Are Women with a History of Low PAPP-A at Risk for Adverse Perinatal Outcomes in a Subsequent Pregnancy?

Kelly B. Zafman, Chloe S. Getrajdman, Melanie K. Arnold, Joanne L. Stone

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objective To determine if patients with a history of low pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A) in an initial pregnancy are at higher risk for adverse obstetric outcomes in a subsequent pregnancy. Study Design This was a retrospective cohort study in patients who underwent first trimester screening for PAPP-A in two consecutive pregnancies. Two groups were examined: patients who had low PAPP-A in the first pregnancy followed by normal PAPP-A in the second pregnancy and patients who had recurrent low PAPP-A. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared between the groups, with the primary outcome being intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) or preeclampsia. Results A total of 124 patients were included, representing 248 pregnancies. Ninety-two (74.2%) patients had normal PAPP-A in the second pregnancy, and 32 (12.9%) patients had recurrent low PAPP-A. Patients with recurrent low PAPP-A had a higher rate of IUGR or preeclampsia compared with patients with normal PAPP-A in the second pregnancy but this was not significantly different (12.5 vs. 10.9%, p = 0.51). There were no significant differences for all other outcomes. Conclusion Among patients with a history of low PAPP-A, patients with normal PAPP-A in the subsequent pregnancy have a similar risk of adverse neonatal outcomes compared with patients with recurrent low PAPP-A.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)647-652
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican Journal of Perinatology
Volume36
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2019

Keywords

  • PAPP-A
  • first trimester screening
  • intrauterine growth restriction
  • maternal and neonatal outcomes
  • preeclampsia

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Are Women with a History of Low PAPP-A at Risk for Adverse Perinatal Outcomes in a Subsequent Pregnancy?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this