The present study was conducted on 190 pregnant females attending Government, Lahore General Hospital and from a private setup named as Fatima Memorial Hospital coming for their antenatal checkups during first trimester. The detailed results are shown in the appendices. The summary of results is given in Tables 1- 20 and Figures 1- 6.
Figure 1 shows the frequency of IgG in pregnant females. Out of 190, IgG antibodies against Toxoplasma gondii were present in 60 (31.58%) females.
Figure 2 shows the frequency of IgM in pregnant females. Out of 190 pregnant females,
IgM antibodies against Toxoplasma gondii were present only in 9 (4.73%) females.
Table 1 shows the comparison of age, gestational age and gravida between IgG positive and negative females. The mean age of IgG positive group was 28.19 ± 4.70 and the mean number of gravida and gestational age of IgG positive group was 3.26 ± 1.84 and 9.28 ± 3.14 respectively. Whereas the mean age of IgG negative group was 25.92 ± 5.00 and the mean number of gravida and gestational age of IgG negative group was 2.63 ± 1.85 and 9.36 ± 3.20 respectively. There was no statistically significant differences in mean gestational age between IgG positive and negative groups (p-value = 0.753). The mean age of IgG positive group was statistically significant and higher as compared to IgG negative group (p-value = 0.005) similarly the mean gravida of IgG positive group was statistically significant and higher as compared to IgG negative group (p-value = 0.012).
Table 2 shows the comparison of age, gestational age and gravida between IgM positive and negative groups. The mean age IgM positive group was 29.44 ± 5.20 and the mean number of gravida and gestational age of IgM positive group was 2.56 ± 1.51 and 9.33 ± 3.74 respectively. Whereas the mean age of IgM negative group was 26.49 ± 4.97 and the mean number of gravida and gestational age of IgM negative group was 2.84 ±1.88 and 9.33 ± 3.16 respectively. The mean age of IgM positive group was generally higher as compared to IgM negative group and the mean gravida of IgM positive group was generally lower as compared to IgM negative group but these differences were not statistically significant (p-value = 0.074 and p-value = 0.806 respectively). Similarly there were no statistically significant differences in mean gestational age between IgM positive and negative groups (p-value = 0.792).
Table 3 shows the IgG positivity in pregnant women according to family income and there was statistically significant association between IgG antibodies and family income (p-value <0.001).
Table 4 shows the IgM positivity in pregnant women according to family income. There was no statistically significant association between IgM antibodies and family income ( p-value 0.058).
Table 5 shows the frequency of IgG positivity in pregnant women with history of abortion. There was statistically significant association between IgG antibodies and history of abortion. The IgG antibodies were present in 20 (33.3%) females who had history of abortion whereas it was positive in 40 (66.70%) females who had no history of abortion (p-value 0.01).
Table 6 shows the frequency of IgM positivity in pregnant women with history of abortion. There was no statistically significant association between IgM antibodies and history of abortion (p-value 0.967). The IgM antibodies were present in 2 (22.2%) females who had history of abortion whereas it was absent in 39 (21.6%) females who had history of abortion.
Figure 3 shows the association of IgG positivity in pregnant women according to complications in previous pregnancies. There was no statistically significant association between IgG antibodies and previous pregnancy complications ( p-value 0.265). The IgG antibodies were present in 4 (7.0%) females who had complication in previous pregnancy whereas it was absent in 4 (3.3%) females who had complication in previous pregnancy.
Figure 4 shows the association of IgM positivity in pregnant women according to complications in previous pregnancies. There was no statistically significant association between IgM antibodies and previous pregnancy complication (p-value 0.342). The IgM antibodies was present in 1 (11.1%) females who had complication in previous pregnancy whereas it was absent in 7 (4.1%) females who had complication in previous pregnancy.
Table 7 shows the frequency of IgG positivity in pregnant women having history of contact with cat. There was statistically significant association between IgG antibodies and contact with cat (p-value <0.01). The IgG antibodies were present in 31 (50.9%) females who had cat in house whereas it was absent in 26 (20.3%) females who had cat in house.
Table 8 shows the frequency of IgM positivity in pregnant women having history of contact with cat. There was no statistically significant association between IgM antibodies and contact with cat (p-value 0.455). The IgM antibodies were present in 4 (44.4%) females who had cat in house whereas it was absent in 53 (29.2%) females who had cat in house.
Figure 5 shows the frequency of IgG positivity in pregnant women having history of cleaning cats litter. There was no statistically significant association between IgG antibodies in women who had an experience to clean the cats litter (p-value 0.505). The IgG antibodies were present in 11 (17.5%) females who had an experience to clean the cats litter whereas it was absent in 18 (13.8%) females who had an experience to clean the cats litter.
Figure 6 shows the frequency of IgM positivity in pregnant women having history of cleaning cats litter. There was no statistically significant association between IgM antibodies and females who had an experience to clean the cats litter (p-value >0.999). The IgM antibodies were present in 1 (11.1%) females who had an experience to clean the cats litter whereas it was absent in 28 (15.2%) females who had an experience to clean the cats litter.
Table 9 shows the frequency of IgG positivity in pregnant women having history of working or exposure to soil. There was no statistically significant association between IgG antibodies and working with soil (p-value 0.076). The IgG antibodies were present in 20 (33.3%) females who worked with soil whereas IgG antibodies was absent in 27 (21.1%) females who worked with soil.
Table 10 shows the frequency of IgM positivity in pregnant women having history of working or exposure to soil. There was statistically significant association between IgM antibodies and working with soil (p-value 0.008). The IgM antibodies were present in 6 (66.7%) females who worked with soil whereas IgM antibodies were absent in 39 (22.8%) females who worked with soil. Therefore, working with soil can be a risk factor for pregnant women.
Table 11 shows the association of IgG positivity in pregnant women having history of eating raw/uncooked meat. There was statistically significant association between IgG antibodies and eating raw/uncooked meat (p-value <0.001). The IgG antibodies were present in 36 (59.6%) females who ate raw/uncooked meat whereas it was absent in 38 (29.3%) females who ate raw/uncooked meat.
Table 12 shows the association of IgM positivity in pregnant women having history of eating raw/uncooked meat. There was no statistically significant association between IgM antibodies and eating raw/uncooked meat (p-value 0.092). The IgM antibodies were present in 6 (66.7%) females who ate raw/uncooked meat whereas it was absent in 64 (37.4%) females who ate raw/uncooked meat.
Table 13 shows the frequency of IgG positivity in pregnant women with history of eating unwashed fruits and vegetables. IgG antibodies were significantly associated with eating raw/unwashed vegetable/fruits (p-value <0.001). The IgG antibodies were present in 50 (82.5%) females who ate raw/unwashed vegetable/fruits whereas it was absent in 67 (51.2%) females who ate raw/unwashed vegetable/fruits.
Table 14 shows the frequency of IgM positivity in pregnant women with history of eating unwashed fruits and vegetables. IgM antibodies were not significantly associated with eating raw/unwashed vegetable/fruits (p-value 0.157). The IgM antibodies were present in 8 (88.9%) females who ate raw/unwashed vegetable/fruits whereas it was absent in 102 (59.6%) females who ate raw/unwashed vegetable/fruits. Generally percentage of positive antibodies was higher so eating raw vegetables and unwashed fruits can be a risk factor for pregnant women.
Table 15 shows the association of IgG positivity in pregnant women according to source of drinking water. IgG antibodies were significantly associated with source of drinking water (p-value <0.001).
Table 16 shows the association of IgM positivity in pregnant women according to source of drinking water. IgM antibodies were not significantly associated with source of drinking water (p-value 0.072).
Table 17 shows the frequency of IgG positivity in pregnant women according to washing of hands before eating. There was no significant association between IgG antibodies and washing of hands before eating (p-value >0.999).
Table 18 shows the frequency of IgM positivity in pregnant women according to washing of hands before eating. There was no statistically significant association between IgM antibodies and washing of hands before eating (p-value >0.999). The IgM antibodies were present in 9 (100.0%) females who washed their hands before eating meals and IgM antibodies were absent in 178 (98.2%) females who washed their hands before eating meals.
Table 19 shows the association of IgG positivity in pregnant women with use of clean kitchen knives and cutting boards. There was no statistically significant association between IgG antibodies and use of clean kitchen utensils before every use (p-value 0.523). The IgG antibodies were present in 55 (91.2%) females who washed kitchen utensils before every use and IgG antibodies were also absent in 123 (94.3%) females who washed kitchen utensils before every use.
Table 20 shows the association of IgM positivity in pregnant women with use of clean kitchen knives and cutting boards. There was no statistically significant association between IgM antibodies and use of clean kitchen utensils before every use (p-value 0.113). The IgM antibodies were present in 7 (77.7%) females who washed kitchen utensils before every use and IgM antibodies were absent in 161 (94.2%) females who washed kitchen utensils before every use.
Figure 1: Showing frequency of IgG in pregnant females
( n = 190)
Figure 2: Showing frequency of IgM in pregnant female
( n = 190)
Table 1: Comparison of age, gestational age and gravida between IgG positive and negative groups ( n = 190)
Groups |
n |
Age |
Gestational Age |
Gravida |
Mean ± S.D |
Mean ± S.D |
Mean ± S.D |
||
IgG Positive |
60 |
28.19 ± 4.70 |
9.28 ± 3.14 |
3.26 ± 1.84 |
IgG Negative |
130 |
25.92 ± 5.00 |
9.36 ± 3.20 |
2.63 ±1.85 |
p-value |
0.005** |
0.753 |
0.012** |
**Statistically significant.
Table 2: Comparison of age, gestational age and gravida between IgM positive and negative groups ( n = 190)
Groups |
n |
Age |
Gestational Age |
Gravida |
Mean ± S.D |
Mean ± S.D |
Mean ± S.D |
||
IgM Positive |
9 |
29.44 ± 5.20 |
9.33 ± 3.74 |
2.56 ± 1.51 |
IgM Negative |
181 |
26.49 ± 4.97 |
9.33 ± 3.16 |
2.84 ±1.88 |
p-value |
0.074* |
0.792* |
0.806* |
*Not Statistically significant
Table 3: IgG positivity in pregnant women according to family income ( n = 190)
Family Income |
IgG Positive |
IgG Negative |
≤ 15,000 n=17 |
3 (5.0%) |
14 (10.8%) |
15,000 – 40,000 n=117 |
38 (63.3%) |
79 (60.8%) |
> 40,000 n=56 |
19 (31.7%) |
37 (28.5%) |
p-value |
< 0.001* |
< 0.001* |
* Statistically significant.
Table 4: IgM positivity in pregnant women according to family Income ( n = 190)
Family Income |
IgM Positive |
IgM Negative |
≤ 15,000 n=17 |
3 (33.30%) |
14 (7.60%) |
15,000 – 40,000 n=117 |
4 (44.40%) |
113 (62.60%) |
> 40,000 n=56 |
2 (22.20%) |
54 (29.80%) |
p-value 0.058. Not Significant.
Table 5: Frequency of IgG positivity in pregnant women with history of abortion ( n = 190)
IgG |
History of Abortion |
|
Yes |
No |
|
Positive (n = 60) |
20(33.30%) |
40(66.70%) |
Negative (n= 130) |
21(16.30%) |
109(83.70%) |
p-value 0.01. Statistically significant.
Table 6: Frequency of IgM positivity in pregnant women with history of abortion ( n = 190)
IgM |
History of abortion |
|
No |
Yes |
|
Positive (n = 9) |
7(77.80%) |
2(22.20%) |
Negative (n= 181) |
142(78.40%) |
39(21.60%) |
p-value 0.967. Not significant.
Figure 3: Association of IgG positivity in pregnant women according to complications in previous pregnancies ( n = 190)
.
Figure 4: Association of IgM positivity in pregnant women according to complications in previous pregnancies ( n = 190)
Table 7: Frequency of IgG positivity in pregnant women having history of contact with cat ( n = 190)
IgG |
Contact with cat |
|
No |
Yes |
|
Positive (n = 60) |
29(49.10%) |
31(50.90%) |
Negative (n= 130) |
104(79.70%) |
26(20.30%) |
p- value <0.01. Statistically significant.
Table 8: Frequency of IgM positivity in pregnant women having history of contact with cat ( n = 190)
IgM |
Contact with cat |
|
No |
Yes |
|
Positive (n = 9) |
5(55.60%) |
4(44.40%) |
Negative (n= 181) |
128(70.80%) |
53(29.20%) |
p-value 0.455. Not significant.
Figure 5: Frequency of IgG positivity in pregnant women having history of cleaning cats litter ( n = 190)
Figure 6:Frequency of IgM positivity in pregnant women having history of cleaning cats litter ( n = 190)
Table 9: Frequency of IgG positivity in pregnant women having history of working or exposure to soil ( n = 190)
IgG |
Exposure or Working with soil |
|
No |
Yes |
|
Positive (n = 60) |
40(66.70%) |
20(33.30%) |
Negative (n= 130) |
103(75.00%) |
27(21.10%) |
p-value 0.076. Not significant.
Table 10: Frequency of IgM positivity in pregnant women having history of working or exposure to soil ( n = 190)
IgM |
Exposure or Working with soil |
|
No |
Yes |
|
Positive (n = 9) |
3(33.30%) |
6(66.70%) |
Negative (n= 181) |
140(77.20%) |
41(22.80%) |
p-value 0.008. Statistically significant.
Table 11: Association of IgG positivity in pregnant women having history of eating raw/uncooked meat ( n = 190)
IgG |
Eating raw/Uncooked meat |
|
No |
Yes |
|
Positive (n = 60) |
24(40.40%) |
36(59.60%) |
Negative (n= 130) |
92(70.70%) |
38(29.30%) |
p-value < 0.001. Statistically significant.
Table 12: Association of IgM positivity in pregnant women having history of eating raw/uncooked meat ( n = 190)
IgM |
Eating of raw/uncooked meat |
|
No |
Yes |
|
Positive (n = 9) |
3(33.30%) |
6(66.70%) |
Negative (n= 181) |
113(62.60%) |
68(37.40%) |
p-value 0.092. Not significant.
Table 13: Frequency of IgG positivity in pregnant women with history of eating unwashed fruits and vegetables ( n = 190)
IgG |
Eating unwashed/raw fruits/vegetables |
|
No |
Yes |
|
Positive (n = 60) |
10(17.50%) |
50(82.50%) |
Negative (n= 130) |
63(48.80%) |
67(51.20%) |
p-value <0.001. Statistically significant.
Table 14: Frequency of IgM positivity in pregnant women with history of eating unwashed fruits and vegetables ( n = 190)
IgM |
Eating of unwashed/raw fruits/vegetables |
|
No |
Yes |
|
Positive (n = 9) |
1(11.10%) |
8(88.90%) |
Negative (n= 181) |
73(40.40%) |
108(59.60%) |
p-value 0.157. Not significant.
Table 15: Association of IgG positivity in pregnant women according to source of drinking water ( n = 190)
IgG |
Source of drinking Water |
|
Tap water |
Filter water |
|
Positive (n = 60) |
40(66.70%) |
20(33.30%) |
Negative (n= 130) |
128(98.40%) |
2(1.60%) |
p-value <0.001. Statistically significant.
Table 16: Association of IgM positivity in pregnant women according to source of drinking water ( n = 190)
IgM |
Source of drinking water |
|
Tap water |
Filter water |
|
Positive (n = 9) |
6(66.70%) |
3(33.30%) |
Negative (n= 181) |
162(89.50%) |
19(10.50%) |
p-value 0.072. Not significant.
Table 17: Frequency of IgG positivity in pregnant women according to washing of hands before eating ( n = 190)
IgG |
Washing of hands before eating |
|
No |
Yes |
|
Positive (n = 60) |
1(1.80%) |
59(98.20%) |
Negative (n= 130) |
2(1.60%) |
128(98.40%) |
p-value >0.999. Not significant.
Table 18: Frequency of IgM positivity in pregnant women according to washing of hands before eating ( n = 190)
IgM |
Washing of hands before eating |
|
No |
Yes |
|
Positive (n = 9) |
0(0.00%) |
9(100.00%) |
Negative (n= 181) |
3(1.80%) |
178(98.20%) |
p-value > 0.999. Not significant.
Table 19: Association of IgG positivity in pregnant women with use of clean kitchen knives and cutting boards ( n = 190)
IgG |
Use of clean kitchen knives and cutting boards |
|
No |
Yes |
|
Positive (n = 60) |
5(8.80%) |
55(91.20%) |
Negative (n= 130) |
7(5.70%) |
123(94.30%) |
p-value 0.523. Not significant.
Table 20: Association of IgM positivity in pregnant women with use of clean kitchen knives and cutting boards ( n = 190)
IgM |
Use of clean kitchen knives and cutting boards |
|
No |
Yes |
|
Positive (n = 9) |
2(22.20%) |
7(77.80%) |
Negative (n= 181) |
10(5.80%) |
171(94.20%) |
p-value 0.113. Not significant.