GTG 17 PDF
GTG 17 PDF
GTG 17 PDF
This is the third edition of this guideline, which was first published in 1998 and then in 2003 under the
title The Investigation and Treatment of Couples with Recurrent Miscarriage.
Recurrent miscarriage, defined as the loss of three or more consecutive pregnancies, affects 1% of couples
trying to conceive.1 It has been estimated that 1–2% of second-trimester pregnancies miscarry before 24
weeks of gestation.2
The databases were searched using the relevant MeSH terms including all sub-headings.This was combined
with a keyword search using ‘human’, ‘female’, ‘pregnancy’, ‘abortion’, ‘miscarriage’, ‘habitual’, ‘recurrent’,
‘randomised controlled trials’ and ‘meta-analysis’.
The definitions of the types of evidence used in this guideline originate from the Scottish Intercollegiate
Guidelines Network (SIGN) grading scheme.Where possible, recommendations are based on, and explicitly
linked to, the evidence that supports them.Areas lacking evidence are highlighted and annotated as ‘good
practice points.’
The evidence on the effect of environmental risk factors is based mainly on data studying women with
sporadic rather than recurrent miscarriage. The results are conflicting and biased by difficulties in
controlling for confounding factors and the inaccuracy of data on exposure and the measurement of toxin
dose. Maternal cigarette smoking and caffeine consumption have been associated with an increased risk
of spontaneous miscarriage in a dose-dependent manner. However, current evidence is insufficient to
confirm this association.7–9 Heavy alcohol consumption is toxic to the embryo and the fetus. Even moderate
consumption of five or more units per week may increase the risk of sporadic miscarriage.10 Working with
or using video display terminals does not increase the risk of miscarriage.11 The evidence on the effect of
anaesthetic gases for theatre workers is conflicting.12,13
Recent retrospective studies have reported that obesity increases the risk of both sporadic and recurrent
miscarriage.14–16
The mechanisms by which antiphospholipid antibodies cause pregnancy morbidity include inhibition of
trophoblastic function and differentiation,19–23 activation of complement pathways at the maternal–fetal
interface resulting in a local inflammatory response24 and, in later pregnancy, thrombosis of the uteropla-
cental vasculature.25–27 In vitro studies have shown that the effect of antiphospholipid antibodies on
trophoblast function28,29 and complement activation30 is reversed by heparin.
Antiphospholipid antibodies are present in 15% of women with recurrent miscarriage.31 By comparison,
the prevalence of antiphospholipid antibodies in women with a low-risk obstetric history is less than
2%.32,33 In women with recurrent miscarriage associated with antiphospholipid antibodies, the live birth
rate in pregnancies with no pharmacological intervention has been reported to be as low as 10%.34
In approximately 2–5% of couples with recurrent miscarriage, one of the partners carries a balanced
structural chromosomal anomaly: most commonly a balanced reciprocal or Robertsonian translocation.35–38
Although carriers of a balanced translocation are usually phenotypically normal, their pregnancies are at
increased risk of miscarriage and may result in a live birth with multiple congenital malformation and/or
mental disability secondary to an unbalanced chromosomal arrangement. The risk of miscarriage is
influenced by the size and the genetic content of the rearranged chromosomal segments.
In couples with recurrent miscarriage, chromosomal abnormalities of the embryo account for 30–57% of
further miscarriages.39,40 The risk of miscarriage resulting from chromosomal abnormalities of the embryo
increases with advancing maternal age. However, it is important to note that as the number of miscar-
riages increases, the risk of euploid pregnancy loss increases.40,41
The exact contribution that congenital uterine anomalies make to recurrent miscarriage remains unclear
since the prevalence and reproductive implications of uterine anomalies in the general population are
unknown. The reported prevalence of uterine anomalies in recurrent miscarriage populations ranges
between 1.8% and 37.6%.42,43 This variability reflects the differences in the criteria and techniques used
for diagnosis and the fact that available studies have included women with two, three or more miscar-
riages in both the first and second trimester of pregnancy.The prevalence of uterine malformations appears
to be higher in women with second-trimester miscarriages compared with women who suffer first-
trimester miscarriages, but this may be related to the cervical weakness that is frequently associated with
uterine malformation.44 It has been reported that women with arcuate uteri tend to miscarry more in the
second trimester while women with septate uteri are more likely to miscarry in the first trimester.45
A retrospective review of reproductive performance in women with untreated uterine anomalies has
suggested that these women experience high rates of miscarriage and preterm delivery, with a term
delivery rate of only 50%.42 However, retrospective studies are biased by patient selection and, until well
controlled prospective data become available, the role of uterine anomalies in recurrent miscarriage will
remain debatable.
