Download PDF
Semin Reprod Med 2006; 24(1): 017-024
DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-931797
Copyright © 2006 by Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc., 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Genetics of Recurrent Pregnancy Loss

Sony Sierra1 , Mary Stephenson2
  • 1Fellow, Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
  • 2Professor, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Section of Reproductive Endocrinology & Infertility, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
18 January 2006 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) is a devastating reproductive problem affecting approximately 5% of couples trying to conceive. Genetic factors appear to be highly associated with reproductive loss. In this article, genetic factors are reviewed in terms of random numerical chromosome errors in miscarriage specimens and carriers of structural chromosome rearrangements that may result in unbalanced chromosome errors in pregnancies. Recently, research has generated interest in genetic markers for recurrent loss such as skewed X-chromosome inactivation and human leukocyte antigen-G polymorphisms. Assisted reproductive technologies (specifically, preimplantation genetic diagnosis) have been offered to couples with recurrent pregnancy loss; however, more data need to be evaluated before routine use can be advocated. Management of genetic factors in RPL should include therapy based on the highest level of evidence, genetic counseling, and close monitoring of subsequent pregnancies.

KEYWORDS

Recurrent pregnancy loss - recurrent miscarriage - cytogenetics - translocations - preimplantation genetic diagnosis

REFERENCES

  • 1 Stephenson M D. Recurrent pregnancy loss: clinical evidence for suboptimal implantation.  Infert Reprod Med Clin N Am. 2001;  12 447-461
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Boue J, Bou A, Lazar P. Retrospective and prospective epidemiological studies of 1500 karyotyped spontaneous human abortions.  Teratology. 1975;  12 11-26
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Edmonds D K, Lindsay K S, Miller J F, Williamson E, Wood P J. Early embryonic mortality in women.  Fertil Steril. 1982;  38 447-453
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Wilcox A J, Weinberg C R, O'Connor J F et al.. Incidence of early loss of pregnancy.  N Engl J Med. 1988;  319 189-194
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Ohno M, Maeda T, Matsunobu A. A cytogenetic study of spontaneous abortions with direct analysis of chorionic villi.  Obstet Gynecol. 1991;  77 394-398
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Jacobs P A, Hassold T. Chromosome abnormalities: origin and etiology in abortions and livebirths. In: Vogel F, Sperling K Human Genetics. Berlin; Springer-Verlag 1987: 233-244
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 7 Simpson J L. Incidence and timing of pregnancy losses: relevance to evaluating safety of early prenatal diagnosis.  Am J Med Genet. 1990;  35 165-173
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Neilson J, Wohert M. Chromosome abnormalities found among 34,910 newborn children: results from a 13-year incidence study in Arhus, Denmark.  Hum Genet. 1991;  87 81-83
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Hassold T, Chiu D. Maternal age-specific rates of numerical chromosome abnormalities with special reference to trisomy.  Hum Genet. 1985;  70 11-17
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Hawley R S, Frazier J A, Rasooly R. Separation anxiety: the etiology of nondisjunction in flies and people.  Hum Mol Genet. 1994;  3 1521-1528
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Martin R H, Ko E, Rademaker A. Distribution of aneuploidy in human gametes: comparison between human sperm and oocytes.  Am J Med Genet. 1991;  39 321-331
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Jacobs P A, Hassold T J. The origin of numerical chromosome abnormalities.  Adv Genet. 1995;  33 101-133
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Rubio C, Gil-Salom M, Simon C et al.. Incidence of sperm chromosomal abnormalities in a risk population: relationship with sperm quality and ICSI outcome.  Hum Reprod. 2001;  16 2084-2092
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Stephenson M D, Awartani K A, Robinson W P. Cytogenetic analysis of miscarriages from couples with recurrent miscarriage: a case-control study.  Hum Reprod. 2002;  17 446-451
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Hassold T, Chen N, Funkhouser J et al.. A cytogenetic study of 1000 spontaneous abortions.  Ann Hum Genet. 1980;  44 151-178
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Stephenson M D. Frequency of factors associated with habitual abortion in 197 couples.  Fertil Steril. 1996;  66 24-29
