Cited by 38Cardiovascular Issues in PregnancyCongenital Heart Disease StudiesAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches

Cardiovascular outcomes of pregnancy in Turner syndrome

Open access
Grewal, Jasmine, Valente, Anne Marie, Egbe, Alexander C, Wu, Fred M, Krieger, Eric V, Sybert, Virginia P, van Hagen, Iris M, Beauchesne, Luc M +5 more·2021·Heart

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Women with Turner syndrome (TS) are frequently counselled against pregnancy due to lack of data and unclear aortic dissection risk. However, with advances in fertility therapy, more women with TS are contemplating pregnancy. This study compared rates of adverse cardiovascular (CV) outcomes among: (1) pregnant and non-pregnant women with TS and (2) pregnant women with TS with/without structural heart disease. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of pregnant and age-matched non-pregnant controls with TS (2005-2017) across 10 CV centres was done. Data were collected at initial evaluation in pregnancy and outcomes were assessed to 6 months postpartum. Adverse CV events were defined as CV death, aortic dissection/rupture and/or aortic intervention. Non-pregnant age-matched controls were followed over the same time period. RESULTS: Sixty-eight pregnancies were included (60 women, mean age 33 years, 48% primigravid, 49% fertility therapy, 80% structurally normal heart, 25% XO karyotype). Based on American Society of Reproductive Medicine criteria, 10 pregnancies occurred in women stratified to high-risk category. There were no CV events in the pregnant women or in the non-pregnant women with TS. Obstetric events complicated 12 (18%) pregnancies with 9 (13%) attributed to hypertensive disorder of pregnancy. Fetal events included small for gestational age neonates (18%), preterm delivery (15%) and fetal death (3%). CONCLUSIONS: This study helps to refine the approach to pregnancy in women with TS. Among women with TS without structural heart disease, pregnancy does not impose an increased risk of CV outcomes. Among women with TS with structural heart disease, the risk of pregnancy is not as prohibitive as previously described but does require ongoing evaluation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/heartjnl-2020-316719

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Initial estimates of maternal deaths due to aortic dissections during pregnancy were much higher than in more recent studies, probably because pre-pregnancy cardiac evaluations were performed less frequently in older cohorts.

    “Initial estimates of maternal deaths due to aortic dissections during pregnancy were much higher than in more recent studies, probably because pre-pregnancy cardiac evaluations were performed less frequently in older cohorts.510-513”
  • Assisted reproductive technologies were proposed to be a risk factor for aortic dilation or dissection, but recent studies did not show any difference in aortic complications.

    “Assisted reproductive technologies were proposed to be a risk factor for aortic dilation or dissection, but recent studies did not show any difference in aortic complications.510”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grewal, J., Valente, A. M., Egbe, A. C., Wu, F. M., Krieger, E. V., Sybert, V. P., van Hagen, I. M., Beauchesne, L. M., Rodriguez, F. H., Broberg, C. S., John, A., Bradley, E. A., & Roos-Hesselink, J. W.
Affiliations
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • Boston Children's Hospital (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • University of Washington Medical Center (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Department of Cardiology, Thoraxcenter, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
  • Ottawa Heart Institute (CA)
  • Emory University (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • Children's National (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
Corresponding author
Grewal, Jasmine
Venue
Heart
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2020-07-15
Volume
107
Issue
1
Pages
61-66
ISSN
  • 1355-6037 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-201X
OpenAlex
W3042685221
Cited by
38
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2
FWCI
3.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Heart (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of British Columbia, Division of Cardiology
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Issues in Pregnancy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Congenital Heart Disease Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Aortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Keywords
Turner syndrome, pregnancy, cardiovascular outcomes, aortic dissection, aortic rupture, structural heart disease, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, pregnancy counseling, cardiovascular risk
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Pregnancy Outcome, Retrospective Studies, Turner Syndrome

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