Cargando…

How long after a miscarriage should women wait before becoming pregnant again? Multivariate analysis of cohort data from Matlab, Bangladesh

OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimum interpregnancy interval (IPI) following a miscarriage. DESIGN: Multivariate analysis of population-based, prospective data from a demographic surveillance system. SETTING: Pregnancies in Matlab, Bangladesh, between 1977 and 2008. PARTICIPANTS: 9214 women with 10 4...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: DaVanzo, Julie, Hale, Lauren, Rahman, Mizanur
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Group 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3425891/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22907047
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001591
_version_ 1782241431163764736
author DaVanzo, Julie
Hale, Lauren
Rahman, Mizanur
author_facet DaVanzo, Julie
Hale, Lauren
Rahman, Mizanur
author_sort DaVanzo, Julie
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimum interpregnancy interval (IPI) following a miscarriage. DESIGN: Multivariate analysis of population-based, prospective data from a demographic surveillance system. SETTING: Pregnancies in Matlab, Bangladesh, between 1977 and 2008. PARTICIPANTS: 9214 women with 10 453 pregnancies that ended in a miscarriage and were followed by another pregnancy outcome. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome of pregnancy following the miscarriage was singleton live birth, stillbirth, miscarriage or induced abortion. For pregnancies that ended in live birth: early neonatal, late neonatal and postneonatal mortality. RESULTS: Compared with IPIs of 6–12 months, pregnancies that were conceived ≤3 months after a miscarriage were more likely to result in a live birth and less likely to result in a miscarriage (adjusted relative risk ratio (RRR) 0.70, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.86) or induced abortion (0.50, 0.29 to 0.89). Induced abortions were significantly more likely following IPIs of 18–24 months (2.36, 1.48 to 3.76), 36–48 months (2.73, 1.50 to 4.94), and >48 months (3.32, 1.68 to 2.95), and miscarriages were more likely following IPIs of 12–17 months (1.25, 1.01 to 1.56) and >48 months (1.90, 1.40 to 2.58). No significant effects of IPI duration are seen on the risks of a stillbirth. However, IPIs≤3 months following a miscarriage are associated with significantly higher late neonatal mortality for the infant born at the end of the IPI (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.74, 1.06 to 2.84), and IPIs of 12–18 months are associated with a significantly lower unadjusted risk of postneonatal mortality (0.54, 0.30 to 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: The shorter the IPI following a miscarriage, the more likely the subsequent pregnancy is to result in a live birth. However, very short IPIs may not be advisable following miscarriages in poor countries like Bangladesh because they are associated with a higher risk of mortality for the infants born after them.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3425891
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BMJ Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34258912012-08-30 How long after a miscarriage should women wait before becoming pregnant again? Multivariate analysis of cohort data from Matlab, Bangladesh DaVanzo, Julie Hale, Lauren Rahman, Mizanur BMJ Open Reproductive Medicine, Obstetrics and Gynaecology OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimum interpregnancy interval (IPI) following a miscarriage. DESIGN: Multivariate analysis of population-based, prospective data from a demographic surveillance system. SETTING: Pregnancies in Matlab, Bangladesh, between 1977 and 2008. PARTICIPANTS: 9214 women with 10 453 pregnancies that ended in a miscarriage and were followed by another pregnancy outcome. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome of pregnancy following the miscarriage was singleton live birth, stillbirth, miscarriage or induced abortion. For pregnancies that ended in live birth: early neonatal, late neonatal and postneonatal mortality. RESULTS: Compared with IPIs of 6–12 months, pregnancies that were conceived ≤3 months after a miscarriage were more likely to result in a live birth and less likely to result in a miscarriage (adjusted relative risk ratio (RRR) 0.70, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.86) or induced abortion (0.50, 0.29 to 0.89). Induced abortions were significantly more likely following IPIs of 18–24 months (2.36, 1.48 to 3.76), 36–48 months (2.73, 1.50 to 4.94), and >48 months (3.32, 1.68 to 2.95), and miscarriages were more likely following IPIs of 12–17 months (1.25, 1.01 to 1.56) and >48 months (1.90, 1.40 to 2.58). No significant effects of IPI duration are seen on the risks of a stillbirth. However, IPIs≤3 months following a miscarriage are associated with significantly higher late neonatal mortality for the infant born at the end of the IPI (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.74, 1.06 to 2.84), and IPIs of 12–18 months are associated with a significantly lower unadjusted risk of postneonatal mortality (0.54, 0.30 to 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: The shorter the IPI following a miscarriage, the more likely the subsequent pregnancy is to result in a live birth. However, very short IPIs may not be advisable following miscarriages in poor countries like Bangladesh because they are associated with a higher risk of mortality for the infants born after them. BMJ Group 2012-08-20 /pmc/articles/PMC3425891/ /pubmed/22907047 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001591 Text en © 2012, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcode
spellingShingle Reproductive Medicine, Obstetrics and Gynaecology
DaVanzo, Julie
Hale, Lauren
Rahman, Mizanur
How long after a miscarriage should women wait before becoming pregnant again? Multivariate analysis of cohort data from Matlab, Bangladesh
title How long after a miscarriage should women wait before becoming pregnant again? Multivariate analysis of cohort data from Matlab, Bangladesh
title_full How long after a miscarriage should women wait before becoming pregnant again? Multivariate analysis of cohort data from Matlab, Bangladesh
title_fullStr How long after a miscarriage should women wait before becoming pregnant again? Multivariate analysis of cohort data from Matlab, Bangladesh
title_full_unstemmed How long after a miscarriage should women wait before becoming pregnant again? Multivariate analysis of cohort data from Matlab, Bangladesh
title_short How long after a miscarriage should women wait before becoming pregnant again? Multivariate analysis of cohort data from Matlab, Bangladesh
title_sort how long after a miscarriage should women wait before becoming pregnant again? multivariate analysis of cohort data from matlab, bangladesh
topic Reproductive Medicine, Obstetrics and Gynaecology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3425891/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22907047
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001591
work_keys_str_mv AT davanzojulie howlongafteramiscarriageshouldwomenwaitbeforebecomingpregnantagainmultivariateanalysisofcohortdatafrommatlabbangladesh
AT halelauren howlongafteramiscarriageshouldwomenwaitbeforebecomingpregnantagainmultivariateanalysisofcohortdatafrommatlabbangladesh
AT rahmanmizanur howlongafteramiscarriageshouldwomenwaitbeforebecomingpregnantagainmultivariateanalysisofcohortdatafrommatlabbangladesh