These two above mentioned situations, may be better known if we could include many cases with more standardized data. The only way that I know to do this, is through a large data base. Data introduced in this bank would be homogeneous because they would follow a recommended data-protocol.

The primary aims should be:

  1. To obtain the major number possible of cases of classical APS-related pregnancy morbidity (according to Sydney criteria), in order to have high amounts of information about the subtypes, involving either clinical and laboratory arms.
  2. To obtain and analyze the laboratory parameters used for different medical teams
  3. To obtain data about type and lasting of treatments commonly used.
  4. To have more contrastable information about long-term follow-up of this cohort of women.
  5. Eventually, to recruit information about the placental pathological abnormalities related to aPL in this women (normal, thrombotic and/or inflammatory changes).
  6. Eventually, to may study the risk added to aPL for other abnormalities, ie: obesity, smoking, inherited thrombophilias.
  7. To study different and controverted topics related to obstetric APS mainly, the value of 2 consecutive first trimester abortion, or recurrent in vitro fertilization failures ore the clinical value of low IgG and IgM aPL levels. This data might become in changes in the current classification criteria (new

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: