Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Reproductive health outcomes in women with psoriatic arthritis
  1. Kieran Murray1,
  2. Louise Moore2,
  3. Fionnuala McAuliffe3,4,
  4. Douglas J Veale5,6
  1. 1 Rheumatology, Dublin Academic Medical Centre, Dublin, Ireland
  2. 2 Rheumatology Rehabilitation, Our Lady's Hospice, Dublin, Ireland
  3. 3 Maternal Medicine, National Maternity Hospital, Dublin 2, Ireland
  4. 4 Perinatal Research Centre, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  5. 5 EULAR Centre For Arthritis And Rheumatic Diseases, Dublin Academic Medical Centre, Dublin, Ireland
  6. 6 The Conway Institute, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  1. Correspondence to Dr Kieran Murray, St. Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin 4, Ireland; kemurray{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

There are now high-quality data showing rheumatoid arthritis improves in pregnancy and flares post partum, and that active disease in pregnancy may be associated with adverse fetal outcomes such as low birth weights. However, in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), the data are less clear. Previous studies examining the disease course of PsA, in and around pregnancy, have found conflicting results.1–3 Only one of those studies was prospective and many lack disease activity scores. Much of the data also predate the widespread use of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in pregnancy and so may not reflect current clinical practice. A recent abstract reviewing a Swedish patient registry reported increased odds of preterm birth, induction of labour and caesarean section in PsA pregnancies compared with population comparators.4

Consecutive female patients with PsA planning pregnancy or were …

View Full Text


  • Handling editor Josef S Smolen

  • Contributors The authors of this paper made the following contributions to the paper: Conception and design: KM, LM, DJV, FM; data collection: KM, LM; revising it critically for important intellectual content: KM, LM, DJV; involved in drafting the manuscript: KM, LM, DJV; have read and given final approval of the version to be published: KM, LM, DJV, FM.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Ethics approval Ethical approval was deemed unnecessary for this review, which describes our current routine care in accordance with best practice. No specific interventions were performed.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data sharing statement We are happy to share our data.