Advertisement

Der Gynäkologe

, Volume 52, Issue 11, pp 831–836 | Cite as

Thrombophiliediagnostik in der Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

  • Ute ScholzEmail author
Leitthema
  • 103 Downloads

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Die Diagnostik thrombophiler Störungen ist für die verschiedenen Lebensphasen der Frau von Bedeutung. Aus der entsprechenden Diagnostik werden häufig therapeutische Entscheidungen abgeleitet.

Ziel und Methodik der Arbeit

Der Beitrag soll den Einfluss hereditärer und erworbener Neigungen zu thrombembolischen Ereignissen bei der Auswahl der hormonellen Kontrazeption, in der Schwangerschaft und bei Abortneigung darstellen. Dabei werden anhand der aktuellen Literatur und Leitlinien die gesicherten Erkenntnisse dargestellt und diskutiert.

Schlussfolgerungen

Anhand gesicherter thrombophiler Marker können Aussagen zur Therapieentscheidnung getroffen werden.

Schlüsselwörter

Kontrazeption Schwangerschaft Methylentetrahydrofolsäure Abort Thrombosis 

Diagnostics of thrombophilia in gynecology and obstetrics

Abstract

Background

The diagnosis of thrombophilic disorders is important in the various phases during the life of women. Therapeutic decisions are frequently derived from the appropriate diagnostic procedures.

Aim and methods

This article demonstrates the influence of hereditary and acquired predispositions for thrombophilic events on the selection of hormonal contraception, during pregnancy and in predisposition for abortion. The known knowledge is presented and discussed based on the currently available literature and guidelines.

Results and conclusion

Statements on treatment decisions can be made based on established thrombophilic markers.

