51
|
Boulet SL, Kawwass JF, Crawford S, Davies MJ, Kissin DM. Preterm Birth and Small Size for Gestational Age in Singleton, In Vitro Fertilization Births Using Donor Oocytes. Am J Epidemiol 2018. [PMID: 29534148 DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwy051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
We used 2006-2015 US National Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance System data to compare preterm birth and fetal growth for liveborn singletons (24-42 weeks' gestation) following in vitro fertilization with donor versus autologous oocytes. Using binary and multinomial logistic regression, we computed adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for associations between use of donor oocytes and preterm delivery, being small for gestational age (SGA), and being large for gestational age (LGA), stratified by fresh and thawed embryo status and accounting for maternal characteristics and year of birth. There were 204,855 singleton births from fresh embryo transfers and 106,077 from thawed embryo transfers. Among fresh embryo transfers, donor oocyte births had higher odds of being preterm (adjusted odd ratio (aOR) = 1.32, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.27, 1.38) or LGA (aOR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.21, 1.33) but lower odds of being SGA (aOR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.77, 0.85). Among thawed embryo transfers, donor oocyte births had higher odds of being preterm (aOR = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.48, 1.65) or SGA (aOR = 1.22, 95% CI: 1.14, 1.31) but lower odds of being LGA (aOR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.82, 0.92). Use of donor oocytes was associated with increased odds of preterm delivery irrespective of embryo status; odds of being SGA were increased for donor versus autologous oocyte births among thawed embryo transfers only.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sheree L Boulet
- Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Jennifer F Kawwass
- Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Sara Crawford
- Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Michael J Davies
- Robinson Research Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Dmitry M Kissin
- Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| |
Collapse
|
52
|
Fang J, Zhu L, Li D, Xu Z, Yan G, Sun H, Zhang N, Chen L. Effect of embryo and blastocyst transfer on the birthweight of live-born singletons from FET cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet 2018; 35:1905-1910. [PMID: 30030709 DOI: 10.1007/s10815-018-1257-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2018] [Accepted: 07/02/2018] [Indexed: 10/28/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the effect of culture duration (embryo (day 3) transfer vs. blastocyst (day 5-6) transfer) on the birthweight of singletons from frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles. METHODS A total of 1092 singletons were analyzed in this retrospective study. The distribution of large for gestational age (LGA) infants, the mean birthweight, and z scores of singletons were compared between the day 3 and day 5-6 transfer groups. Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate the relationships between confounding factors and singleton birthweight. RESULTS The proportion of LGA infants significantly increased with BMI (BMI < 20, 12.8%; 20 ≤ BMI ≤ 25, 23.2%; BMI > 25, 32.3%; P < 0.0001). However, the proportions of small for gestational age (SGA) and LGA infants were not significantly different between day 3 and day 5-6 transfers. The absolute mean birthweight of singletons was not significantly different between day 3 transfer (3422 ± 547 g) and day 5-6 transfer (3433 ± 559 g; P = 0.732). The z scores (calculated from a reference population) of singletons were also not significantly different between the two groups (0.499 vs. 0.533, P = 0.625). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that maternal BMI, gestational age, and infant gender had significant effects on singleton birthweight, while culture duration (P = 0.731) did not significantly affect singleton birthweight. CONCLUSIONS In vitro culture duration did not affect the birthweight of newborns resulting from day 3 to day 5-6 transfers in FET cycles.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Junshun Fang
- Reproductive Medical Center, Drum Tower Hospital Affiliated with Nanjing University Medical College, Road 321#, Zhongshan, 210008, Nanjing, People's Republic of China
| | - Lihua Zhu
- Reproductive Medical Center, Drum Tower Hospital Affiliated with Nanjing University Medical College, Road 321#, Zhongshan, 210008, Nanjing, People's Republic of China
| | - Dong Li
- Reproductive Medical Center, Drum Tower Hospital Affiliated with Nanjing University Medical College, Road 321#, Zhongshan, 210008, Nanjing, People's Republic of China
| | - Zhipeng Xu
- Reproductive Medical Center, Drum Tower Hospital Affiliated with Nanjing University Medical College, Road 321#, Zhongshan, 210008, Nanjing, People's Republic of China
| | - Guijun Yan
- Reproductive Medical Center, Drum Tower Hospital Affiliated with Nanjing University Medical College, Road 321#, Zhongshan, 210008, Nanjing, People's Republic of China
| | - Haixiang Sun
- Reproductive Medical Center, Drum Tower Hospital Affiliated with Nanjing University Medical College, Road 321#, Zhongshan, 210008, Nanjing, People's Republic of China
| | - Ningyuan Zhang
- Reproductive Medical Center, Drum Tower Hospital Affiliated with Nanjing University Medical College, Road 321#, Zhongshan, 210008, Nanjing, People's Republic of China.
