anticardiolipin antibody was positive in 7 women (3.2%), and anti-β2-glycoprotein 1 antibody was positive in 4 women (1.8%). In 193 women entering embryo transfer, clinical characteristics and stimulation outcomes were comparable between APA-positive (n=12) and APA-negative group (n=181). The clinical pregnancy rate (66.7% vs. 45.9%), ongoing pregnancy rate (58.3% vs. 37.0%), and miscarriage rate (12.5% vs. 19.3%) were all similar between APA-positive and APA-negative group.

Conclusion

The prevalence of APA is low in Korean infertile women undergoing the first IVF cycle, and the presence of APA appears to neither decrease their first IVF success nor increase abortion rate.

Infertility - Prevention and Management

Infertility and subfertility, menstrual irregularities, and decreased parity may occur in women with autoimmune diseases due to multiple factors, including underlying inflammatory disease, gonadotoxic medications, and psychosocial issues related to living with chronic disease. Awareness of these factors, as well as validation and support of patients confronting reproductive challenges, is important for providing comprehensive care to these women. An understanding of the expanding options for fertility preservation strategies during gonadotoxic medications is essential. Referral to a reproductive endocrinology clinic is indicated in this patient population.

Live Birth Pregnancy Outcome after First In Vitro Fertilization Treatment in a Patient with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Isolated High Positive IgA Anti-β2glycoprotein I Antibodies: A Case Report

IgA anti-β2glycoprotein I antibodies (IgA-anti-β2GPI) seems to be the most prevalent isotype in patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) with a significant association to thrombotic events. Both SLE and antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) can be associated with implantation failure, fetal loss and obstetric complications. Recent reports highlight the clinical value of IgA-anti-β2GPI determination in supporting in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment and IVF pregnancy outcomes. We report a 36-year-old female diagnosed with SLE, endometriosis and unexplained infertility. Conventional APS markers were consistently negative: anti-cardiolipin (aCL) and anti-β2GPI: IgG/IgM. She was then tested with reports of repeatedly high IgA-anti-β2GPI and tested positive from 2014 after IgA (aCL; anti-β2GPI) were established in our APS diagnostic panel. She underwent successful first IVF procedure with a 30 week live birth pregnancy outcome. During the follow up no lupus flare, thrombosis or ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome were registered. Serum IgA anti-β2GPI and anti-dsDNA levels declined statistically significant during the second and third trimester. Titres of IgA-anti-β2GPI remained lower postpartum as well. This case highlights the clinical importance of IgA-anti-β2GPI testing for family planning, assisted reproduction and pregnancy in women with SLE and/or APS.

Thrombophilia and assisted reproduction technology-any detrimental impact or unnecessary overuse?

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to provide an overview of the studies investigating a possible association between thrombophilia and assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcome.

METHODS

This is a literature review.

RESULTS

Congenital thrombophilias (CoT) are reported to be associated with pregnancy loss. However, the association between CoT and early pregnancy loss is weak and does not necessarily support causation. CoT are more likely to be associated with late fetal loss. Even though data pooled from case-control and cohort studies suggest an increased risk of ART failure in women with CoTs, there seems no association when the analysis is confined to better quality cohort studies. The evidence supporting anticoagulation to improve ART outcome in CoT carriers is weak. Likewise, studies on antiphospholipid antibodies (APAs) and ART outcome suffer from multiple methodological limitations and a detrimental impact of APA positivity is controversial. Empirical administration of heparin or low molecular weight heparin to women with recurrent ART failures is supported by weak evidence. Importantly, thrombophilias are likely to increase thrombotic complications after ovarian stimulation for ART.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence does not support routinely testing for or treatment of thrombophilia in the setting of ART nor in couples with implantation failure. A careful personal and family history should be obtained and a risk assessment for thrombotic complications should be made in every woman undergoing ovarian stimulation. If positive, testing for thrombophilia is warranted.

Association between in vitro fertilization outcomes and inherited thrombophilias: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to determine whether in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes are associated with inherited thrombophilias.