Keywords

Contraception Pregnancy Methylenetetrahydrofolic acid Abortion Thrombosis 

Notes

Einhaltung ethischer Richtlinien

Interessenkonflikt

U. Scholz gibt an, dass in Hinblick auf die vorliegende Thematik kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autoren keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Westhoff CL et al (2016) Clotting factor changes during the first cycle of oral contraceptive use. Contraception 93(1):70–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liberti G et al (1999) Hormonal state rather than age influences cut-off values of protein S: reevaluation of the thrombotic risk associated with protein S deficiency. Thromb Haemost 82(3):1093–1096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Franchi F et al (2013) Normal reference ranges of antithrombin, protein C and protein S: effect of sex, age and hormonal status. Thromb Res 132(2):e152–e157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    WHO (2015) Medical elegibility criteria for contraceptive use, 5. Aufl.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roach RE et al (2015) Combined oral contraceptives: the risk of myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011054.pub2 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sacco S et al (2017) Hormonal contraceptives and risk of ischemic stroke in women with migraine: a consensus statement from the European Headache Federation (EHF) and the European Society of Contraception and Reproductive Health (ESC). J Headache Pain 18(1):108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    de Bastos M et al (2014) Combined oral contraceptives: venous thrombosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010813.pub2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weill A et al (2016) Low dose oestrogen combined oral contraception and risk of pulmonary embolism, stroke, and myocardial infarction in five million French women: cohort study. BMJ 353:i2002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Eischer L et al (2014) The risk of recurrence in women with venous thromboembolism while using etrogens. J Thromb Haemost 12(5):635–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Beyer-Westendorf J et al (2018) “Sex hormones and venous thromboembolism—from contraception to hormone replacement therapy.”. Vasa 47(6):441–450.  https://doi.org/10.1024/0301-1526/a000726 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bremme KA (2003) Haemostatic changes in pregnancy. Best Pract Res Clin Haematol 16(2):153–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Szecsi PB et al (2010) Haemostatic reference in intervals in pregnancy. Thromb Haemost 103:718–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Virkus RA et al (2011) Venous thromboembolism in pregnant and puerperal women in Denmark 1995–2005. A national cohort study. Thromb Haemost 106(2):304–309PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Robertson L et al (2005) Thrombophilia in pregnancy: a systemic review. Br J Haematol 132:171–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gerhardt A et al (2016) Hereditary risk factors for thrombophilia and probability of venous thromboembolism during pregnancy and the puerperium. Blood 128:2343–2349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sucker C, Zotz RB et al (2015) Prophylaxis and treatment of venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in pregnancy. Rev Vasc Med 3:24–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lockwood C et al (2013) Inherited thrombophilias in pregnancy. Practice bulletin. Am Coll Obst Gynecol 122(3):706–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rodger MA et al (2014) Is thrombophilia associated with placenta-mediated pregnancy complications? A prospective cohort study. J Thromb Haemost 12:469–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bouvier S et al (2014) Comparative incidence of pregnancy outcomes in thrombophilia-positive women from the NOH-APS observational study. Blood 123:414–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    AWMF-Leitlinien S2k, 065-002:Venenthrombose und Lungenembolie: Diagnostik und TherapieGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thrombosis and Embolism during Pregnancy and the Puerperium, Reducing the Risk (Green-top Guideline No. 37a) Published: 13/04/2015Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Keck C (Hrsg) (2014) Kinderwunschbehandlung in der gynäkologischen Praxis. ISBN 978-3-13-171671‑2Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hachem HE et al (2017) Recurrent pregnancy loss: current perspectives. Int J Womens Health 9:331–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Prager S et al (2015) Early pregnancy loss. Practice bulletin no. 150. Obstet Gynecol 125:1258–1267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pritchard A et al (2016) Hereditary thrombophilia and recurrent pregnancy loss. Clin Obstet Gynecol 59(3):487–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Deguchi M et al (2017) Factors associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with antiphospholipid syndrome: a multicenter study. J Reprod Immunol 122:21–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Da Silva ST et al (2017) Antiphospholipid syndrome and recurrent miscarriage: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Reprod Immunol 123:78–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Saccone G et al (2017) Antiphospholipid antibody profile based obstetric outcomes of primary antiphospholipid syndrome: the PREGNANTS study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 216:525.e1–525.12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Latino JO et al (2017) Pregnancy failure in patients with obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome with conventional treatment: the influence of a triple positive antibody profile. Lupus 26:983–988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chaturvedi S, McCrae KR (2017) Diagnosis and management of the antiphospholipid syndrome. Blood Rev 31:406–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Arachchillage D, Laffan M (2017) Pathogenesis and management of antiphospholipid syndrome. Br J Haematol 178:181–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    De Groot PG, Urbanus RT (2015) Antiphospholipid syndrome—not a noninflammatory disease. Semin Thromb Hemost 41:607–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Shi H et al (2017) Antiphosphatidylserine/prothrombin antibodies (aPS/PT) as potential diagnostic markers and risk predictors of venous thrombosis and obstetric complications in antiphospholipid syndrome. Clin Chem Lab Med 56(4):614.  https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2017-0502 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Royal College of Obstretricians and Gynaecologists (2011) The Use of Antitrombotics in the Prevention of Recurrent Pregnancy Loss. Scientific Impact Paper No. 26Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kraft J et al (2017) Women with homozygous AT deficiency type II heparin-binding site (HBS) are at high risk of pregnancy loss and pregnancy complications. Ann Hematol 96:1023–1031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fischer-Betz R, Specker C (2017) Pregnancy in systemic lupus erythematosus and antiphospholipid syndrome. Res Clin Rhematol 31:397–414Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Schreiber K, Hunt BJ (2016) Pregnancy and antiphosphlipid syndrome. Semin Thromb Hemost 42:780–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Leitlinie zur Diagnostik und Therapie mit wiederholten Spontanaborten: AWMF-Registernummer 015/050, S2k, Dezember 2018Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MVZ Labor Dr. Reising-Ackermann und KollegenZentrum für BlutgerinnungsstörungenLeipzigDeutschland

Personalised recommendations