Pregnancy and thrombosis risk for women without a history of thrombotic events: a retrospective study of the real risks

Abstract

Background: During pregnancy and puerperium women are at high VTE risk. Current guidelines recommend dynamic VTE-risk assessment during pregnancy. Based on related RCOG-guidelines we constructed a digital VTE-risk assessment tool: PATrisks (www.PATrisks.com). Using this tool, we retrospectively evaluated the thrombotic risk in 742 women from our previous work, women who received thromboprophylaxis based on clinical experience for A) pregnancy complications, B) IVF treatment and C) prothrombotic tendency, in order to investigate whether that practice was justified according to the PATrisks scoring system for VTE prevention. Methods: Women with pregnancy complications [Group-A: 445], women who had undergone IVF [Group-B:132] and women with a prothrombotic tendency (thrombophilia, family history of VTE, other) [Group-C:165] were assessed using the PATrisks scoring system for thrombotic risk. The women were assigned into one of the following risk categories: low (score ≤ 2), intermediate (score = 3) and high (score ≥ 4). Further analysis per risk factor type (pre-existing or obstetric) and for various combinations of them, was also performed. We evaluated thrombotic risk early in pregnancy, and in the peripartum period. Results: The mean risk score antepartum was higher for women in Group B (3.3 in comparison with 1.9 and 2.0 in Group A and Group C respectively). Moreover, the risk score increased significantly postpartum for all Groups. The chi-square test also proved that there was a higher percentage of women at high or intermediate risk in group B compared to C before birth (55.3% vs.26.1% respectively, p < 0.0001, OR: 3.5, 95% CI: 2.2 – 5.7) and similarly after birth (85.6% vs. 56.4%, OR: 4.6, 95%CI: 2.6–8.2, p < 0.0001). In total 12 (1.6%) out of 742 women experienced thrombotic events, whether pre- or post-partum. Conclusions: LMWHs are widely prescribed during pregnancy for a number of indications, even when a proven scientific basis for such a practice is lacking. However, a considerable percentage of women were already at VTE-risk according to PATrisks and might have derived an additional benefit from LMWH in the form of VTE prevention. The rational use of these drugs should be optimized by establishing and implementing routine risk assessment for all pregnant women and by providing the necessary education to healthcare professionals.