| | - Linjun Chen
- Reproductive Medical Center, Drum Tower Hospital Affiliated with Nanjing University Medical College, Road 321#, Zhongshan, 210008, Nanjing, People's Republic of China.
| |
Collapse
|
53
|
De Geyter C, Calhaz-Jorge C, Kupka MS, Wyns C, Mocanu E, Motrenko T, Scaravelli G, Smeenk J, Vidakovic S, Goossens V, Gliozheni O, Strohmer H, Obruca, Kreuz-Kinderwunschzentrum SPG, Petrovskaya E, Tishkevich O, Wyns C, Bogaerts K, Balic D, Sibincic S, Antonova I, Vrcic H, Ljiljak D, Pelekanos M, Rezabek K, Markova J, Lemmen J, Sõritsa D, Gissler M, Tiitinen A, Royere D, Tandler—Schneider A, Kimmel M, Antsaklis AJ, Loutradis D, Urbancsek J, Kosztolanyi G, Bjorgvinsson H, Mocanu E, Scaravelli G, de Luca R, Lokshin V, Ravil V, Magomedova V, Gudleviciene Z, Belo lopes G, Petanovski Z, Calleja-Agius J, Xuereb J, Moshin V, Simic TM, Vukicevic D, Romundstad LB, Janicka A, Calhaz-Jorge C, Laranjeira AR, Rugescu I, Doroftei B, Korsak V, Radunovic N, Tabs N, Virant-Klun I, Saiz IC, Mondéjar FP, Bergh C, Weder M, De Geyter C, Smeenk JMJ, Gryshchenko M, Baranowski R. ART in Europe, 2014: results generated from European registries by ESHRE†. Hum Reprod 2018; 33:1586-1601. [DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dey242] [Citation(s) in RCA: 314] [Impact Index Per Article: 52.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2018] [Accepted: 06/18/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Ch De Geyter
- Institute of Reproductive Medicine and Gynecological Endocrinology (RME), Vogesenstrasse 134, Basel, Switzerland
- ESHRE Central Office, Meerstraat 60, Grimbergen, Belgium
| | - C Calhaz-Jorge
- CNPMA, assembleia da Republica, Palacio de Sao Bento, Lisboa, Portugal
| | - M S Kupka
- Gynaekologicum Hamburg, Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Altonaer Strasse 59, Hamburg, Germany
| | - C Wyns
- Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain, Av. Hippocrate, 10, Brussels, Belgium
| | - E Mocanu
- Human Assisted Reproduction Ireland Rotunda Hospital, HARI Unit, Master's House, Parnell Square, 1 Dublin, Ireland
| | - T Motrenko
- Medical Centre Cetinje, Human Reproduction Department, Vuka Micunovica 4, Cetinje, Montenegro
| | - G Scaravelli
- Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Registro Nazionale della Procreazione Medicalmente Assistita, CNESPS, Viale Regina Elena, 299, Roma, Italy
| | - J Smeenk
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, St Elisabeth Hospital Tilburg, Hilv, The Netherlands
| | - S Vidakovic
- Institute for Obstetrics and Gynecology, Clinical Center Serbia ‘GAK’, Visegradska 26, Belgrade, Serbia
| | - V Goossens
- ESHRE Central Office, Meerstraat 60, Grimbergen, Belgium
| | - Orion Gliozheni
- University Hospital for Obst&Gynecology, Departement of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Bul.B.Curri, Tirana, Albania. Tel: +355-4-222-3632; Fax: +355-4-225-7688; Mobile: +355-682029313. E-mail:
| | - Heinz Strohmer
- Lazarettgasse 16-18, 1090 Wien, Austria. Tel: +43-40-111-1400; Fax: +43-40-111-1401. E-mail:
| | - Obruca
- Lazarettgasse 16-18, 1090 Wien, Austria. Tel: +43-40-111-1400; Fax: +43-40-111-1401. E-mail:
| | | | | | - Oleg Tishkevich
- Centre For Assisted Reproduction ‘Embryo’ Belivpul, Filimonova Str. 53, 220114 Minsk, Belarus. Tel: +375-29-622-2722; Fax: +375-17-237-6404; Mobile: +375-296222722; E-mail:
| | - Christine Wyns
- Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain, Av. Hippocrate, 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium. Tel. +32-27-64-6576; Fax: +32-27-64-9050; E-mail:
| | - Kris Bogaerts
- I-Biostat, Kapucijnenvoer 35 bus 7001, 3000 Leuven, Belgium. Tel: +32-016-33-6890; Fax: +32-016-33-7015. E-mail:
| | - Devleta Balic
- Zavod za humanu reprodukciju ‘Dr Balic’, Kojsino 25, 75000 Tuzla, Bosnia—Herzegovina. Tel: +387-35-26-0650; Mobile: +387-61140222; E-mail:
| | - Sanja Sibincic
- Health Centre Medico-S, Jevrejska 58/A, 78000 Banja Luka, Bosnia—Herzegovina. Tel: +387-51-232-100; Mobile: +387-65515942; E-mail:
| | - Irena Antonova
- ESHRE certified clinical embryologist (2011), Ob/Gyn Hospital Dr Shechterev, 25-31, Hristo Blagoev Strasse, 1330 Sofia, Bulgaria. Tel: +359-88-712-7651; E-mail:
| | - Hrvoje Vrcic
- Zagreb University Medical School, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Petrova 13, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia. Tel: +385-14-60-4646; Fax: +385-14-63-3512; E-mail:
| | - Dejan Ljiljak
- Clinical Hospital Centre ‘Sestre milosrd’, Department for Biology of Human Reproduction, Ob/Gyn Clinic, Vinogradska c. 29, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia. Tel: +385-378-7597; Fax: +385-13-76-8272; Mobile: +385-378-7125; E-mail:
| | - Michael Pelekanos
- Fertility Centre Aceso, 1, Pavlou Nirvana str., 3021 Limassol, Cyprus. Tel: +357-99-64-5333; Fax: +357-25-82-4477; Mobile +30-6944248433; E-mail:
| | - Karel Rezabek
- Medical Faculty, University Hopsital, CAR-Assisited Reproduction Centre, Gyn/Ob departement, Apolinarska 18, 12000 Prague, Czech Republic. Tel: +420-22-496-7479; Fax: +420-22-492-2545; Mobile: +420-724685276; E-mail:
| | - Jitka Markova
- Institute of Health Information and Statistics of the Czech Republic, Palackeho namesti 4, 12801 Prague, Czech Republic. Tel: +420-22-497-2832; Mobile: +420-72-182-7532; E-mail:
| | - Josephine Lemmen
- Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark. Tel: +45-35-450-934; Fax: +45-35-454-945; Mobile: +45-30285712; E-mail:
| | - Deniss Sõritsa
- Tartu University Hospital and Elitre Clinic, Tartu, Estonia. Tel: +372-740-9930; Fax: +372-740-9931; E-mail:
| | - Mika Gissler
- THL National Institute for Health and Welfare, PO Box 30, 00271 Helsinki, Finland. Tel: +385-29-524-7279; E-mail:
| | - Aila Tiitinen
- Helsinki University Central Hospital, Dept. of Ob/Gyn, Haartmaninkatu, 2, PO Box 140, 00029 HUS—Helsinki, Finland. Tel: + 358-50-427-1217; E-mail:
| | - Dominique Royere
- Agence de la Biomédecine, 1 Av du stade de France, 93212 Saint-Denis La Plaine Cedex, France.Tel.: +33-15-593-6555; Fax: +33-15-593-6561; E-mail:
| | - Andreas Tandler—Schneider
- Fertility Centre Berlin; Spandauer damm 130; 14050 Berlin; Germany. Tel: +49-30-23-320-8110; Fax: +49-30-23-320-8119; E-mail:
| | - Markus Kimmel
- D.I.R. Geschäftsstelle, Torstrasse 140, D-10119 Berlin, Germany. Tel: +49-303-980-0743; E-mail:
| | - Aris J Antsaklis
- Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Athens, President Hellenic Authority of Assisted Human Reproduction. Tel: +30-694-429-9699; E-mail:
| | - Dimitris Loutradis
- Athens Medical School, 1st Department of OB/GYN, 62, Sirinon Street, 17561 P. Faliro, Athens, Greece. Tel: +30-19-83-3576; Fax: +30-19-88-3834; Mobile: +30-693-242-1747; E-mail:
