Abstract
The recent publication of a study into the contribution of embryo chromosomal abnormalities in recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) affords the opportunity to revisit the hypothesis that women with an aneuploid pregnancy loss have a better chance of a successful pregnancy next time than women with a chromosomally normal loss. A previous miscarriage with an abnormal karyotype (unrelated to a parental chromosome rearrangement) should not be viewed as a marker of an increased likelihood of aneuploidy in a subsequent pregnancy; it is (counterintuitively) likely to be indicative of a reduced risk of clinical miscarriage (with a higher proportion of aneuploid products) and an excellent chance for the live birth of the next pregnancy. Each couple should be treated on their own merits and with appropriate investigations performed where indicated; caution should be advised regarding offering preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Nikitina TV, Sazhenova EA, Zhigalina DI, Tolmacheva EN, Sukhanova NN, Lebedev IN. Karyotype evaluation of repeated abortions in primary and secondary recurrent pregnancy loss. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-020-01703-y.
Carp H, Toder V, Aviram A, Daniely M, Mashiach S, Barkai G. Karyotype of the abortus in recurrent miscarriage. Fertil Steril. 2001;75:678–82.
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. The investigation and treatment of couples with recurrent first-trimester and second-trimester miscarriage. Green-top Guideline No. 17. London: RCOG; 2011. https://www.rcog.org.uk/globalassets/documents/guidelines/gtg_17.pdf. Accessed 09 Feb 2020.
Scriven PN. A tale of two studies: now is no longer the best of times for preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A). J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-020-01712-x.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
The author is responsible for the content and writing of the paper.
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Ethics approval
Not applicable.
Consent to participate
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Scriven, P.N. Squaring the circle of recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL). J Assist Reprod Genet 37, 1067–1068 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-020-01780-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-020-01780-z