NO, can't cause abortion in human

No, it does not cause abortion in humans.

Clinical manifestation of the disease differs between animals and humans.  In animals, Brucella has a specific tropism for the reproductive system, often leading to abortion in the last trimester of gestation following extensive bacterial colonization of the placenta. Transmission between animals is facilitated by the presence of high numbers of bacteria in aborted fetuses, reproductive tract discharges, and milk.  In addition to being clinically affected, animals can also be carriers and continuously shed bacteria for many years. Clinical manifestation, of the disease, in humans, can be misleading and is often characterized by a non-specific flu-like syndrome, with recurrent episodes of undulant fever.

No.Brucellaisattractedtosugareerythritolfound only in the placenta of domestic animal 

Hi, what species of Brucella?

No.. I have not net a single though I manged many pregnant women Acute Bacteremic brucellosis.. 

If any one encounter a case then it happens because of effect of high fever rather than direct brucellosis effect.. 

I agree with Ashenafi Beyi's good comment. The clinical manifestation of the disease differs between animals and humans. Regardless of Brucella species.

This is much more complicated than just “no.” It doesn’t cause the classical abortion that we know as the hallmark sign in animals. This is due to the pathogenesis of the bacterium and its affinity to erythritol (a carbon source and growth factor for most Brucellae). Only cattle, bison, elk, goats, sheep and pigs have erythritol in the reproductive tract. This is a chemotaxis signal to intracellular Brucella that causes them to translocate from regional lymph nodes to the reproductive tract, signifying pregnancy. This invasion of the reproductive tract is what leads to abortion in naïve individuals.

However, human infections with Brucella have been noted in several publications to cause an increased risk of intrauterine fetal death and spontaneous abortions. I will note this is controversial. Below are some publications that detail such for your pursuing.  It is thought to be due to maternal toxemia, disseminated intravascular coagulation, or bacteremia. Also, another association has been preterm labor in mothers with high titers to Brucella. Ultimately you have some studies that fall on both sides. However, from an epidemiologic prospective, there are some very good studies showing an association.

References:

Erythritol:

Petersen E, Rajashekara G, Sanakkayala N, Eskra L, Harms J, Splitter G. Erythritol triggers expression of virulence traits in Brucella melitensis. Microbes and infection. 2013;15(6):440-9.

Human Pregnancy:

Hackmon R, Bar-David J, Bashiri A, Mazor M. Brucellosis in pregnancy. Harefuah. 1998;135(1-2):3-7, 88.

Elshamy M, Ahmed AI. The effects of maternal brucellosis on pregnancy outcome. The Journal of Infection in Developing Countries. 2008;2(03):230-4.

Seoud M, Saade G, Awar G, Uwaydah M. Brucellosis in pregnancy. The Journal of reproductive medicine. 1991;36(6):441-5.

Gulsun S, Aslan S, Satici O, Gul T. Brucellosis in pregnancy. Tropical doctor. 2011;41(2):82-4.

Ghaznavi-Rad E, Zarinfar N. Brucellosis in pregnancy. Arak Medical University Journal. 2012;14(7):100-8.

I agree with a lot of aswer. and of course in general "no".

But in any cases Brucella also in humans  depend to eco-pathological impact, domestic and Wildlife interactions.

Moreover among humans, domestic  and Wildlife and still to verify  stakeholders and risk analysis  concerning compsumption of milk and milk products.

Dear doctor Al-Hamadany, the presence of abortion in brucellosis is mainly correlated  with the presence of erythritol; cattle, pigs, goats and sheeps have that substance in his reproductive system and joints, so, abortion is commonly present in the last third of pregnancy, we can also see orchitis and arthritis. On the contrary, horses and human beings doesn't have erythritol, that's why abortion is uncommon, although it could happens as a general and febrile disease, as any other

Brucella is incapable of causing abortions in humans. It is important to note that the ecological niche of this bacterium is in wildlife affecting various mammals and in which the human being is infected accidentally.

B. abotis is causative agent in human beings but very rare. Unpasteurised milk is main source of this. 

Hi, ya i think that , see this links

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5010707/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20492399

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21980785

Thanks colleagues, yes it may cause abortion in human very rare due to high fever resultant, but these bacteria can not be considered as the main cause for abortion in human.

thanks for all of you dear scientists...I can conclude that Brucella  regardless species can not be considered as the main causative factor for abortion in human..!

Previous research confirms that the cause of abortion in pregnant women is the high temperature when brucellosis but newly isolated Brucella from infected placenta, I isolated Brucellea from placenta of aborted women in my PhD thesis and determine the relation between progesterone hormone and infection with Brucellea by immunohistochemistry assay

This my research about placentitis in aborted women that infected with Brucellea

Thank you colleagues for your interest.