Cited by 153Reproductive System and PregnancyPituitary Gland Disorders and TreatmentsGrowth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth Factors

Hyperprolactinemic recurrent miscarriage and results of randomized bromocriptine treatment trials

Open access
Hirahara, Fumiki, Andoh, Noriko, Sawai, Kaori, Hirabuki, Tomoo, Uemura, Tsuguo, Minaguchi, Hiroshi·1998·Fertility and Sterility

Abstract

Objective To evaluate hyperprolactinemia in the pathogenesis of recurrent spontaneous abortion.Design Randomized trial.Setting Miscarriage clinic, Yokohama City University Hospital, Yokohama, Japan.Patient(s) From a group of 352 women with recurrent spontaneous abortion, we identified 64 patients with a prolactin disorder that was not associated with any other etiologic abnormalities, including ovarian or endocrinologic disturbances such as luteal phase dysfunction, polycystic ovaries, hypersecretion of LH, galactorrhea, or thyroid hormone disorders.Intervention(s) Restoration of prolactin levels with bromocriptine.Main outcome measure(s) Successful pregnancy (live birth).Result(s) The percentage of successful pregnancies was higher in the bromocriptine-treated group than in the group that was not treated with bromocriptine (85.7% versus 52.4%, P < .05). Serum prolactin levels during early pregnancy (5-10 weeks of gestation) were significantly higher in patients who miscarried (31.8-55.3 ng/mL) than in patients whose pregnancies were successful (4.6-15.5 ng/mL, P < .01 or P < .05).Conclusion(s) Appropriate circulating levels of prolactin may play an important role in maintaining early pregnancy, especially in cases of hyperprolactinemic recurrent miscarriage.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0015-0282(98)00164-2

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A small randomised controlled trial of 48 women with recurrent miscarriage and hyperprolactinaemia showed significant differences in live birth between bromocriptine and no bromocriptine (85.7% versus 52.4% respectively, P < 0.05).

    “A small randomised controlled trial (RCT) of 48 women with recurrent miscarriage and hyperprolactinaemia were randomised into bromocriptine versus no bromocriptine, showing significant differences in live birth (85.7% versus 52.4% respectively, P < 0.05).94”

    From Recurrent MiscarriageGreen‐top Guideline No. 17 (2023) · cites this paper as [94]

    The Selection of Subjects section reports that 48 women were randomized, but only 24 had hyperprolactinemia; the other 24 had occult hyperprolactinemia. The Randomized Bromocriptine Treatment Trials section reports the cited live-birth rates and P < .05, but those rates are among the 21 women who conceived in each group, not all 48 randomized women. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 27 · Cited by 153

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [9]9. Hirahara F. The clinical management for recurrent spontaneous abor- tion [in Japanese]. Acta Obstetricia et Gynaecologica Japon 1996;48: 169 -72.
  2. [24]24. Bryant-Greenwood GD, Yamamoto S. Control of peripheral collag- enolysis in the human chorio-decidua. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;172: 63-70.
  3. [25]25. Blank M, Krause I, Buskila D, Teitelbaum D, Kopolovic J, Afek A, et al. Bromocriptine immunomodulation of experimental SLE and pri- mary antiphospholipid syndrome via induction of nonspecific T sup- pressor cells. Cell Immunol 1995;162:114 -22.

Authors
Hirahara, F., Andoh, N., Sawai, K., Hirabuki, T., Uemura, T., & Minaguchi, H.
Affiliations
Yokohama City University (JP)
Corresponding author
Hirahara, Fumiki
Venue
Fertility and Sterility
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-08
Volume
70
Issue
2
Pages
246-252
ISSN
0015-0282 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2001821740
Cited by
153
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
FWCI
0.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Fertility and Sterility (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Reproductive System and Pregnancy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Pituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Growth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth Factors
Keywords
hyperprolactinemia, recurrent pregnancy loss, bromocriptine, prolactin, early pregnancy maintenance, live birth, pregnancy outcomes
MeSH terms
Abortion, Habitual, Adult, Bromocriptine, Female, Hormone Antagonists, Humans, Hyperprolactinemia, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Outcome, Recurrence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review