Cervical weakness is a recognised cause of second-trimester miscarriage, but the true incidence is
unknown, since the diagnosis is essentially a clinical one. There is currently no satisfactory objective test
that can identify women with cervical weakness in the non-pregnant state.The diagnosis is usually based
on a history of second-trimester miscarriage preceded by spontaneous rupture of membranes or painless
cervical dilatation.
Anti-thyroid antibodies have been linked to recurrent miscarriage. However, one case–control
study51 from 1998 has reported that women with recurrent miscarriages are no more likely
Evidence
than women without recurrent miscarriage to have circulating thyroid antibodies. A single level 3
prospective study52 has shown that the presence of thyroid antibodies in euthyroid women
with a history of recurrent miscarriage does not affect future pregnancy outcome.
Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) has been linked to an increased risk of miscarriage but the exact
mechanism remains unclear. Polycystic ovarian morphology, elevated serum luteinising hormone levels or
elevated serum testosterone levels, although markers of PCOS, do not predict an increased risk of future
Natural killer (NK) cells are found in peripheral blood and the uterine mucosa. Peripheral blood NK cells
are phenotypically and functionally different from uterine NK (uNK) cells.56 There is no clear evidence that
altered peripheral blood NK cells are related to recurrent miscarriage.57,58 Therefore, testing for peripheral
blood NK cells as a surrogate marker of the events at the maternal–fetal interface is inappropriate and
should not be offered routinely in the investigation of couples with recurrent miscarriage.
It has been suggested that uNK cells may play a role in trophoblastic invasion and angiogenesis in addition
to being an important component of the local maternal immune response to pathogens.59 It should be
noted that the largest study60 examining the relationship between uNK cell numbers and future pregnancy
outcome reported that raised uNK cell numbers in women with recurrent miscarriage was not associated
with an increased risk of miscarriage.This remains a research field and testing for uNK cells should not be
offered routinely in the investigation of recurrent miscarriage.
Cytokines are immune molecules that control both immune and other cells. Cytokine responses are
generally characterised either as T-helper-1 (Th-1) type, with production of the pro-inflammatory cytokines
interleukin 2, interferon and tumour necrosis factor (TNF ) alpha, or as T-helper-2 (Th-2) type, with
production of the anti-inflammatory cytokines interleukins 4, 6 and 10. It has been suggested that normal
pregnancy might be the result of a predominantly Th-2 cytokine response, whereas women with recurrent
miscarriage have a bias towards mounting a Th-1 cytokine response.
A meta-analysis61 concluded that the available data are not consistent with more than modest
associations between cytokine polymorphisms and recurrent miscarriage. Further research is Evidence
level 2++
required to assess the contribution that disordered cytokines make to recurrent miscarriage
before routine cytokine tests can be introduced to clinical practice.
rubella, cytomegalovirus, herpes and listeria infections do not fulfil these criteria and routine
TORCH screening should be abandoned.62
The presence of bacterial vaginosis in the first trimester of pregnancy has been reported as a risk factor
for second-trimester miscarriage and preterm delivery,63,64 but the evidence for an association with first-
trimester miscarriage is inconsistent.65,66 A randomised placebo-controlled trial67 reported that treatment
of bacterial vaginosis early in the second trimester with oral clindamycin significantly reduces the
incidence of second-trimester miscarriage and preterm birth in the general population. There are no
published data to assess the role of antibiotic therapy in women with a previous second-trimester
miscarriage.
