The risk of cardiovascular diseases after miscarriage, stillbirth, and induced abortion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Aims
Miscarriage and stillbirth have been included in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk guidelines, however heterogeneity in exposures and outcomes and the absence of reviews assessing induced abortion, prevented comprehensive assessment. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the risk of cardiovascular diseases for women with prior pregnancy loss (miscarriage, stillbirth, and induced abortion).Methods and results
Observational studies reporting risk of CVD, coronary heart disease (CHD), and stroke in women with pregnancy loss were selected after searching MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Library (to January 2020). Data were extracted, and study quality were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using inverse variance weighted random-effects meta-analysis.Twenty-two studies involving 4 337 683 women were identified. Seven studies were good quality, seven were fair and eight were poor. Recurrent miscarriage was associated with a higher CHD risk (RR = 1.37, 95% CI: 1.12-1.66). One or more stillbirths was associated with a higher CVD (RR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.09-1.82), CHD (RR = 1.51, 95% CI: 1.04-1.29), and stroke risk (RR = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.03-1.71). Recurrent stillbirth was associated with a higher CHD risk (RR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.18-1.39). One or more abortions was associated with a higher CVD (RR = 1.04, 95% CI: 1.02-1.07), as was recurrent abortion (RR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.05-1.13).Conclusion
Women with previous pregnancy loss are at a higher CVD, CHD, and stroke risk. Early identification and risk factor management is recommended. Further research is needed to understand CVD risk after abortion.
SUBMITTER: Kyriacou H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9617475 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The risk of cardiovascular diseases after miscarriage, stillbirth, and induced abortion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Kyriacou Harry H Al-Mohammad Abdulrahman A Muehlschlegel Charlotte C Foster-Davies Lowri L Bruco Maria Eduarda Ferreira MEF Legard Chloe C Fisher Grace G Simmons-Jones Fiona F Oliver-Williams Clare C
European heart journal open 20220901 5
<h4>Aims</h4>Miscarriage and stillbirth have been included in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk guidelines, however heterogeneity in exposures and outcomes and the absence of reviews assessing induced abortion, prevented comprehensive assessment. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the risk of cardiovascular diseases for women with prior pregnancy loss (miscarriage, stillbirth, and induced abortion).<h4>Methods and results</h4>Observational studies reporting risk of CVD, ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in women, responsible for approximately a third of all female deaths. Pregnancy complications are known to be associated with a greater risk of incident CVD in mothers. However, the relationships between pregnancy loss due to miscarriage, stillbirth, or therapeutic abortion, and future maternal cardiovascular health are under-researched. This study seeks to provide an up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis of the relationship between these three forms of pregnancy loss and the subsequent development of CVD. METHODS:This systematic review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis checklist (PRISMA) and the Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) Checklist. A systematic search will be undertaken using publications identified in MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, Web of Knowledge, the CINAHL Nursing Database, and the Cochrane Library. The eligibility of each publication will be determined by predefined selection criteria. The quality of the included studies will be rated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled measures of association will be computed using random-effects model meta-analyses. Between-study heterogeneity will be assessed using the I2 statistic and the Cochrane ?2 statistic. Small study effects will be evaluated for meta-analyses with sufficient studies through the use of funnel plots and Egger's test. DISCUSSION:The results of this systematic review will discuss the long-term risks of multiple types of cardiovascular disease in women who have experienced miscarriage, stillbirth, and/or therapeutic abortion. It will contribute to the growing field of cardio-obstetrics as the first to consider the full breadth of literature regarding the association between all forms of pregnancy loss and future maternal cardiovascular disease. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO registration number [CRD42020167587].
