Perinatal Outcome of Inadvertent Immunization with the Measles-Rubella Vaccine in Pregnant Mexican Women during the Campaign for the Eradication of Congenital Rubella in 2008


Objective: To investigate maternal and neonatal complications resulting from inadvertent immunization against rubella-measles during the first trimester of pregnancy. Methods: A prospective and descriptive study was carried out, including a total of 1,924 pregnant women, 175 (9.1%) of which were classified as non responding to infection by the rubella virus. They underwent clinical and ultrasonographic follow-up to dismiss maternal or fetal complications and complications at the time of delivery. The infant was checked to determine demographic, anthropometric, serological and clinical features at the time of birth. Results: No women had complications during the pregnancy, including exanthematic symptoms. 174/175 newborns were studied; one pregnancy was interrupted based on non-medical arguments. The findings in terms of the analyzed patients suggest a benign evolution after inadvertently immunizing the pregnant women, which support studies with similar results. No complications during the course of the pregnancy or phenotypic alterations of the infant at the time of birth are suggested.

Share and Cite:

R. Jesus, H. Ilse, G. Misael, V. Patricia, R. Vesta, C. Edith and C. Edith, "Perinatal Outcome of Inadvertent Immunization with the Measles-Rubella Vaccine in Pregnant Mexican Women during the Campaign for the Eradication of Congenital Rubella in 2008," World Journal of Vaccines, Vol. 1 No. 1, 2011, pp. 1-4. doi: 10.4236/wjv.2011.11001.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Centers for Disease Control & Prevention. Notice to Readers: Revised ACIP Recommendation for Avoiding Pregnancy After Receiving a Rubella-Containing Vaccine. MMWR 50 (No.49); 1117, 2001.
[2] F. T Cutts, “Lucha contra la rubéola y el síndrome de rubéola congénita (SRC) en los países en desarrollo,” Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 1997, pp.55-68.
[3] CDC, “Achievements in Public Health: Elimination of Rubella and Congenital Rubella Syndrome-United States 1969-2004,” MMWR, Vol. 54, No. 11, 2005, pp. 279-282.
[4] NM Gregg, “Congenital cataract following German measles in the mother,” Epidemiology and Infection Vol. 107, No.1, Aug., 1991, pp. 3-14.
[5] S. Sheppard, R.W. Smithells, A. Dickson and H. Holzel, “Rubella vaccination and pregnancy: preliminary report of a national survey,” Br Med J (Clin Res Ed), Vol. 292, No. 6522, 1986, p. 727.
[6] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Measles, mumps and rubella vaccine use and strategies for elimination of measles, rubella and congenital rubella syndrome and control of mumps. Recommendation of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices,” MMWR, Vol. 47, No. 8, 1998, pp. 1-57.
[7] Organización Mundial de la Salud, “Documento de posición de la OMS,” Vacuna contra la rubeola,
[8] SSA, “NOM-017-SSA2-1994, para la vigilancia epidemiológica,” Norma Oficial Mexicana, 1994.
[9] L. Dontigny, M. Arcenault and M. Martel, “Rubella in Pregnancy,” SOGC Clinical Practice Guidelines, 2008, pp. 153-154.
[10] G Enders, “Rubella Antibody Titers in Vaccinated and Nonvaccinated Women and Results of Vaccination during Pregnancy,” Reviews of Infectious Disease, Vol. 7, No. 1, 1985, pp. 103-107.
[11] Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, “Current Trends Rubella Vaccination during Pregnancy--United States,” MMWR, Vol. 38, No.17, 1971-1988, pp. 289-293.
[12] J. Banatvala, “Rubeola,” The Lancet, 2004, pp. 1-10.
[13] E. Miller, J. E. Cradock-Watson and T. H. Pollock, “Consequences of confirmed maternal rubella at successive stages of pregnancy,” Lancet, Vol. 2, 1982, pp. 781-784.
[14] R. Hamkar and S. Jalilvand, “Inadvertent rubella vaccination of pregnant women: Evaluation of possible transplacental infection with rubella vaccine,” Vaccine, Vol. 24, No. 17, 2006, pp. 3558-3563.
[15] Morice A, Ulloa-Gutierrez R; ávila-Agüero M. Congenital Rubella Syndrome: Progress and Future Challenges. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2009; 8(3): 323-331.
[16] Secretaria de Salud (México), “Anuarios de morbilidad,” 1984-2008.
[17] Díaz-Ortega JL, Meneses-Reyes CD, Palacios-Martínez M. Incidencia y patrones de transmisión de rubeola en México. Salud Pública Mex 2007; 49: 337-344.
[18] G. Gutiérrez, O. Mu?oz, R. Tapia, M. E. Bustamante, M. T. álvarez and J. P. Guiscafré, et al, “Seroepidemiología de la rubéola en mujeres mexicanas. Encuesta Nacional Probabilística,” Salud Publica Mex, Vol. 32, 1990, pp. 623-631.
[19] J. S. Remington, J. O. Klein, C. B. Wilson and C. J. Beker, “Infectious diseases of the fetus and newborn infant,” Elseviers Saunders, 2006, Vol. 6, pp. 464-73.

Copyright © 2022 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.