A meta-analysis68 of pooled data from 31 retrospective studies suggested that the magnitude of
the association between inherited thrombophilias and fetal loss varies according to type of fetal
loss and type of thrombophilia.The association between thrombophilia and late pregnancy loss
has been consistently stronger than for early pregnancy loss. In this meta-analysis, factor V Leiden
was associated with recurrent first-trimester fetal loss (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.13–3.58), recurrent
fetal loss after 22 weeks (OR 7.83, 95% CI 2.83–21.67) and non-recurrent fetal loss after 19
weeks (OR 3.26, 95% CI 1.82–5.83).Activated protein C resistance was associated with recurrent
Evidence
first-trimester fetal loss (OR 3.48, 95% CI 1.58–7.69). Prothrombin gene mutation was associated level 2++
with recurrent first-trimester fetal loss (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.12–4.79), recurrent fetal loss before
25 weeks (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.04–6.29) and late non-recurrent fetal loss (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.09–
4.87). Protein S deficiency was associated with recurrent fetal loss (OR 14, 95% CI 0.99–218)
and non-recurrent fetal loss after 22 weeks (OR 7.39, 95% CI 1.28–42.83). Methylenetetrahy-
drofolate mutation and protein C and antithrombin deficiencies were not associated with fetal
loss. However, since protein C and antithrombin III deficiencies are rare, the number of women
included in the study was too small to show any difference in pregnancy outcome.
for women with recurrent miscarriage who carry the factor V Leiden mutation compared with
those with a normal factor V genotype.
P
Women with recurrent first-trimester and second-trimester miscarriage should be
looked after by a health professional with the necessary skills and expertise. Where
available, this might be within a recurrent miscarriage clinic.
The loss of pregnancy at any stage can be a devastating experience and particular sensitivity is required
in assessing and counselling couples with recurrent miscarriage. Ideally,the couple should be seen together
at a dedicated recurrent miscarriage clinic and given accurate information to facilitate decision making
about future pregnancies. Clearly written patient leaflets are recommended to provide written information
that the couple can take home.
In the detection of lupus anticoagulant, the dilute Russell’s viper venom time test together with a platelet
neutralisation procedure is more sensitive and specific than either the activated partial thromboplastin time
test or the kaolin clotting time test.31 Anticardiolipin antibodies are detected using a standardised enzyme-
linked immunosorbent assay.
5.2 Karyotyping
Cytogenetic analysis should be performed on products of conception of the third and
subsequent consecutive miscarriage(s).
D
Knowledge of the karyotype of the products of conception allows an informed prognosis for a
future pregnancy outcome to be given. While a sporadic fetal chromosome abnormality is the
Evidence
most common cause of any single miscarriage, the risk of miscarriage as a result of fetal level 4
aneuploidy decreases with an increasing number of pregnancy losses.41 If the karyotype of the
miscarried pregnancy is abnormal, there is a better prognosis for the next pregnancy.39
A Dutch study38 reported that couples with balanced translocations have a low risk (0.8%) of
pregnancies with an unbalanced karyotype surviving into the second trimester and that their
chance of having a healthy child is 83%. A recent retrospective UK audit74 of four UK centres
over periods of 5–30 years reported that balanced translocations were found in 1.9% (406 of 20
432) of parents with recurrent miscarriage, but only four unbalanced translocations were found
Evidence
after referral for prenatal diagnosis because of balanced parental translocation ascertained for level 3
recurrent miscarriage. At an estimated cost of £3–4 million (the total cost of karyotyping 20
432 individuals calculated at £160–200 per karyotype), the data suggest that routine karyotyping
of couples with recurrent miscarriage cannot be justified. Selective parental karyotyping may
be more appropriate when an unbalanced chromosome abnormality is identified in the
products of conception.
P
All women with recurrent first-trimester miscarriage and all women with one or
more second-trimester miscarriages should have a pelvic ultrasound to assess uterine
anatomy.
P
Suspected uterine anomalies may require further investigations to confirm the
diagnosis, using hysteroscopy, laparoscopy or three-dimensional pelvic ultrasound.
5.4 Thrombophilias
Women with second-trimester miscarriage should be screened for inherited
thrombophilias including factor V Leiden, factor II (prothrombin) gene mutation and
D
protein S.
