Subsequent pregnancy outcomes after second trimester miscarriage or termination for medical/fetal reason: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of observational studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Women with a prior stillbirth or a history of recurrent first trimester miscarriages are at increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. However, little is known about the impact of a second trimester pregnancy loss on subsequent pregnancy outcome. This review investigated if second trimester miscarriage or termination for medical reason or fetal anomaly (TFMR/TOPFA) is associated with future adverse pregnancy outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review of observational studies was conducted. Eligible studies included women with a history of a second trimester miscarriage or termination for medical reasons and their pregnancy outcomes in the subsequent pregnancy. Where comparative studies were identified, studies which compared subsequent pregnancy outcomes for women with and without a history of second trimester loss or TFMR/TOPFA were included. The primary outcome was livebirth, and secondary outcomes included: miscarriage (first and second trimester), termination of pregnancy, fetal growth restriction, cesarean section, preterm birth, pre-eclampsia, antepartum hemorrhage, stillbirth and neonatal death. Studies were excluded if exposure was nonmedical termination or if related to twins or higher multiple pregnancies. Electronic searches were conducted using the online databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed and The Cochrane Library) and searches were last updated on June 16, 2023. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Where possible, meta-analysis was undertaken. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023375033. RESULTS: Ten studies were included, reporting on 12 004 subsequent pregnancies after a second trimester pregnancy miscarriage. No studies were found on outcomes after second trimester TFMR/TOPFA. Overall, available data were of "very low quality" using GRADE assessment. Meta-analysis of cohort studies generated estimated outcome frequencies for women with a previous second trimester loss as follows: live birth 81% (95% CI: 64-94), miscarriage 15% (95% CI: 4-30, preterm birth 13% [95% CI: 6-23]).The pooled odds ratio for preterm birth in subsequent pregnancy after second trimester loss in case-control studies was OR 4.52 (95% CI: 3.03-6.74). CONCLUSIONS: Very low certainty evidence suggests there may be an increased risk of preterm birth in a subsequent pregnancy after a late miscarriage. However, evidence is limited. Larger, higher quality cohort studies are needed to investigate this potential association.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.031 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".