| S-EPMC7542880 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the risk of stillbirth and miscarriage in a subsequent pregnancy in women with a previous caesarean or vaginal delivery.DesignSystematic review of the published literature including seven databases: CINAHL; the Cochrane library; Embase; Medline; PubMed; SCOPUS and Web of Knowledge from 1945 until November 11(th) 2011, using a detailed search-strategy and cross-checking of reference lists.Study selectionCohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies examining the association between previous caesarean section and subsequent stillbirth or miscarriage risk. Two assessors screened titles to identify eligible studies, using a standardised data abstraction form and assessed study quality.Data synthesis11 articles were included for stillbirth, totalling 1,961,829 pregnancies and 7,308 events. Eight eligible articles were included for miscarriage, totalling 147,017 pregnancies and 12,682 events. Pooled estimates across the stillbirth studies were obtained using random-effect models. Among women with a previous caesarean an increase in odds of 1.23 [95% CI 1.08, 1.40] for stillbirth was yielded. Subgroup analyses including unexplained stillbirths yielded an OR of 1.47 [95% CI 1.20, 1.80], an OR of 2.11 [95% CI 1.16, 3.84] for explained stillbirths and an OR of 1.27 [95% CI 0.95, 1.70] for antepartum stillbirths. Only one study reported adjusted estimates in the miscarriage review, therefore results are presented individually.ConclusionsGiven the recent revision of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines (NICE), providing women the right to request a caesarean, it is essential to establish whether mode of delivery has an association with subsequent risk of stillbirth or miscarriage. Overall, compared to vaginal delivery, the pooled estimates suggest that caesarean delivery may increase the risk of stillbirth by 23%. Results for the miscarriage review were inconsistent and lack of adjustment for confounding was a major limitation. Higher methodological quality research is required to reliably assess the risk of miscarriage in subsequent pregnancies.
| S-EPMC3553078 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has led to concerns about potential adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with infection, resulting in intensive research. Numerous studies have attempted to examine whether COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk of pregnancy loss. However, studies and reviews to date have drawn differing conclusions. The aim of this systematic review is to provide a summary of all quantitative research on the relationship between pregnancy loss and COVID-19 infection and, if appropriate, to synthesise the evidence into an overall effect estimate.Methods and analysisThree publication databases (Embase, PubMed and Cochrane) and four preprint databases (medRxiv, Lancet Preprint, Gates Open Research and Wellcome Open Research) will be searched. Boolean logic will be used to combine terms associated with pregnancy loss and COVID-19. The population of interest are pregnant women. Retrieved results will be assessed in two phases: (1) abstract screening and (2) full text evaluation. All studies which compare pregnancy loss outcomes in women who had COVID-19 versus those who did not quantitatively will be included. Narrative and non-English studies will be excluded. Two reviewers will screen independently, with results compared and discrepancies resolved by the study team. Study quality and risk of bias will be assessed using a quality appraisal tool. Results will be summarised descriptively and where possible synthesised in a meta-analysis.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review requires no ethical approval. This review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and provide an important update in a rapidly evolving field of research.Prospero registration numberCRD42022327437.
| S-EPMC9534774 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGiven the rising incidence of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) in Bangladesh, an improved understanding of the epidemiology of CVD risk factors is needed. Therefore, we reviewed published studies on CVD modifiable risk factors e.g., Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM), hypertension (HTN), dyslipidemia and smoking as well as studies on CVDs and conducted a meta-analysis of risk factors and disease prevalence.MethodsWe searched the GLOBAL HEALTH, MEDLINE, EMBASE 'BanglaJol' databases for all studies in English on CVDs and its associated modifiable risk factors. Random effects meta-analysis methods were used to estimate pooled prevalence.ResultsThere were 74 eligible studies (outcome: T2DM = 32, HTN = 24, dyslipidaemia = 8 and smoking = 25; CVDs = 10). Due to high between study heterogeneity (p<0.001, I2> 95%) in the prevalence of CVD risk factors, we presented median and interquartile range (IQR) instead of the pooled estimates as the summary measures. Median (IQR) prevalence of T2DM, HTN, dyslipidemia and smoking were 5.9% (1.97%-8.25%); 15.1% (10.52%-17.60%); 34.35% (10.66%-48.50%) and 40.56% (0.80%-55.95%), respectively. The prevalence of T2DM and dyslipidemia were significantly higher in urban compared to rural populations (13.5 vs 6%, p<0.001; 41.5 vs 30%, p = 0.007, respectively).ConclusionsThe prevalence of risk factors for CVDs is high in Bangladesh, more so in urban areas. Ageing of the population may be a factor but urbanization seems to have an influence, possibly related to changes in dietary and physical activity patterns. Further research, in particular longitudinal studies, is needed to explore the complex interaction of these factors and to inform policies and programs for the prevention and management of CVDs in Bangladesh.
| S-EPMC4975457 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe roles of endogenous stress hormones (norepinephrine, epinephrine, and cortisol) in cardiovascular diseases have been discussed. However, the higher versus lower level of stress hormones in relation to cardiovascular risks remained uncertain.MethodsWe searched databases from their inception to 31, March 2023. We conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the effect of higher to lower level of stress hormones with random effect model. Subgroup and meta-regression analysis were done to clarify the heterogeneity.ResultsIn total, 33 studies involving 43641 participants were included. With regard to cardiovascular disease risks, a higher risk for individuals with higher level of all stress hormones (risk ratio (RR), 1.63; 95 % Confidence intervals (CIs): 1.36, 1.97) was noted compared with lower level of all stress hormones. The meta-regression showed that as the follow-up year increased per year, the impact of higher level of all stress hormones on the risk of cardiovascular disease declined significantly (RR, -0.09; 95 % CIs: 0.15, -0.03, p = 0.006). A significantly higher risk of cardiovascular diseases for individuals with higher level of norepinephrine (RR, 1.68; 95 % CIs: 1.37, 2.06), with higher level of epinephrine (RR, 1.58; 95 % CIs: 1.10, 2.26), and with higher level of cortisol (RR, 1.60; 95 % CIs: 1.04, 2.26) were noted compared with a lower level of each stress hormone.ConclusionHigher levels of stress hormones were significantly associated with higher risks of cardiovascular diseases compared with lower levels of stress hormones.
| S-EPMC11420448 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Sarcopenia is an age-related disease and is often accompanied by other diseases. Now, many studies have shown that cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) may raise the incidence rate of sarcopenia. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with CVDs compared with the general population, defined as relatively healthy non-hospitalized subjects. The databases of PubMed, Embase, Medline and Web of Science were searched for eligible studies published up to 12 November 2022. Two assessment tools were used to evaluate study quality and the risk of bias. Statistical analysis was conducted using STATA 14.0 and R Version 4.1.2. Thirty-eight out of the 89 629 articles retrieved were included in our review. The prevalence of sarcopenia ranged from 10.1% to 68.9% in patients with CVDs, and the pooled prevalence was 35% (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 28-42%). The pooled prevalence of sarcopenia was 32% (95% CI: 23-41%) in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF), 61% (95% CI: 49-72%) in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF), 43% (95% CI: 2-85%) in patients with coronary artery disease, 30% (95% CI: 25-35%) in patients with cardiac arrhythmia (CA), 35% (95% CI: 10-59%) in patients with congenital heart disease and 12% (95% CI: 7-17%) in patients with unclassed CVDs. However, in the general population, the prevalence of sarcopenia varied from 2.9% to 28.6% and the pooled prevalence was 13% (95% CI: 9-17%), suggesting that the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with CVDs was about twice compared with the general population. The prevalence of sarcopenia was significantly higher only in patients with ADHF, CHF and CA compared with the general population. There is a positive correlation between CVDs and sarcopenia. The prevalence of sarcopenia is higher in patients with CVDs than that in the general population. With global aging, sarcopenia has brought a heavy burden to individuals and society. Therefore, it is important to identify the populations with high-risk or probable sarcopenia in order to do an early intervention, such as exercise, to counteract or slow down the progress of sarcopenia.
