Purpose of review Couples with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) are often referred to reproductive specialists to help determine the reason for their repeated losses. This review will help to develop a strategy that is effective in providing a diagnosis, efficient to administer, and cost-effective to the healthcare system. Recent findings International societies have published different recommendations for the evaluation of RPL, they consider it appropriate to initiate an evaluation after two (or three) clinical miscarriages. On the contrary, the clinician who follows these guidelines will only be able to offer a possible explanation to fewer than half of the couples being evaluated. Recently, genetic testing of miscarriage tissue using 24-chromosome microarray (CMA) analysis at the time of the second pregnancy loss coupled with testing based on society guidelines has been shown provide an explanation in more than 90% of cases. Summary New guidelines for the complete evaluation of RPL should consider adding 24-CMA testing on the miscarriage tissue. Providing couples with an explanation for recurrent loss assists them in dealing with the loss and discourages the clinician from instituting unproven therapies. Truly unexplained pregnancy loss can be reduced to less than 10% with this new algorithm. Incorporation of these strategies will result in significant cost savings to the healthcare system.

Purpose:To determine the prognostic importance of pleural effusions on preoperative computed tomographic (CT) images in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Materials and Methods:The institutional review board waived informed consent for this HIPAA-compliant study of 203 patients with Inter-

Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) is an obstetrical complication that affects about 3% of reproductive age couples. Genetic and non-genetic causes of RPL are multiple; however, aneuploidy is the most common obstetrical complication that can explain single and recurrent pregnancy loss (present in about 60% of recognized clinical pregnancies which result in a miscarriage). Parental karyotyping will only be of potential benefit for 2 to 5 percentage of RPL couples who are translocation carriers. Products of conception (POC) karyotype analysis has been used to direct management in RPL and has been shown to be cost-effective, but the technique has many limitations including high culture failure rate and maternal cell contamination. These limitations can be significantly reduced using POC chromosomal microarray (CMA) technology. We believe that POC genetic testing should be performed after the second and subsequent pregnancy loss using CMA. Although the results will not generally alter the course of treatment, the knowledge of the reason for the loss is of great emotional comfort to many patients. In addition, POC CMA performed in conjunction with a regular complete maternal RPL work-up will identify the group of truly unexplained RPL. Thus, only 10% of patients with RPL will complete an evaluation having a euploid loss and an otherwise normal work-up. This group of “truly unexplained RPL” would be ideal for new research trials and therapies. Pre-implantation genetic testing (PGT) technology has improved recently with day 5 trophectoderm biopsy as compared to biopsy on day 3 as well as with the addition of CMA and next-generation sequencing technologies. The most recent studies on PGT-SR (PGT-Structural rearrangement) show improved clinical and live birth rates per pregnancy, as well as decreased miscarriage rate for translocation carriers. PGT-A (PGT-aneuploidy) may have a limited role in RPL in cases with documented recurrent POC aneuploidy.

No abstract