P
Women with recurrent miscarriage should be offered referral to a specialist clinic.
Two small prospective studies77,78 reported no difference in efficacy and safety between unfra-
Evidence
ctionated heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin when combined with aspirin in the level 1+
treatment of women with recurrent miscarriage associated with antiphospholipid antibodies.
The value of heparin has been questioned in two studies.79,80 However, there were methodological
weaknesses in both demographic and laboratory entry criteria and time of randomisation.
There are no adverse fetal outcomes reported in the meta-analysis of randomised controlled
trials of low-dose aspirin for the prevention of pre-eclampsia in pregnancy.81 Heparin does not
cross the placenta and hence there is no potential to cause fetal haemorrhage or teratogenicity.
Heparin can, however, be associated with maternal complications including bleeding, hypersen- Evidence
sitivity reactions, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and, when used long term, osteopenia level 2+
and vertebral fractures. Two prospective studies82,83 have shown that the loss of bone mineral
density at the lumbar spine associated with low-dose long-term heparin therapy is similar to that
which occurs physiologically during normal pregnancy.
Pregnancies associated with antiphospholipid antibodies treated with aspirin and heparin
remain at high risk of complications during all three trimesters. Although aspirin plus heparin
treatment substantially improves the live birth rate of women with recurrent miscarriage Evidence
associated with antiphospholipid antibodies, these pregnancies remain at high risk of compli- level 2+
cations during all three trimesters, including repeated miscarriage, pre-eclampsia, fetal growth
restriction and preterm birth;85,86 this necessitates careful antenatal surveillance.
A meta-analysis76 of randomised controlled trials reported that treating women who suffer
recurrent miscarriage associated with antiphospholipid antibodies with corticosteroids during
pregnancy does not improve the live birth rate compared with aspirin or aspirin plus heparin Evidence
(prednisone and aspirin compared with placebo or aspirin alone:RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.53–1.36; and level 1+
compared with heparin and aspirin: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.47–2.93). Steroid therapy is associated
with significant maternal and fetal morbidity.
A randomised controlled trial87 reported that women with recurrent miscarriage associated
with antiphospholipid antibodies treated with low-molecular-weight heparin plus aspirin had
a higher rate of live births than those treated with intravenous immunoglobulin (RR 2.28, 95%
Evidence
CI 0.81–6.4). Similarly, another randomised controlled trial88 reported that low-molecular-weight level 1+
heparin plus aspirin resulted in a higher live birth rate than intravenous immunoglobulin in the
treatment of women with recurrent miscarriage associated with antiphospholipid antibodies
(OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.14–2.84).
Genetic counselling offers the couple a prognosis for the risk of future pregnancies with an unbalanced
chromosome complement and the opportunity for familial chromosome studies.
Preimplantation genetic diagnosis has been proposed as a treatment option for translocation
carriers.89,90 Since preimplantation genetic diagnosis necessitates that the couple undergo in
vitro fertilisation to produce embryos, couples with proven fertility need to be aware of the
financial cost as well as implantation and live birth rates per cycle following in vitro fertili- Evidence
sation/preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Furthermore, they should be informed that they have level 4
a higher (50–70%) chance of a healthy live birth in future untreated pregnancies following
natural conception37,38,91 than is currently achieved after preimplantation genetic diagnosis/in
vitro fertilisation (approximately 30%).92
Preimplantation genetic screening in conjunction with in vitro fertilisation has been advocated
as a treatment option for women with recurrent miscarriage, the rationale being that the identi-
fication and transfer of what are thought to be genetically normal embryos will lead to a live Evidence
birth. The live birth rate of women with unexplained recurrent miscarriage who conceive level 2+
There are no published randomised trials assessing the benefits of surgical correction of uterine
abnormalities on pregnancy outcome. Open uterine surgery has never been assessed in prospective trials
but is associated with postoperative infertility and carries a significant risk of uterine scar rupture during
pregnancy.96 These complications are less likely to occur after transcervical hysteroscopic resection of
uterine septae; experience from case series appears promising.97 However, before a clear judgement can
be made, this procedure must be evaluated in a prospective controlled trial.
Cervical cerclage is associated with potential hazards related to the surgery and the
risk of stimulating uterine contractions and hence should be considered only in
A
women who are likely to benefit.
The role of cervical cerclage in the prevention of preterm birth has been examined in a recently published
RCOG Green-top Guideline.98 A Cochrane review99 of four randomised controlled trials found no
conclusive evidence that prophylactic cerclage reduces the risk of pregnancy loss and preterm delivery
in women at risk of preterm birth or mid-trimester loss owing to cervical factors. Furthermore, the
procedure was associated with a high risk of minor morbidity but no serious morbidity.A small reduction
in deliveries before 33 weeks of gestation was noted in the largest trial.100 The benefit was most marked
in women with three or more second-trimester miscarriages or preterm births. However, there was no
significant improvement in perinatal survival.
A short cervical length on transvaginal ultrasound during pregnancy may be useful in predicting
preterm birth in some cases of suspected cervical weakness. A meta-analysis101 of individual
patient-level data from four randomised controlled trials reported that in a subgroup analysis of Evidence
women with singleton pregnancies, a short cervix (less than 25 mm) and previous second- level 1+
trimester miscarriage, cerclage may reduce the incidence of preterm birth before 35 weeks of
gestation (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.33–99).
Progesterone is necessary for successful implantation and the maintenance of pregnancy. This
benefit of progesterone could be explained by its immmunomodulatory actions in inducing a
pregnancy-protective shift from pro-inflammatory Th-1 cytokine responses to a more favourable
anti-inflammatory Th-2 cytokine response.107 A meta-analysis108 to assess progesterone support
for pregnancy showed that it did not reduce the sporadic miscarriage rate. However, in a
subgroup analysis of trials involving women with recurrent miscarriage, progesterone treatment Evidence
level 1+
offered a statistically significant decrease in miscarriage rate compared with placebo or no
treatment (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.2–0.7). However, this meta-analysis was based on three small
controlled studies, none of which detected a significant improvement in pregnancy outcome.
A large multicentre study (PROMISE, http://www.medscinet.net/promise) is currently under
way to assess the benefit of progesterone supplementation in women with unexplained
recurrent miscarriage.
Luteinising hormone hypersecretion, a frequent feature of PCOS, has been reported as a risk
factor for early pregnancy loss. A randomised controlled trial111 has shown that prepregnancy
pituitary suppression of luteinising hormone among ovulatory women with recurrent Evidence
miscarriage and polycystic ovaries who hypersecrete luteinising hormone does not improve level 1+
the live birth rate. Furthermore, the outcome of pregnancy without pituitary suppression is
similar to that of women without raised luteinising hormone.
metformin has no effect on the sporadic miscarriage risk when administered prepregnancy.
Uncontrolled small studies113 have shown that use of metformin during pregnancy is associated with a
reduction in the miscarriage rate in women with recurrent miscarriage and PCOS. However, there are no
randomised controlled trials to assess the role of metformin in women with recurrent miscarriage.
6.6 Immunotherapy
Paternal cell immunisation, third-party donor leucocytes, trophoblast membranes
and intravenous immunoglobulin in women with previous unexplained recurrent
A
miscarriage does not improve the live birth rate.
A Cochrane systematic review114 has shown that the use of various forms of immunotherapy,
including paternal cell immunisation, third-party donor leucocytes, trophoblast membranes and
intravenous immunoglobulin, in women with unexplained recurrent miscarriage provides no
significant beneficial effect over placebo in preventing further miscarriage. A 2010 meta- Evidence
analysis115 confirmed this conclusion with respect to intravenous immunoglobulin. Moreover, level 1++
immunotherapy is expensive and has potentially serious adverse effects including transfusion
reaction, anaphylactic shock and hepatitis. The use of immunotherapy should no longer be
offered to women with unexplained recurrent miscarriage.
There are no published data on the use of anti-TNF agents to improve pregnancy outcome in women with
recurrent miscarriage. Furthermore, anti-TNF agents could potentially cause serious morbidity including
lymphoma, granulomatous disease such as tuberculosis, demyelinating disease, congestive heart failure
and syndromes similar to systemic lupus erythematosus.
