Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Oct;75(10):e14520.
doi: 10.1111/ijcp.14520. Epub 2021 Jun 22.

Could fibrinogen to albumin ratio be a predictive marker for recurrent pregnancy loss

Affiliations

Could fibrinogen to albumin ratio be a predictive marker for recurrent pregnancy loss

Meral Tugba Cimsir et al. Int J Clin Pract. 2021 Oct.

Abstract

Aims: Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) is usually defined by two or more consecutive clinical miscarriages, which causes psychological trauma for couples. In this study, we aimed to investigate the predictive role of fibrinogen to albumin ratio (FAR) in patients with RPL.

Methods: Pregnant women in their first trimester of pregnancy were included in the study and divided into two groups as RPL patients (n: 44) and patients with no previous recurrent miscarriage (n: 60) as control group. Demographical parameters and routine blood parameters (fibrinogen, D-dimer, FAR, neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio [NLR], platelet count, main platelet volume [MPV], and red cell distribution width [RDW] values) were compared between the RPL group and the control group.

Results: The groups were determined to be statistically different in regard to gravidity and parity (P < .001). The difference between the groups was statistically different in regard to fibrinogen (mg/dL), albumin (g/dL), FAR (%), NLR (%), RDW-coefficient of variation (%), RDW-standard deviation (fl), and platelet counts (10-3 /μL). However, MPV (fl) and D-dimer (μg/L) levels were similar in both groups. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that the NLR levels were 84.1% sensitive and 75% specific with a cut-off value of 4.27 and the FAR levels were 79.5% sensitive and 88.3% specific with a cut-off value of 105.69 for predicting RPL.

Conclusion: Our results indicate that the FAR and NLR levels seem to be effective parameters for predicting RPL with high sensitivity and specificity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

REFERENCES

    1. van Dijk MM, Kolte AM, Limpens J, et al. Recurrent pregnancy loss: diagnostic workup after two or three pregnancy losses? A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2020;26(3):356-367. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmz048
    1. Papas RS, Kutteh WH. A new algorithm for the evaluation of recurrent pregnancy loss redefining unexplained miscarriage: review of current guidelines. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2020;32(5):371-379. https://doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0000000000000647
    1. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Electronic address: asrm@asrm.org. Definitions of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2020;113:533-535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.11.025
    1. Kolte AM, van Oppenraaij RH, Quenby S; ESHRE Special Interest Group Early Pregnancy, et al. Non-visualized pregnancy losses are prognostically important for unexplained recurrent miscarriage. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(5):931-937. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deu042
    1. Young BK. A multidisciplinary approach to pregnancy loss: the pregnancy loss prevention center. J Perinat Med. 2018;47(1):41-44. https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2018-0135

LinkOut - more resources