Relationship between obstetric history and Rh(D) alloimmunization severity
- First Online:
To evaluate the relationship between obstetric history and Rh(D) alloimmunization severity, employing the gestational age at the first intrauterine fetal transfusion (IUT) as an indicator of this severity.
From 1996 to 2006, Rh(D) alloimmunized pregnancies submitted to IUT had their data assessed. Gestational age at the first IUT was modeled as a linear outcome. The associations between obstetric history variables, anti-Rh(D) antibodies titer and gestational age at the first IUT were analyzed. Statistics are presented with 95% confidence intervals (P < 0.05).
A total of 82 non-hydropic anemic fetuses, ensuing in 92.7% (n = 76) of perinatal survival, were submitted to IUT. Nineteen (23,2%) pregnant women did not present with any previous stillbirth, neonatal death, IUT, hydrops or neonatal exchange transfusion (group 1); and 63 (76.8%) reported at least one of these events (group 2). Gestational age at the first IUT differed significantly between the groups (P = 0.0001). For group 1, it ranged from 24 to 35 weeks (median 32.5 weeks), whereas for group 2 it ranged from 19 to 34 weeks (median 27 weeks). In the multivariated analysis, previous neonatal death (P = 0.040), previous IUT (P = 0.000) and previous neonatal exchange transfusion (P = 0.036) were independently associated with the gestational age at the first IUT.
The evaluation of the obstetrical history is an important diagnostic tool for predicting Rh(D) alloimmunization severity. Alloimmunized pregnant women who reported previous neonatal death(s), neonatal exchange transfusion(s) or IUT(s) should receive a closer fetal surveillance due to the risk of a higher rate of fetal hemolysis and the need of an earlier IUT.
KeywordsAlloimmunization Fetal anemia Fetal hydrops Fetal therapy Intrauterine transfusion Perinatal loss
- 1.Amorim L, Ximenes GV, Susana TC, Mello SM, Castilho SL, Lopes MED (2003) Reasons for anti-D alloimmunization in Brazilian blood donors. Transfusion 43:96AGoogle Scholar
- 2.Armitage P, Mollison L (1953) Further analysis of controlled trials of treatment of hemolytic disease of the newborn. J Obstet Gynecol Br Emp 60:605–620Google Scholar
- 3.Bowman JM (1999) Hemolytic disease (erythroblastosis fetalis). In: Creasy RK, Resnik R (eds) Maternal fetal medicine, 4th edn. W B Sanders, Philadelphia, p 736Google Scholar
- 8.Mari G, Deter RL, Carpenter RL, Rahman F, Zimmerman R, Moise KJ Jr, Dorman KF, Ludomirsky A, Gonzalez R, Gomez R, Oz U, Detti L, Copel JA, Bahado-Singh R, Berry S, Martinez-Poyer J, Blackwell SC (2000) Noninvasive diagnosis by Doppler ultrasonography of fetal anemia due to maternal red cell alloimmunization. Collaborative group for Doppler assessment of the blood velocity in anemic fetuses. N Engl J Medicine 342:9–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, Menacker F, Park MM, Sutton PD (2002) Births: final data for 2001. Natl Vital Stat Rep 18:1–102Google Scholar
- 20.Whitfield CR, Raafat A, Urbaniak SJ (1997) “Underreporting of mortality from RhD haemolytic disease in Scotland and its implications: retrospective review. Br Med J 315:1504–1505Google Scholar