Systematic Reviews
Obstetrics
Celiac disease and obstetric complications: a systematic review and metaanalysis

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.09.080Get rights and content

The aim of this metaanalysis was to evaluate the risk of the development of obstetric complications in women with celiac disease. We searched electronic databases from their inception until February 2015. We included all cohort studies that reported the incidence of obstetric complications in women with celiac disease compared with women without celiac disease (ie, control group). Studies without a control group and case-control studies were excluded. The primary outcome was defined a priori and was the incidence of a composite of obstetric complications that included intrauterine growth restriction, small for gestational age, low birthweight, preeclampsia and preterm birth. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, stillbirth, preeclampsia, small for gestational age, and low birthweight. The review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42015017263) before data extraction. All authors were contacted to obtain the original databases and perform individual participant data metaanalysis. Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed in the aggregate data analysis and in the individual participant data metaanalysis. We included 10 cohort studies (4,844,555 women) in this metaanalysis. Four authors provided the entire databases for the individual participant data analysis. Because none of the included studies stratified data for the primary outcome (ie, composite outcome), the assessment of this outcome for the aggregate analysis was not feasible. Aggregate data analysis showed that, compared with women in the control group, women with celiac disease (both treated and untreated) had a significantly higher risk of the development of preterm birth (adjusted odds ratio, 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 1.09–1.66), intrauterine growth restriction (odds ratio, 2.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.32–4.67), stillbirth (odds ratio, 4.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.08–21.75), low birthweight (odds ratio, 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–2.51), and small for gestational age (odds ratio, 4.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.02–20.08); no statistically significant difference was found in the incidence of preeclampsia (odds ratio, 2.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.90–6.70). The risk of preterm birth was still significantly higher both in the subgroup analysis of only women with diagnosed and treated celiac disease (odds ratio, 1.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–1.48) and in the subgroup analysis of only women with undiagnosed and untreated celiac disease (odds ratio, 2.50; 95% confidence interval; 1.06–5.87). Women with diagnosed and treated celiac disease had a significantly lower risk of the development of preterm birth, compared with undiagnosed and untreated celiac disease (odds ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.64–0.99). The individual participant data metaanalysis showed that women with celiac disease had a significantly higher risk of composite obstetric complications compared with control subjects (odds ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.17–1.94). Our individual participant data concurs with the aggregate analysis for all the secondary outcomes. In summary, women with celiac disease had a significantly higher risk of the development of obstetric complications that included preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, stillbirth, low birthweight, and small for gestational age. Since the treatment with gluten-free diet leads to a significant decrease of preterm delivery, physicians should warn these women about the importance of a strict diet to improve obstetric outcomes. Future studies calculating cost-effectiveness of screening for celiac disease during pregnancy, which could be easily performed, economically and noninvasively, are needed. In addition, further studies are required to determine whether women with adverse pregnancy outcomes should be screened for celiac disease, particularly in countries where the prevalence is high.

Section snippets

Search strategy

This review was performed according to a protocol designed a priori and recommended for systematic review.4 Electronic databases (MEDLINE, PROSPERO, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, EMBASE, Science direct, the Cochrane Library) were searched from their inception until February 2015 with no limit for language. The following search terms were used: “celiac,” “celiac disease,” “coeliac,” “coeliac disease,” “preterm birth,” “small for gestational age,” “miscarriage,” “pregnancy,” “premature,” “newborn,”

Study selection and study characteristics

The flow of study identification is shown in Figure 1. Seventeen full-text articles were assessed for eligibility.9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 Seven studies were excluded.15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25 Six studies were excluded because they evaluated the incidence of celiac disease among women with obstetric complications (ie, case-control studies),15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and one study25 was excluded because it was based on the same cohort as a more recent study.

Main findings

This metaanalysis showed that women with celiac disease (both treated and untreated) had a significantly higher risk of the development of obstetric complications, including PTB, IUGR, stillbirth, LBW, and SGA; no statistically significant difference was found in the incidence of preeclampsia. The risk of PTB was higher both in treated and in untreated women. However, women with diagnosed and treated celiac disease had a 20% significant decrease of PTB compared with those with undiagnosed and

References (38)

  • A. Ventura et al.

    Gluten-dependent diabetes-related and thyroid-related autoantibodies in patients with celiac disease

    J Pediatr

    (2000)
  • R. Troncone et al.

    IgA antibodies to tissue transglutaminase: an effective diagnostic test for celiac disease

    J Pediatr

    (1999)
  • A. Fasano et al.

    Clinical practice: celiac disease

    N Engl J Med

    (2012)
  • C. Tersigni et al.

    Celiac disease and reproductive disorders: meta-analysis of epidemiologic associations and potential pathogenic mechanisms

    Human Reprod Update

    (2014)
  • D. Zugna et al.

    Risk of congenital malformations among offspring of mothers and fathers with celiac disease: a nationwide cohort study

    Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol

    (2014)
  • Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, version 5.1.0 (update March 2011). The...
  • K. Slim et al.

    Methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS): development and validation of a new instrument

    Aust N Z J Surg

    (2003)
  • J. Peters et al.

    Selective reporting of adjusted estimates in observational epidemiology studies: reasons and implications for meta-analyses

    Eval Health Prof

    (2008)
  • L. Shamseer et al.

    Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation

    BMJ

    (2015)
  • Cited by (0)

    The authors report no conflict of interest.

    View full text