Immune treatments should not be offered routinely to women with recurrent miscarriage outside formal
research studies.
Heparin therapy during pregnancy may improve the live birth rate of women with
second-trimester miscarriage associated with inherited thrombophilias.
A
Women with known heritable thrombophilia are at an increased risk of venous thromboembolism. See
RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 37a: Reducing the risk of thrombosis and embolism during pregnancy
and the puerperium.116
that heparin therapy may improve the live birth rate for these women.
randomised controlled trial. However, data from several non-randomised studies6,121,122 have
suggested that attendance at a dedicated early pregnancy clinic has a beneficial effect, although
the mechanism is unclear.
Aspirin alone or in combination with heparin is being prescribed for women with unexplained
recurrent miscarriage, with the aim of improving pregnancy outcome.Two recent randomised
controlled trials reported that neither of these interventions improves the live birth rate among Evidence
level 1+
women with unexplained recurrent miscarriage.123,124 However, it should be noted that both
studies included a significant number of women with only two previous miscarriages (40% and
57% of the study population, respectively).
These data suggest that the use of empirical treatment in women with unexplained recurrent miscarriage
is unnecessary and should be resisted. Furthermore, clinical evaluation of future treatments for recurrent
miscarriage should be performed only in the context of randomised trials of sufficient power to determine
efficacy.
8. Future research
● The role of uterine NK cells and cytokines in recurrent miscarriage.
● The role of uterine septum resection in women with recurrent miscarriage and septate uterus.
● Thromboprophylaxis in women with thrombophilia and recurrent first-trimester miscarriage.
● Progesterone treatment in women with unexplained recurrent miscarriage.
● Metformin treatment in women with recurrent miscarriage and insulin resistance.
Appendix
P
3 Non-analytical studies, e.g. case reports,
Recommended best practice based on the
case series
clinical experience of the guideline
4 Expert opinion development group
Professor L Regan FRCOG, Miss M Backos MRCOG, and Dr R Rai MRCOG, London
and peer-reviewed by: RCOG Consumers’ Forum;The Miscarriage Association; Royal College of Midwives; Dr A Eapen,
Research Registrar in Gynaecology, Keele University, Stoke on Trent; Mr RG Farquharson FRCOG, Liverpool; Mr DI Fraser
MRCOG, Norwich; Professor M Greaves MBChB, MD, FRCPath, FRCP, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland; Mr D
Jurkovic FRCOG, London; Professsor T Li FRCOG, Sheffield; Professor SM Quenby FRCOG, Warwick; Ms MS To MRCOG,
London.
Guideline Committee lead reviewers were Dr J Shillito MRCOG, Leeds and Dr SK Surendran FRCOG, London.
The final version is the responsibility of the Guidelines Committee of the RCOG.
The guideline review process will commence in 2014 unless evidence requires earlier review.
DISCLAIMER
The British Society of Gynaecological Endoscopists produces guidelines as an educational aid to good clinical practice.
They present recognised methods and techniques of clinical practice, based on published evidence, for consideration by
gynaecologists and other relevant health professionals.The ultimate judgement regarding a particular clinical procedure
or treatment plan must be made by the doctor or other attendant in the light of clinical data presented by the patient
and the diagnostic and treatment options available. This means that BSGE guidelines are unlike protocols or guidelines
issued by employers, not being intended to be prescriptive directions defining a single course of management. Departure
from the local prescriptive protocols or guidelines should be fully documented in the patient’s case notes at the time
the relevant decision is taken.
The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists produces guidelines as an educational aid to good clinical practice.
They present recognised methods and techniques of clinical practice, based on published evidence, for consideration by
obstetricians and gynaecologists and other relevant health professionals.The ultimate judgement regarding a particular
clinical procedure or treatment plan must be made by the doctor or other attendant in the light of clinical data presented
by the patient and the diagnostic and treatment options available.This means that RCOG guidelines are unlike protocols
or guidelines issued by employers, as they are not intended to be prescriptive directions defining a single course of
management. Departure from the local prescriptive protocols or guidelines should be fully documented in the patient’s
case notes at the time the relevant decision is taken.