| S-EPMC10235887 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study questionWhat is the risk of miscarriage among pregnant women who received any of the COVID-19 vaccines?Summary answerThere is no evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are associated with an increased risk of miscarriage.What is known alreadyIn response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the mass roll-out of vaccines helped to boost herd immunity and reduced hospital admissions, morbidity, and mortality. Still, many were concerned about the safety of vaccines for pregnancy, which may have limited their uptake among pregnant women and those planning a pregnancy.Study design, size, durationFor this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception until June 2022 using a combination of keywords and MeSH terms.Participants/materials, setting, methodsWe included observational and interventional studies that enrolled pregnant women and evaluated any of the available COVID-19 vaccines compared to placebo or no vaccination. We primarily reported on miscarriage in addition to ongoing pregnancy and/or live birth.Main results and the role of chanceWe included data from 21 studies (5 randomized trials and 16 observational studies) reporting on 149 685 women. The pooled rate of miscarriage among women who received a COVID-19 vaccine was 9% (n = 14 749/123 185, 95% CI 0.05-0.14). Compared to those who received a placebo or no vaccination, women who received a COVID-19 vaccine did not have a higher risk of miscarriage (risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% CI 0.89-1.28, I2 35.8%) and had comparable rates for ongoing pregnancy or live birth (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97-1.03, I2 10.72%).Limitations, reasons for cautionOur analysis was limited to observational evidence with varied reporting, high heterogeneity and risk of bias across included studies, which may limit the generalizability and confidence in our findings.Wider implications of the findingsCOVID-19 vaccines are not associated with an increase in the risk of miscarriage or reduced rates of ongoing pregnancy or live birth among women of reproductive age. The current evidence remains limited and larger population studies are needed to further evaluate the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy.Study funding/competing interest(s)No direct funding was provided to support this work. M.P.R. was funded by the Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health Grant No: MR/N022556/1. B.H.A.W. hold a personal development award from the National Institute of Health Research in the UK. All authors declare no conflict of interest.Registration numberCRD42021289098.
| S-EPMC10152171 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study questionDoes the exposure to job loss during pregnancy increase the risk of miscarriage or stillbirth?Summary answerThe experience of own or partner's job loss during the pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of miscarriageand stillbirth.What is known alreadyPrior research on the psycho-social aspect of pregnancy loss has investigated the contextual and the individual-level stressors. At the contextual level, natural disasters, air pollution, and economic downturns are associated with higher risk of pregnancy loss. At the individual level, intense working schedules and financial strain are linked with increased risk of pregnancy loss both at early and later stages of the gestation.Study design, size, durationThis work draws on high-quality individual data of 'Understanding Society', a longitudinal survey that has interviewed a representative sample of households living in the UK annually since 2009. Approximately 40 000 households were recruited. The analyses use all the available survey waves (1-12, 2009-2022).Participants/materials, setting, methodsThe final sample consisted of 8142 pregnancy episodes that contain complete informationon pregnancy outcome and date of conception. Ongoing pregnancies at the time of the interview were excluded from the final sample. The outcome variable indicated whether a pregnancy resulted in a live birth or a pregnancy loss whereas the exposure variable identified the women's or their partner's job loss because of redundancy or a dismissal. Logistic regression models were employed to estimate the relation between job loss during pregnancy and pregnancy loss. The models were adjusted for an array of socio-demographic and economic characteristics following a stepwise approach. Several sensitivity analyses complemented the main findings.Main results and the role of chanceBaseline models controlling for women's demographic background and prior experience of miscarriage estimated an increased risk of pregnancy loss when women were exposed to their own or their partner's job loss during their pregnancy (odds ratio (OR) = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.32, 2.99). When the models were adjusted for all socio-economic and partnership-related covariates the association remained robust (OR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.20, 2.73).Limitations, reasons for cautionFirst, the pregnancy outcome and the date of conception were self-reported and may besubjected to recall and social desirability bias. Second, although we adjusted for an array socio-demographic characteristics and self-reported health, other contextual factors might be correlated with both job loss and pregnancy loss. Third, owing to the limited sample size, we could not assess if the main finding holds across different socio-economic strata.Wider implications of the findingsBy showing that exposure to a job loss during pregnancy increases the risk of miscarriage and stillbirth, we underline the relevance of pregnancy loss as a preventable public health matter. This result also calls for policy designthat enhances labour market protection and social security buffers for pregnant women and their partners.Study funding/competing interestsThe authors received the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: H2020 Excellent Science, H2020 European Research Council, Grant/Award Number: 694262 (project DisCont-Discontinuities in Household and Family Formation) and the Economic and Social Research Centre on Micro-Social Change (MiSoC). There are no conflicts of interest to declare.
