Why the study?
Identifying predictive factors of fetal congenital heart block in pregnant women with positive anti-SS-A antibodies is important for proper case management.
What are the predictive factors for fetal congenital heart block in anti-SS-A antibody-positive pregnant women?
What are the predictive factors for fetal congenital heart block in anti-SS-A antibody-positive pregnant women?
In anti-SS-A antibody-positive pregnant women, a diagnosis of connective tissue disease is protective against fetal CHB, while testing positive for anti-SS-A antibodies after conception is a significant risk factor.
CTD diagnosis may protect against fetal CHB while post-conception anti-SS-A positivity raises risk; leaves open need for prospective confirmation.
Background Identifying predictive factors of fetal congenital heart block (CHB) in pregnant women with positive anti-SS-A antibodies is important to manage the cases properly. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 59 anti-SS-A antibody-positive women undergoing perinatal management at our hospital from January 2011 to November 2021. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate predictive factors for the development of fetal CHB. Results Of 59 women with positive anti-SS-A antibodies, 9 had fetal CHB. In univariate analysis, fetal CHB was associated with diagnosing connective tissue disease (OR 0.109, p = .009) and positive anti-SS-A antibodies after conception (OR 31.333, p = .0002). In multivariate analysis, diagnosing connective tissue disease was a protective factor (OR 0.049, p = .025), and positive anti-SS-A antibody after conception was a risk factor (OR 41.738, p = .004). However, other maternal clinical characteristics did not influence the development of fetal CHB. Conclusions In pregnancies of anti-SS-A antibody-positive women, diagnosing connective tissue disease was an independent protective factor for fetal CHB, and positive anti-SS-A antibody after conception was an independent risk factor.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Heshiki et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: