Background: Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has been used in the treatment of systematic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), but its effect on lupus activity during pregnancy, preeclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) remains unclear. Methods: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched before 11 September 2022 for randomized clinical trials (RCT) or observational studies involving additional HCQ treatment and pregnant women diagnosed as having SLE and/or APS/positive antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs). Risks of high lupus activity, preeclampsia and IUGR were explored. Results: One RCT and 13 cohort studies were included. A total of 1764 pregnancies were included in the pooled meta-analysis (709 in the HCQ group vs. 1055 in the control group). After the additional use of HCQ, the risk of high lupus activity decreased (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.57–0.97, p = 0.03). For preeclampsia, the total incidence decreased (RR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.37–0.78, p = 0.001). The subgroup analysis showed statistical significance in the SLE subgroup (RR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.34–0.78, p = 0.002) but not in the APS/aPLs subgroup (RR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.29–1.54, p = 0.34). For IUGR, the decrease in incidence was not statistically significant (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.47–1.35, p = 0.46), neither in the SLE subgroup (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.40–1.36, p = 0.33) nor in the APS/aPLs subgroup (RR: 1.26, 95% CI: 0.34–4.61, p = 0.73). Conclusion: The additional use of HCQ may decrease the risk of high lupus activity during pregnancy and the incidence of preeclampsia for SLE patients, but the results do not support that using HCQ decreases the incidence of preeclampsia for APS/aPLs patients or reduces IUGR risk for SLE and/or APS/aPLs patients.

Problem: To compare the clinical characteristics and pregnancy outcomes between patients with primary obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome (OAPS) and those with primary non‐criteria obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome (NC‐OAPS), and to identify the risk factors of adverse pregnancy outcomes in both groups.Methods: A retrospective single‐center study was performed in a university hospital of western China, including 141 patients with OAPS and 865 patients with NC‐OAPS. The clinical characteristics, pregnancy complications, and obstetric outcomes of the cohorts were collected from the hospital system and were compared by univariable analysis, and the independent risk factors for adverse pregnancy outcomes (APO) were investigated by logistic regression analysis in these two populations.Results: The OAPS patients had a significantly higher risk for stillbirths compared to the NC‐OAPS patients, while the NC‐OAPS group had a significantly higher risk for preterm birth and overall APO. Double aPL positivity, triple aPL positivity, and gestational hypertension were the independent risk factors for APO in OAPS patients, whereas two of the double aPL positivity subtypes, triple aPL positivity and placenta previa were independent risk factors for APO in NC‐OAPS patients.Conclusion: This study identified different rates in different APOs among OAPS and NC‐OAPS patients. Additionally, this study revealed different risk factors for the development of APO between the two populations. These findings indicated that OAPS and NC‐OAPS are two distinct entities of the same disease, providing new insights into the individualized management for patients with OAPS and NC‐OAPS.

Early‑onset pre‑eclampsia (ePE) is a severe subtype of pre‑eclampsia (PE) commonly attributed to placental dysfunction. Although plasma p