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Boue A, Gallano P. A collaborative study of the segregation of inherited chromosome structural rearrangements in 1356 prenatal diagnoses.  Prenat Diagn. 1984;  4(suppl) 45-67
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Sugiura-Ogasawara M, Ozaki Y, Sato T, Suzumori N, Suzumori K. Poor prognosis of recurrent aborters with either maternal or paternal reciprocal translocations.  Fertil Steril. 2004;  81 367-373
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Goddijn M, Joosten J H, Knegt A C et al.. Clinical relevance of diagnosing structural chromosome abnormalities in couples with repeated miscarriage.  Hum Reprod. 2004;  19 1013-1017
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Stephenson M D, Sierra S. Reproductive outcomes in recurrent pregnancy loss associated with a potential carrier of a structural chromosome rearrangement.  Fertil Steril. 2006;  , (in press)
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Carp H, Feldman B, Oelsner G, Schiff E. Parental karyotype and subsequent live births in recurrent miscarriage.  Fertil Steril. 2004;  81 1296-1301
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Wolf G C, Horger III E O. Indications for examination of spontaneous abortion specimens: a reassessment.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;  173 1364-1368
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Bell K A, Van Deerlin P G, Haddad B R, Feinberg R F. Cytogenetic diagnosis of “normal 46,XX” karyotypes in spontaneous abortions frequently may be misleading.  Fertil Steril. 1999;  71 334-341
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Lomax B, Tang S, Separovic E et al.. Comparative genomic hybridization in combination with flow cytometry improves results of cytogenetic analysis of spontaneous abortions.  Am J Hum Genet. 2000;  66 1516-1521
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Philipp T, Feichtinger W, Van Allen M I, Separovic E, Reiner A, Kalousek D K. Abnormal embryonic development diagnosed embryoscopically in early intrauterine deaths after in vitro fertilization: a preliminary report of 23 cases.  Fertil Steril. 2004;  82 1337-1342
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Ferro J, Martinez M C, Lara C, Pellicer A, Remohi J, Serra V. Improved accuracy of hysteroembryoscopic biopsies for karyotyping early missed abortions.  Fertil Steril. 2003;  80 1260-1264
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Lyon M. Gene action in the X-chromosome of the mouse (Mus musculus L.)  Nature. 1961;  190 372-373
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Sangha K K, Stephenson M D, Brown C J, Robinson W P. Extremely skewed X-chromosome inactivation is increased in women with recurrent spontaneous abortion.  Am J Hum Genet. 1999;  65 913-917
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Uehara S, Hashiyada M, Sato K, Sato Y, Fujimori K, Okamura K. Preferential X-chromosome inactivation in women with idiopathic recurrent pregnancy loss.  Fertil Steril. 2001;  76 908-914
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Lanasa M C, Hogge W A, Kubik C, Blancato J, Hoffman E P. Highly skewed X-chromosome inactivation is associated with idiopathic recurrent spontaneous abortion.  Am J Hum Genet. 1999;  65 252-254
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Beever C L, Stephenson M D, Penaherrera M S et al.. Skewed X-chromosome inactivation is associated with trisomy in women ascertained on the basis of recurrent spontaneous abortion or chromosomally abnormal pregnancies.  Am J Hum Genet. 2003;  72 399-407
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Robinson W P, Beever C, Brown C J, Stephenson M D. Skewed X inactivation and recurrent spontaneous abortion.  Semin Reprod Med. 2001;  19 175-181
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Ober C, Aldrich C L, Chervoneva I et al.. Variation in the HLA-G promoter region influences miscarriage rates.  Am J Hum Genet. 2003;  72 1425-1435
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Karhukorpi J, Laitinen T, Tiilikainen A S. HLA-G polymorphism in Finnish couples with recurrent spontaneous miscarriage.  Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;  104 1212-1214
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Penzes M, Rajczy K, Gyodi E, Reti M, Feher E, Petranyi G. HLA-G gene polymorphism in the normal population and in recurrent spontaneous abortion in Hungary.  Transplant Proc. 1999;  31 1832-1833
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Pfeiffer K A, Fimmers R, Engels G, van der Ven H, van der Ven K. The HLA-G genotype is potentially associated with idiopathic recurrent spontaneous abortion.  Mol Hum Reprod. 2001;  7 373-378