METHODS

Several databases including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were retrieved up to 12 January 2016. The quality of the included studies was assessed by two authors. The associations of the following mutations in inherited thrombophilias and IVF outcomes were explored: factor V Leiden (FVL), prothrombin gene G20210A mutation (PGM), 5,10-methylentetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) C677T, MTHFR (A1298C) and activated protein C resistance (APCR). The main outcome measures included CPR and implantation rate (IR). The relative risk (RR) and its 95 % confidence interval (CI) were calculated for effect index. Heterogeneity test was evaluated by Chi-square based on Q statistic and I (2) statistics.

RESULTS

A total of seven articles published between 2007 and 2015 with the ages of subjects between 30.9 and 36.2 were included. For subgroups analysis of CPR or IR, there were no significant differences in MTHFR (C377T), MTHFR (A1298C), FVL, PGM, and FVL/PGM mutation were found between the mutation group and control group (P > 0. 05).

CONCLUSIONS

IVF outcomes are not associated with FVL, PGM, MTHFR (C677T), MTHFR (A1298C), and APCR mutation in inherited thrombophilias.

The hidden world of anti-phospholipid antibodies and female infertility: A literature appraisal

Even though the association of anti-phospholipid antibodies (aPL) with infertility is debated, infertile women are commonly screened for aPL. To review evidence, a systematic PubMed search was conducted to retrieve papers addressing (i) the association between aPL and infertility, (ii) the positivity rate of criteria and non-criteria aPL in women with infertility, (iii) the association between aPL and assisted reproduction technologies (ART) outcome, (iv) the efficacy of medical treatments on ART outcome, and (v) the effects of ART on thrombotic risk. A total of 46 papers were considered; several limitations emerged: (i) wide heterogeneity in study populations, (ii) non-prospective design in 90% of studies, and (iii) aPL cutoffs not conforming to international guidelines in more than 75% of studies; aPL positivity not confirmed in 89% of studies. Most studies evinced an association between infertility and anti-β2GPI antibodies and almost all non-criteria aPL. The association rate with infertility was below 50% for lupus anti-coagulant, anti-cardiolipin antibodies (aCL), and anti-phosphatidic acid antibodies. According to our estimates, overall positivity rates of criteria and non-criteria aPL tests are 6% and 3% among infertile women, 1% and 2% among controls, respectively. A significant difference in the positivity rate of patients versus controls emerged for aCL only. Five of 18 studies reported a detrimental effect of aPL on ART outcome. Only one of the six studies assessing the effects of treatment on ART outcome among aPL-positive infertile women reported a benefit. All relevant studies reported no increase in the rate of thrombosis among aPL-positive women undergoing ART.

Antiphospholipid antibodies and infertility

Since the late 1980s some publications have proposed that antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) may have some relationship with infertility, considering reported deleterious effects that aPL exert on trophoblast proliferation and growth. Although not included in current classification criteria for antiphospholipid syndrome, many physicians investigate for aPL in patients with a history of infertility, including antibodies not listed in classification criteria, and most of those patients will receive anticoagulant therapy if any of those antibodies have a result considered positive. A review of literature was conducted searching for studies that investigated the association of aPL and infertility and if aPL positivity alters in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcome. The definition of infertility, routine work-up to exclude other causes of infertility, definition of IVF failure as inclusion criteria and control populations were heterogeneous among studies. Most of them enrolled women over 40 years of age, and exclusion of other confounding factors was also inconsistent. Of 29 studies that assessed aPL positivity rates in infertile women, the majority had small sample sizes, implying a lack of power, and 13 (44.8%) reported higher frequency of aPL in infertile patients compared to controls, but most of them investigated a panel of non-criteria aPL tests, whose clinical significance is highly controversial. Only two studies investigated all three criteria tests, and medium-high titer of anticardiolipin cut-off conforming to international guidelines was used in one study. Considering IVF outcome, there was also disparity in this definition: few studies assessed the live birth rate, others the implantation rate. Of 14 publications that addressed the relationship between aPL and IVF outcome, only two described a detrimental effect of these autoantibodies. In conclusion, available data do not support an association between aPL and infertility, and aPL positivity does not seem to influence IVF outcome. Well-designed clinical studies recruiting women with a clear diagnosis of infertility and a high-risk aPL profile should be performed to test whether clinically relevant aPL do-or not-exert an effect on human fertility.

Understanding and Managing Pregnancy in Patients with Lupus

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic, multisystemic autoimmune disease that occurs predominantly in women of fertile age. The association of SLE and pregnancy, mainly with active disease and especially with nephritis, has poorer pregnancy outcomes, with increased frequency of preeclampsia, fetal loss, prematurity, growth restriction, and newborns small for gestational age. Therefore, SLE pregnancies are considered high risk condition, should be monitored frequently during pregnancy and delivery should occur in a controlled setting. Pregnancy induces dramatic immune and neuroendocrine changes in the maternal body in order to protect the fetus from immunologic attack and these modifications can be affected by SLE. The risk of flares depends on the level of maternal disease activity in the 6–12 months before conception and is higher in women with repeated flares before conception, in those who discontinue useful medications and in women with active glomerulonephritis at conception. It is a challenge to differentiate lupus nephritis from preeclampsia and, in this context, the angiogenic and antiangiogenic cytokines are promising. Prenatal care of pregnant patients with SLE requires close collaboration between rheumatologist and obstetrician. Planning pregnancy is essential to increase the probability of successful pregnancies.

Assisted reproductive technology in SLE and APS

Assisted reproductive technology (ART) procedures, which include in vitro fertilization (IVF), are performed frequently and may be considered for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus and antiphospholipid syndrome. These procedures do not appear to increase the risk of disease flare or thrombosis in these patients. In addition, the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) does not independently predict the outcome of IVF pregnancies. As with pregnancies that are achieved naturally, candidates for ART should have quiescent disease for at least 6 months prior to attempting pregnancy for the best possible outcome for mother and child.

14th International Congress on Antiphospholipid Antibodies Task Force report on obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome

Pregnancy morbidity is one of the clinical manifestations used for classification criteria of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). During the 14th International Congress on Antiphospholipid Antibodies (aPL), a Task Force with internationally-known experts was created to carry out a critical appraisal of the literature available regarding the association of aPL with obstetric manifestations present in actual classification criteria (recurrent early miscarriage, fetal death, preeclampsia and placental insufficiency) and the quality of the evidence that treatment(s) provide benefit in terms of avoiding recurrent adverse obstetric outcomes. The association of infertility with aPL and the effectiveness of the treatment of patients with infertility and positive aPL was also investigated. This report presents current knowledge and limitations of published studies regarding pregnancy morbidity, infertility and aPL, identifying areas that need better investigative efforts and proposing how critical flaws could be avoided in future studies, as suggested by participants of the Task Force. Except for fetal death, there are limitations in the quality of the data supporting the association of aPL with obstetric complications included in the current APS classification criteria. Recommended treatments for all pregnancy morbidity associated to APS also lack well-designed studies to confirm its efficacy. APL does not seem to be associated with infertility and treatment does not improve the outcomes in infertile patients with aPL. In another section of the Task Force, Dr. Jane Salmon reviewed complement-mediated inflammation in reproductive failure in APS, considering new therapeutic targets to obstetric APS (Ob APS).

Aspirin and heparin to improve live birth rate in IVF for unexplained implantation failure?

The data concerning use of aspirin and/or heparin in IVF failure patients is reviewed. A number of methodological and biological problems are identified. A strategy to achieve reliable conclusions is explained.

Aspirin and heparin as adjuvants during IVF do not improve live birth rates in unexplained implantation failure

This study tested the hypothesis that using aspirin and/or heparin as adjuvants in IVF improves the treatment outcome. This retrospective cohort-control study recruited 234 consecutive subjects aged ≤ 44 years who had previously had one or more unsuccessful IVF cycle. All underwent IVF using conventional protocols. The study group received aspirin and/or heparin post embryo transfer until the day of pregnancy test or until 12 weeks of pregnancy. The control group did not receive adjuvant treatment. The outcome measures were live birth, clinical pregnancy and miscarriage rates. The outcomes were compared by chi-squared test and relative-risk analysis. Analysis was performed in 206 subjects. There was no statistically significant difference in the live birth rate (35.0%, 36/103 versus 47.6%, 49/103), clinical pregnancy rate (40.8%, 42/103 versus 53.4%, 55/103) and miscarriage rate (14.3%, 6/42 versus 10.9%, 6/55) between the study group and the control group. The data in this study show that low-dose aspirin and/or heparin as adjuvant therapies during IVF do not improve live birth rates in an unselected group of subfertile women who have previously had one or more unexplained implantation failure following IVF.