Prevalence of adenomyosis in women with subfertility: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of adenomyosis in women with subfertility. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Google Scholar, PsycINFO and Web of Science Core Collection from database inception to October 2022. The included studies evaluated the prevalence of adenomyosis in women with subfertility, with or without endometriosis and/or uterine fibroids. Secondary analyses were conducted to identify variation in the prevalence of isolated adenomyosis according to geographical location, diagnostic modality, diagnostic criteria, type of ultrasound, ultrasound features of adenomyosis and the use of assisted reproductive technology. RESULTS: Among 21 longitudinal studies evaluating 25 600 women, the overall pooled prevalence of isolated adenomyosis was 10% (95% CI, 6-15%) (I2 = 99.1%; tau2 = 0.12). The pooled prevalence was 1% (95% CI, 0-4%) for adenomyosis with concurrent fibroids (eight studies; I2 = 95.8%; tau2 = 0.03), 6% (95% CI, 3-11%) for adenomyosis with concurrent endometriosis (18 studies; I2 = 98.6%; tau2 = 0.12) and 7% (95% CI, 2-13%) for adenomyosis with concurrent endometriosis and/or fibroids (nine studies; I2 = 98.3%; tau2 = 0.09). The prevalence of isolated adenomyosis varied substantially according to geographical location, with Australia exhibiting the highest pooled prevalence of adenomyosis (19% (95% CI, 12-27%)), which was significantly higher compared with that in Asia (5% (95% CI, 1-12%)). The pooled prevalence of isolated adenomyosis diagnosed using a combination of direct and indirect ultrasound features was 11% (95% CI, 7-16%), whereas it was 0.45% (95% CI, 0-1%) in the study in which only an indirect feature was used as the diagnostic criterion. CONCLUSION: One in 10 women with subfertility have a diagnosis of isolated adenomyosis. The prevalence of adenomyosis varies according to the presence of concurrent endometriosis and/or fibroids. © 2023 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

TPO antibody positivity and adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Thyroid autoimmunity (TAI) is prevalent amongst women of reproductive age. TAI describes the presence of circulating anti-thyroid autoantibodies that are targeted against the thyroid, with or without thyroid dysfunction. Thyroid peroxidase antibodies (TPOAb) are the most common anti-thyroid autoantibodies. Around 10% of biochemically euthyroid individuals also have an elevated TPOAb titre. Many studies have linked the presence of TPOAb to adverse maternal and fetal outcomes in pregnancy, in particular miscarriage and pre-term birth, even in the absence of thyroid dysfunction. The causal pathway is poorly understood and few trials have looked to find treatments to reduce adverse outcomes. This review discusses in detail the associated adverse outcomes of TPOAb in pregnancy and the results of trials exploring methods to reduce such outcomes. Recommendations for counselling and monitoring of women with TPOAb and suggested areas for future work are also outlined.

Outcomes in prevention and management of miscarriage trials: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: There is a substantial body of research evaluating ways to prevent and manage miscarriage, but all studies do not report on the same outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To review systematically, outcomes reported in existing miscarriage trials. SEARCH STRATEGY: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane were searched from inception until January 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reporting prevention or management of miscarriage. Miscarriage was defined as a pregnancy loss in the first trimester. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data about the study characteristics, primary, and secondary outcomes were extracted. MAIN RESULTS: We retrieved 1553 titles and abstracts, from which 208 RCTs were included. For prevention of miscarriage, the most commonly reported primary outcome was live birth and the top four reported outcomes were pregnancy loss/stillbirth (n = 112), gestation of birth (n = 68), birth dimensions (n = 65), and live birth (n = 49). For these four outcomes, 58 specific measures were used for evaluation. For management of miscarriage, the most commonly reported primary outcome was efficacy of treatment. The top four reported outcomes were bleeding (n = 186), efficacy of miscarriage treatment (n = 105), infection (n = 97), and quality of life (n = 90). For these outcomes, 130 specific measures were used for evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Our review found considerable variation in the reporting of primary and secondary outcomes along with the measures used to assess them. There is a need for standardised patient-centred clinical outcomes through the development of a core outcome set; the work from this systematic review will form the foundation of the core outcome set for miscarriage. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: There is disparity in the reporting of outcomes and the measures used to assess them in miscarriage trials.