TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparative study of obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome (OAPS) and non-criteria obstetric APS (NC-OAPS)
T2 - report of 1640 cases from the EUROAPS registry
AU - Alijotas-Reig, Jaume
AU - Esteve-Valverde, Enrique
AU - Ferrer-Oliveras, Raquel
AU - Sáez-Comet, Luis
AU - Lefkou, Elmina
AU - Mekinian, Arsène
AU - Belizna, Cristina
AU - Ruffatti, Amelia
AU - Hoxha, Ariela
AU - Tincani, Angela
AU - Nalli, Cecilia
AU - Marozio, Luca
AU - Maina, Aldo
AU - Espinosa, Gerard
AU - Ríos-Garcés, Roberto
AU - Cervera, Ricard
AU - Carolis, Sara De
AU - Monteleone, Giuseppina
AU - Latino, Omar
AU - Udry, Sebastian
AU - LLurba, Elisa
AU - Garrido-Gimenez, Carmen
AU - Trespidi, Laura
AU - Gerosa, Maria
AU - Chighizola, Cecilia Beatrice
AU - Rovere-Querini, Patrizia
AU - Canti, Valentina
AU - Mayer-Pickel, Karoline
AU - Tabacco, Sara
AU - Arnau, Anna
AU - Trapé, Jaume
AU - Ruiz-Hidalgo, Domingo
AU - Sos, Laia
AU - Farran-Codina, Inmaculada
N1 - © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: [email protected].
PY - 2020/6
Y1 - 2020/6
N2 - OBJECTIVES: To compare clinical features, laboratory data and fetal-maternal outcomes between 1000 women with obstetric APS (OAPS) and 640 with aPL-related obstetric complications not fulfilling Sydney criteria (non-criteria OAPS, NC-OAPS).METHODS: This was a retrospective and prospective multicentre study from the European Registry on Obstetric Antiphospholipid Syndrome.RESULTS: A total of 1650 women with 5251 episodes, 3601 of which were historical and 1650 latest episodes, were included. Altogether, 1000 cases (OAPS group) fulfilled the Sydney classification criteria and 650 (NC-OAPS group) did not. Ten NC-OAPS cases were excluded for presenting thrombosis during follow-up. All cases were classified as category I (triple positivity or double positivity for aPL) or category II (simple positivity). Overall, aPL laboratory categories showed significant differences: 29.20% in OAPS vs 17.96% in NC-OAPS (P < 0.0001) for category I, and 70.8% in OAPS vs 82% in NC-OAPS (P < 0.0001) for category II. Significant differences were observed when current obstetric complications were compared (P < 0.001). However, major differences between groups were not observed in treatment rates, livebirths and thrombotic complications. In the NC-OAPS group, 176/640 (27.5%) did not fulfil Sydney clinical criteria (subgroup A), 175/640 (27.34%) had a low titre and/or non-persistent aPL positivity but did meet the clinical criteria (subgroup B) and 289/640 (45.15%) had a high aPL titre but did not fulfil Sydney clinical criteria (subgroup C).CONCLUSION: Significant clinical and laboratory differences were found between groups. Fetal-maternal outcomes were similar in both groups when treated. These results suggest that we could improve our clinical practice with better understanding of NC-OAPS patients.
AB - OBJECTIVES: To compare clinical features, laboratory data and fetal-maternal outcomes between 1000 women with obstetric APS (OAPS) and 640 with aPL-related obstetric complications not fulfilling Sydney criteria (non-criteria OAPS, NC-OAPS).METHODS: This was a retrospective and prospective multicentre study from the European Registry on Obstetric Antiphospholipid Syndrome.RESULTS: A total of 1650 women with 5251 episodes, 3601 of which were historical and 1650 latest episodes, were included. Altogether, 1000 cases (OAPS group) fulfilled the Sydney classification criteria and 650 (NC-OAPS group) did not. Ten NC-OAPS cases were excluded for presenting thrombosis during follow-up. All cases were classified as category I (triple positivity or double positivity for aPL) or category II (simple positivity). Overall, aPL laboratory categories showed significant differences: 29.20% in OAPS vs 17.96% in NC-OAPS (P < 0.0001) for category I, and 70.8% in OAPS vs 82% in NC-OAPS (P < 0.0001) for category II. Significant differences were observed when current obstetric complications were compared (P < 0.001). However, major differences between groups were not observed in treatment rates, livebirths and thrombotic complications. In the NC-OAPS group, 176/640 (27.5%) did not fulfil Sydney clinical criteria (subgroup A), 175/640 (27.34%) had a low titre and/or non-persistent aPL positivity but did meet the clinical criteria (subgroup B) and 289/640 (45.15%) had a high aPL titre but did not fulfil Sydney clinical criteria (subgroup C).CONCLUSION: Significant clinical and laboratory differences were found between groups. Fetal-maternal outcomes were similar in both groups when treated. These results suggest that we could improve our clinical practice with better understanding of NC-OAPS patients.
KW - Adult
KW - Antibodies, Antiphospholipid
KW - Antiphospholipid Syndrome/diagnosis
KW - Aspirin/therapeutic use
KW - Female
KW - Humans
KW - Live Birth
KW - Pregnancy
KW - Pregnancy Complications/diagnosis
KW - Pregnancy Outcome
KW - Prospective Studies
KW - Registries
KW - Retrospective Studies
KW - Treatment Outcome
U2 - 10.1093/rheumatology/kez419
DO - 10.1093/rheumatology/kez419
M3 - Article
C2 - 31580459
SN - 0003-4908
VL - 59
SP - 1306
EP - 1314
JO - Rheumatology (Oxford, England)
JF - Rheumatology (Oxford, England)
IS - 6
ER -