| S-EPMC10628490 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Overweight and obesity is a major public health concern that includes associations with the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors during childhood and adolescence as well as premature mortality in adults. Despite the high prevalence of childhood and adolescent obesity as well as adult CVD, individual studies as well as previous systematic reviews examining the relationship between childhood obesity and adult CVD have yielded conflicting results. The purpose of this study was to use the aggregate data meta-analytic approach to address this gap.Studies were included if they met the following criteria: (1) longitudinal and cohort studies (including case-cohort), (2) childhood exposure and adult outcomes collected on the same individual over time, (3) childhood obesity, as defined by the original study authors, (4) English-language articles, (5) studies published up to June, 2015, (6) one or more of the following CVD risk factors [systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL), and triglycerides (TG)], (7) outcome(s) not self-reported, and (8) exposure measurements (child's adiposity) assessed by health professionals, trained investigators, or self-reported. Studies were retrieved by searching three electronic databases as well as citation tracking. Fisher's r to z score was calculated for each study for each outcome. Pooled effect sizes were calculated using random-effects models while risk of bias was assessed using the STROBE instrument. In order to try and identify sources of heterogeneity, random-effects meta-regression was also performed.Of the 4840 citations reviewed, a total of 23 studies were included in the systematic review and 21 in the meta-analysis. The findings suggested that childhood obesity is significantly and positively associated with adult SBP (Zr = 0.11; 95% CI: 0.07, 0.14), DBP (Zr = 0.11; 95% CI: 0.07, 0.14), and TG (Zr =0.08; 95% CI: 0.03, 0.13), and significantly and inversely associated with adult HDL (Zr = -0.06; 95% CI: -0.10, -0.02). For those studies that adjusted for adult body mass index (BMI), associations were reversed, suggesting that adult BMI may be a potential mediator. Nine studies had more than 33% of items that placed them at an increased risk for bias.The results of this study suggest that childhood obesity may be a risk factor for selected adult CVD risk factors. However, a need exists for additional, higher-quality studies that include, but are not limited to, both unadjusted and adjusted measures such as BMI before any definitive conclusions can be reached.PROSPERO 2015: CRD42015019763 .
| S-EPMC5575877 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundHigh rate of cardiovascular disease (CVD) have been reported among patients with novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Meanwhile there were controversies among different studies about CVD burden in COVID-19 patients. Hence, we aimed to study CVD burden among COVID-19 patients, using a systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsWe have systematically searched databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science as well as medRxiv pre-print database. Hand searched was also conducted in journal websites and Google Scholar. Meta-analyses were carried out for Odds Ratio (OR) of mortality and Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission for different CVDs. We have also performed a descriptive meta-analysis on different CVDs.ResultsFifty-six studies entered into meta-analysis for ICU admission and mortality outcome and 198 papers for descriptive outcomes, including 159,698 COVID-19 patients. Results of meta-analysis indicated that acute cardiac injury, (OR: 13.29, 95% CI 7.35-24.03), hypertension (OR: 2.60, 95% CI 2.11-3.19), heart Failure (OR: 6.72, 95% CI 3.34-13.52), arrhythmia (OR: 2.75, 95% CI 1.43-5.25), coronary artery disease (OR: 3.78, 95% CI 2.42-5.90), and cardiovascular disease (OR: 2.61, 95% CI 1.89-3.62) were significantly associated with mortality. Arrhythmia (OR: 7.03, 95% CI 2.79-17.69), acute cardiac injury (OR: 15.58, 95% CI 5.15-47.12), coronary heart disease (OR: 2.61, 95% CI 1.09-6.26), cardiovascular disease (OR: 3.11, 95% CI 1.59-6.09), and hypertension (OR: 1.95, 95% CI 1.41-2.68) were also significantly associated with ICU admission in COVID-19 patients.ConclusionFindings of this study revealed a high burden of CVDs among COVID-19 patients, which was significantly associated with mortality and ICU admission. Proper management of CVD patients with COVID-19 and monitoring COVID-19 patients for acute cardiac conditions is highly recommended to prevent mortality and critical situations.
| S-EPMC7561581 | biostudies-literature