Recurrent Miscarriage May be Caused by Women Being "Too Fertile"

[Xerxella]

So while currently going through my 4th loss, I stumbled up on this article:

http://www.fertilityauthority.com/blogger/claire/2012/8/27/recurrent-miscarriage-caused-being-super-fertile

"But now a new study may shed more light on why some women experience recurrent miscarriage — it is because they are "super fertile" and able to get pregnant easily. The theory is that a woman who is "super fertile" may have a uterus that allows embryos that would not normally survive to implant and last long enough so there is a positive pregnancy test. The researchers hypothesized that human endometrial stromal cells of women with recurrent miscarriage are not discriminating between high-and low-quality human embryos."

Here's the actual study (which is a tougher read than the article):

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0041424#

Holy moley, I think this is me! Has anybody else run across this? Anybody's doc talk about this? Any thoughts? Does anybody think IVF might be the answer because it would give the docs time to look at the embryos and put back the best?

(Can you tell I'm super excited to possibly actually have some answers as to why?)

cross posted in Pregnancy Loss, but I wanted to post here too because I know a lot of women here have suffered from RPL and there are a lot of women doing IVF

[revolting]

Thanks for posting. I've always gotten pregnant easily and I've also had a lot of losses. Something to chew on for sure.

[SilaMarila]

Hey X. Yes actually I have heard of this study. I podcast I listen to went into depth about it (I'm going to try to come back with the link). Basically the "super fertile" women in this study were not actually all healthy women, the study group was small, and the there were some major issues in the way they grew the cultures ect. The only part that really makes sense out of the whole thing is that if you are ovulating more frequently your chances of getting pregnant are higher and you have to be pregnant to miscarry.

[SilaMarila]

Here it is. Download episode 2 and let me know what you think after you hear more about this study. In fact download every episode of The Bitter Infertiles podcast because they rock ;)

http://bitterinfertiles.wordpress.com/2012/09/04/episode-2-is-live/

I am so so sorry for your loss. 

[Xerxella]

Thanks Sila. There are certainly problems with the study, as you pointed out the small sample size for one. But, I did think it was interesting and certainly feasible. For me, it would explain a lot, like the way I get pregnant easily enough, but seem to hold onto the losses for WAY too long. I have to listen to the podcast. (You're dashing my hopes here for an easy "answer.")

Big squishy hugs right back at ya.

[Xerxella]

Sila -I listened to the podcast and I have to say I wasn't impressed. They seem most upset that the article will "blame" and confuse women with RPL. I found the article comforting if nothing else. Here's someone saying here's a possible answer. ( BTW - I've done the whole RPL work up and everything tests normal. ).

Also they fail to mention that the article points to other articles in other journals that propose the same theory. ( I'm on my phone, so I can't cite them now.).

I'm not saying this article is the be all, end all, just that its an interesting beginning to one theory that needs additional studies.

[SilaMarila]

Got it. When I read it there were too many red flags in the way the study was conducted for me to feel like I could take it too seriously. 

I've also done all of the RPL work up and everything was "fine" (positive for 2 MTHFR mutations but according to my RE they are very common ones that supposedly do not cause problems unless you are positive for an additional mutation which I am not). The little research I have done backs that up and at this point I'm comfortable without a second opinion.

It is a theory and it will be interesting to see what further research pops up in the coming years.