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Aldrich C L, Stephenson M D, Karrison T et al.. HLA-G genotypes and pregnancy outcome in couples with unexplained recurrent miscarriage.  Mol Hum Reprod. 2001;  7 1167-1172
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins-Obstetrics .Management of recurrent early pregnancy loss. Number 24, February 2001. The 2005 Compendium of Selected Publications. Washington, DC; American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; 2005
  • 39 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists .The Investigation and Treatment of Couples with Recurrent Miscarriage. RCOG Guideline No. 17 2003 London: United Kingdom; Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 40 Edwards R G, Gardner R L. Choosing sex before birth.  New Scientist. 1968;  38 218-220
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Harper J C, Coonen E, Ramaekers F C et al.. Identification of the sex of human preimplantation embryos in two hours using an improved spreading method and fluorescent in-situ hybridization (FISH) using directly labelled probes.  Hum Reprod. 1994;  9 721-724
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Egozcue J, Santalo J, Gimenez C et al.. Preimplantation genetic screening and human implantation.  J Reprod Immunol. 2002;  55 65-72
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Verlinsky Y, Cieslak J, Evsikov S, Galat V, Kuliev A. Nuclear transfer for full karyotyping and preimplantation diagnosis for translocations.  Reprod Biomed Online. 2002;  5 300-305
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Munne S, Magli C, Cohen J et al.. Positive outcome after preimplantation diagnosis of aneuploidy in human embryos.  Hum Reprod. 1999;  14 2191-2199
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Delhanty J D. Chromosome analysis by FISH in human preimplantation genetics.  Hum Reprod. 1997;  12 153-155
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Colls P, Blanco J, Martinez-Pasarell O et al.. Chromosome segregation in a man heterozygous for a pericentric inversion, inv(9)(p11q13), analyzed by using sperm karyotyping and two-color fluorescence in situ hybridization on sperm nuclei.  Hum Genet. 1997;  99 761-765
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Munne S, Morrison L, Fung J et al.. Spontaneous abortions are reduced after preconception diagnosis of translocations.  J Assist Reprod Genet. 1998;  15 290-296
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Vidal F, Gimenez C, Rubio C et al.. FISH preimplantation diagnosis of chromosome aneuploidy in recurrent pregnancy wastage.  J Assist Reprod Genet. 1998;  15 310-313
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 49 Pellicer A, Rubio C, Vidal F et al.. In vitro fertilization plus preimplantation genetic diagnosis in patients with recurrent miscarriage: an analysis of chromosome abnormalities in human preimplantation embryos.  Fertil Steril. 1999;  71 1033-1039
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 50 Munne S, Sandalinas M, Magli C et al.. Inereased rate of aneuploid embryos in young women with previous areuploid conceptions.  Prenat Diagnosis. 2004;  24 638-643
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 51 Verlinsky Y, Cohen J, Munne S et al.. Over a decade of experience with preimplantation genetic diagnosis: a multicenter report.  Fertil Steril. 2004;  82 292-294
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 52 Rubio C, Simon C, Vidal F et al.. Chromosomal abnormalities and embryo development in recurrent miscarriage couples.  Hum Reprod. 2003;  18 182-188
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 53 Staessen C, Platteau P, Van A E et al.. Comparison of blastocyst transfer with or without preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in couples with advanced maternal age: a prospective randomized controlled trial.  Hum Reprod. 2004;  19 2849-2858
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 54 Platteau P, Staessen C, Michiels A, Van S A, Liebaers I, Devroey P. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in patients with unexplained recurrent miscarriages.  Fertil Steril. 2005;  83 393-397
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 55 Clifford K, Rai R, Regan L. Future pregnancy outcome in unexplained recurrent first trimester miscarriage.  Hum Reprod. 1997;  12 387-389
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar

Mary D StephensonM.D. 

Professor, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Section of Reproductive Endocrinology & Infertility, University of Chicago

5841 South Maryland Avenue (MC 2050), Chicago, IL 60637

Email: mstephen@babies.bsd.uchicago.edu