| | - Janos Urbancsek
- Semmelweis University, 1st Dept. of Ob/Gyn, Baross utca 27, 1088 Budapest, Hungary. Tel: +36-12-66-0115; Fax: +36-12-66-0115; E-mail:
| | - G Kosztolanyi
- University of Pecs, Dept. of Medical Genetics and Child Development, Jozsef A.u.7., 7623 Pecs, Hungary. Tel: +36-72-53-5977; Fax: +36-72-53-5972; E-mail:
| | - Hilmar Bjorgvinsson
- Art Medica, Baejarlind 12, 201 Kopavogur, Iceland. Tel: +354-515-8100; Fax: +354-515-8103; E-mail:
| | - Edgar Mocanu
- Human Assisted Reproduction Ireland Rotunda Hospital, HARI Unit, Master’s House, Parnell Square, 1 Dublin, Ireland. Tel: +353-18-07-2732; Mobile: +353-86-81-8839; Fax: +353-18-72-7831; E-mail:
| | - Giulia Scaravelli
- Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Registro Nazionale della Procreazione Medicalmente Assistita, CNESPS, Viale Regina Elena, 299, 00161 Roma. Tel: +39-49-90-4050; Fax: +39-49-90-4324; E-mail:
| | - Roberto de Luca
- Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Registro Nazionale della Procreazione Medicalmente Assistita, CNESPS, Viale Regina Elena, 299, 00161 Roma. Tel: +39-064-990-4320; E-mail:
| | - Vyacheslav Lokshin
- The Urban Centre of Human Reproduction, Tole Be Street 99, 50012 Almaty, Kazakhstan. Tel: +7-727-234-3434; Fax: +7-727-264-6615; Mobile: +7-7017558209; E-mail:
| | - Valiyev Ravil
- The Scientific Centre for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Dostyk street 125, 050020 Almaty, Kazakhstan. Tel: +7-727-300-4530; Fax: +7-727-300-4529; Mobile: +7-7772258189; E-mail:
| | - Valeria Magomedova
- Jusu Arsti Private Clinic, Apuzes 14, 1046 Riga, Latvia. Tel: +371-67-87-0029; E-mail:
| | - Zivile Gudleviciene
- Baltic American Clinic, IVF Laboratory, Nemencines rd 54 A, 10103 Vilnius, Lithuania. Tel: + 370-52-34-2020; Mobile: +370-68682417; E-mail:
| | - Giedre Belo lopes
- Northway Medical Centre, S. Žukausko g. 19, Vilnius 08234, Lithuania. Tel: + 370-529-8290; E-mail:
| | - Zoranco Petanovski
- Re-medika Hospital; Jane dandaniski 87/1/4, 1000 Skopje, Macedonia. Tel: +389-23-07-3335; Mobile: +389-72443114; E-mail:
| | - Jean Calleja-Agius
- University of Malta, 12, Mon Nid, Gianni Faure Street, TXN2421 Tarxien, Malta. Tel: +356-21-69-3041; Mobile: +356-99-55-3653; E-mail:
| | - Josephine Xuereb
- Mater Dei Hospital Malta, Apt 1 Hampton Place, BKR 104 B’Kara, Malta. Tel: +356-99-99-2382; E-mail:
| | - Veaceslav Moshin
- Medical Director at Repromed Moldova, Centre of Mother @ Child protection, State Medical and Pharmaceutical University ‘N.Testemitanu’, Bd. Cuza Voda 29/1, Chisinau, Republic of Moldova. Tel: +373-22-26-3855; Mobile: +373-69724433; E-mail:
| | - Tatjana Motrenko Simic
- Medical Centre Cetinje, Human Reproduction Departement, Vuka Micunovica 4, 81310 Cetinje, Montenegro. Tel: +382-41-23-2690; Fax: +382-41-23-1212; Mobile: +382-69-05-2331; E-mail:
| | - Dragana Vukicevic
- Hospital ‘Danilo I’, Humana reprodukcija, Vuka Micunovica bb, 86000 Cetinje, Montenegro. Tel: +382-67-55-1371; E-mail:
| | - Liv Bente Romundstad
- St. Olavs Hospital, Postboks 3250 Sluppen, Olav Kyrres gt.17, 7006 Trondheim, Norway. Tel: +47-73-86-8000; Fax: +47-73-86-7602; Mobile: +47-90-55-0207; E-mail: ,
| | - Anna Janicka
- VitroLive, Kasprzaka 2 A, 71-074 Szczecin, Poland. Tel: +48-69-167-6305; E-mail:
| | - Carlos Calhaz-Jorge
- CNPMA, assembleia da Republica, Palacio de Sao Bento, 1249-068 Lisboa, Portugal. Tel: +351-21-391-9303; Fax: +351-21-391-7502; E-mail:
| | - Ana Rita Laranjeira
- CNPMA, Assembleia da Republica, Palaio de Sao Bento 1249-068 Lisboa, Portugal. Tel: +351-21-391-9303; Fax: +351-21-391-7502; E-mail:
| | - Ioana Rugescu
- Gen Secretary of AER Embryologist association and Representative for Human Reproduction Romanian Society. Tel: +40-74-450-0267; E-mail:
| | - Bogdan Doroftei
- Univ. of Medicine and Pharmacy Iasi; Teaching Hospital Obgyn ‘Cuza Voda’; Cuza Voda Str. 34; 700038 Iasi; Romania. Tel: + 40-23-221-3000/int. 176; Mobile: +40-744515297; E-mail: ;
| | - Vladislav Korsak
- International Centre for Reproductive Medicine, General Director, Liniya 11, Building 18B, Vasilievsky Island, 199034 St-Petersburg, Russia C.I.S. Tel: +7-812-328-2251; Fax: +7-812-327-1950; Mobile: +7-921-965-1977; E-mail:
| | - Nebosja Radunovic
- Institute for Obstetrics and Gynecology, Visegradska 26, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia. Tel: +38-111-361-5592; Fax: +38-111-361-5603; Mobile: +381-63200204; E-mail:
| | - Nada Tabs
- Klinika za ginekologiju i akuserstvo, Klinicki centar Vojvodine, Branimira Cosica 37, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia. Mobile: +381-63508185; E-mail:
| | - Irma Virant-Klun
- University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Departement of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Slajmerjeva 3, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia. Tel: +386-1-522-6013; Fax: +386-1-431-4355; Mobile:+386-31625774; E-mail:
| | - Irene Cuevas Saiz
- Hospital General de Alicante, Infertility Dept., Av Pintor Baeza, 12, 03010 Valencia, Spain;. Tel: +34-96-197-2000; Fax: +34-91-799-4407; Mobile +34-677245650; E-mail:
| | - Fernando Prados Mondéjar
- Hospital de Madrid-Montepríncipe, HM Fertility Centre Monteprincipe, C/Montepríncipe 25, 28660 Boadilla del Monte, Spain. Tel: +34-91-708-9931; Mobile +34-646737237; E-mail:
| | - Christina Bergh
- Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Bla Straket 6, 413 45 Göteborg, Sweden. Tel: +46-31-342-1000, +46-73-688-9325; Fax: +46-31-41-8717; Mobile +46-736889325; E-mail:
| | - Maya Weder
- Administration FIVNAT, Postfach 754, 3076 Worb, Switzerland. Tel: +41-031-819-7602; Fax + 41-031-819-8920; E-mail:
| | - Christian De Geyter
- University Women’s Hospital of Basel, Abteilungsleiter gyn. Endokrinologie und Reproduktionsmedizin, Spitalstrasse 21, 4031 Basel, Switzerland. Tel: +41-61-265-9315; Fax: + 41-61-265-9194; E-mail:
| | - Jesper M J Smeenk
- St Elisabeth Hospital Tilburg, Dept. of obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hilv, The Netherlands. Tel: +31-13-539-3108; Mobile: +31-622753853; E-mail:
| | - Mykola Gryshchenko
- IVF Clinic Implant Ltd, Academician V.I.Gryshchenko Clinic for Reproductive Medicine, 25 Karl Marx Str., 61000 Kharkiv, Ukraine. Tel: +380-57-12-4522; Fax: +380-57-70-507-0703; Mobile +380-57705070703; E-mail:
| | - Richard Baranowski
- Deputy Information Manager, Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA), Finsbury Tower, 103-105 Bunhill Row, London EC1 Y 8HF, UK. Tel: +44-020-7539-3329; Fax: +44-020-7377-1871; E-mail:
| | | |
Collapse
|
54
|
Zhang J, Du M, Li Z, Wang L, Hu J, Zhao B, Feng Y, Chen X, Sun L. Fresh versus frozen embryo transfer for full-term singleton birth: a retrospective cohort study. J Ovarian Res 2018; 11:59. [PMID: 30012201 PMCID: PMC6048709 DOI: 10.1186/s13048-018-0432-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2018] [Accepted: 07/05/2018] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Improvements in vitrification and frozen embryo transfer (FET) technologies have rapidly increased, and some evidence suggests that FET may increase pregnancy rates and lead to more favourable perinatal outcomes. However, the outcome of interest should be offspring safety. Therefore, the primary objective of our study was to investigate whether FET was preferable to fresh embryo transfer (ET) in terms of full-term neonatal birthweight and congenital malformations. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with no pregnancy-related complications who underwent first fresh ETs (n = 2059) or FETs (n = 2053), resulting in full-term singletons births. Outcome measures were neonatal birthweight, low birthweight (LBW), small-for-gestational age (SGA), large-for-gestational age (LGA), macrosomia and congenital malformations. Additionally, we used logistic regression to adjust for baseline characteristics (age, BMI, No. of embryos transferred and embryo stage) between the two groups. Results The mean neonatal birthweight was higher for singletons born after FET than for singletons born after fresh ET (3468.7 ± 475.3 vs. 3386.7 ± 448.1; p < 0.001). The frequencies of full-term singleton LBW and SGA after FET were significantly lower than those after fresh ET (1.7% vs. 3.0 and 4.4% vs. 6.7%, respectively), with adjusted rate ratios of 0.59 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.98; p = 0.026) and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.55 to 0.99; p = 0.041), respectively. FET resulted in higher frequencies of macrosomia and LGA (15.1% vs 10.2 and 22.8% vs. 17.5%, respectively) than fresh ET, with adjusted rate ratios of 1.43 (95% CI, 1.16 to 1.75; p = 0.001) and 1.26 (95% CI, 1.07 to 1.49; p = 0.007), respectively. Furthermore, the incidence of congenital malformations was not different between the two groups (1.2% vs. 0.9%), with a rate ratio of 0.288. Conclusions After the cycles with pregnancy-related complications were excluded and after adjustments for baseline characteristics, women undergoing FET were associated with a higher neonatal birthweight than women undergoing fresh ET cycles. Additionally, the FET protocol was associated with lower rates of LBW and SGA and higher rates of macrosomia and LGA than the fresh ET protocol. Meanwhile, no difference in the congenital malformation rate was evident between the two groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Junwei Zhang
- The Reproduction Center, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, 7 Kangfuqian Road, Zhengzhou, 450052, Henan, People's Republic of China
| | - Mingze Du
- The Reproduction Center, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, 7 Kangfuqian Road, Zhengzhou, 450052, Henan, People's Republic of China
| | - Zhe Li
- The Reproduction Center, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, 7 Kangfuqian Road, Zhengzhou, 450052, Henan, People's Republic of China
| | - Lulu Wang
- The Reproduction Center, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, 7 Kangfuqian Road, Zhengzhou, 450052, Henan, People's Republic of China
| | - Jijun Hu
- The Reproduction Center, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, 7 Kangfuqian Road, Zhengzhou, 450052, Henan, People's Republic of China
| | - Bei Zhao
- The Reproduction Center, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, 7 Kangfuqian Road, Zhengzhou, 450052, Henan, People's Republic of China
| | - Yingying Feng
- The Reproduction Center, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, 7 Kangfuqian Road, Zhengzhou, 450052, Henan, People's Republic of China
| | - Xiaolin Chen
- The Reproduction Center, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, 7 Kangfuqian Road, Zhengzhou, 450052, Henan, People's Republic of China
| | - Lijun Sun
- The Reproduction Center, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, 7 Kangfuqian Road, Zhengzhou, 450052, Henan, People's Republic of China.
| |
Collapse
|
55
|
Anav M, Ferrières-Hoa A, Gala A, Fournier A, Zaragoza S, Vintejoux E, Vincens C, Hamamah S. [Birth weight and frozen embryo transfer: State of the art]. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2018; 46:489-496. [PMID: 29680508 DOI: 10.1016/j.gofs.2018.03.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2017] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
The aim of this study was to update our acknowledgment if there is a link between assisted embryo cryopreservation and epigenetics in human? Animal studies have demonstrated epigenetics consequence and especially imprinting disorders due to in vitro culture. In human, it is important to note that after frozen embryo transfer birth weight is significantly increased by 81 to 250g. But these studies cannot identify the reasons of such difference. This review strongly suggests that embryo cryopreservation is responsible for birth weight variations but mechanisms not yet elucidated. Epigenetics is probably one of these but to date, none study is able to prove it. We have to be attentive on a possible link between assisted reproductive technology (ART) and epigenetics reprogrammation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Anav
- Département biologie de la reproduction/DPI, hôpital Arnaud-de-Villeneuve, 371, avenue du Doyen-Gaston-Giraud, 34295, Montpellier, France
| | - A Ferrières-Hoa
- Département biologie de la reproduction/DPI, hôpital Arnaud-de-Villeneuve, 371, avenue du Doyen-Gaston-Giraud, 34295, Montpellier, France
| | - A Gala
- Département biologie de la reproduction/DPI, hôpital Arnaud-de-Villeneuve, 371, avenue du Doyen-Gaston-Giraud, 34295, Montpellier, France
| | - A Fournier
- Département biologie de la reproduction/DPI, hôpital Arnaud-de-Villeneuve, 371, avenue du Doyen-Gaston-Giraud, 34295, Montpellier, France
| | - S Zaragoza
- Département biologie de la reproduction/DPI, hôpital Arnaud-de-Villeneuve, 371, avenue du Doyen-Gaston-Giraud, 34295, Montpellier, France
| | - E Vintejoux
- Service de gynécologie obstétrique, CHU Arnaud-de-Villeneuve, 371, avenue du Doyen-Gaston-Giraud, 34295, Montpellier, France
| | - C Vincens
- Service de gynécologie obstétrique, CHU Arnaud-de-Villeneuve, 371, avenue du Doyen-Gaston-Giraud, 34295, Montpellier, France
| | - S Hamamah
- Département biologie de la reproduction/DPI, hôpital Arnaud-de-Villeneuve, 371, avenue du Doyen-Gaston-Giraud, 34295, Montpellier, France.
| |
Collapse
|
56
|
Litzky JF, Boulet SL, Esfandiari N, Zhang Y, Kissin DM, Theiler RN, Marsit CJ. Effect of frozen/thawed embryo transfer on birthweight, macrosomia, and low birthweight rates in US singleton infants. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018; 218:433.e1-433.e10. [PMID: 29291410 PMCID: PMC5878119 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.12.223] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/02/2017] [Revised: 12/18/2017] [Accepted: 12/21/2017] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Singleton infants conceived using assisted reproductive technology have lower average birthweights than naturally conceived infants and are more likely to be born low birthweight (<2500 gr). Lower birthweights are associated with increased infant and child mortality and poor adult health outcomes, including cardiovascular disease, hypertension, and diabetes. Data from registry and single-center studies suggest that frozen/thawed embryo transfer may be associated with larger birthweights. To date, however, a nationwide, full-population study on United States infants born using frozen/thawed embryo transfer has not been reported. OBJECTIVES The objective of this study was to compare the effect of frozen/thawed vs fresh embryo transfer on birthweight outcomes for singleton, term infants conceived using in vitro fertilization in the United States between 2007 and 2014, including average birthweight and the risks of both macrosomia (>4000 g) and low birthweight (<2500 g). STUDY DESIGN We used data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance System to compare birthweight outcomes of live-born singleton, autologous oocyte, term (37-43 weeks) infants. Generalized linear models for all infants and stratified by infant sex were used to assess the relationship between frozen/thawed embryo transfer and birthweight, in grams. Infertility diagnosis, year of treatment, maternal age, maternal obstetric history, maternal and paternal race, and infant gestational age and sex were included in the models. Missing race data were imputed. The adjusted relative risks for macrosomia and low birthweight were evaluated using multivariable predicted marginal proportions from logistic regression models. RESULTS In total, 180,184 singleton, term infants were included, with 55,898 (31.02%) having been conceived from frozen/thawed embryos. Frozen/thawed embryo transfer was associated with, on average, a 142 g increase in birthweight compared with infants born after fresh embryo transfer (P < .001). An interaction between infant sex and embryo transfer type was significant (P < .0001), with frozen/thawed embryo transfer having a larger effect on male infants by 16 g. The adjusted risk of a macrosomic infant was 1.70 times higher (95% confidence interval, 1.64-1.76) following frozen/thawed embryo transfer than fresh embryo transfer. However, adjusted risk of low birthweight following frozen/thawed embryo transfer was 0.52 (95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.56) compared with fresh embryo transfer. CONCLUSION Frozen/thawed embryo transfer, in comparison with fresh embryo transfer, was associated with increased average birthweight in singleton, autologous oocytes, term infants born in the United States, with a significant interaction between frozen/thawed embryo transfer and infant sex. The risk of macrosomia following frozen/thawed embryo transfer was greater than that following fresh embryo transfer, but the risk of low birthweight among frozen/thawed embryo transfer infants was significantly decreased in comparison with fresh embryo transfer infants.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia F Litzky
- Department of Epidemiology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
| | - Sheree L Boulet
- Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA
| | - Navid Esfandiari
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
| | - Yujia Zhang
- Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA
| | - Dmitry M Kissin
- Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA
| | - Regan N Theiler
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
| | - Carmen J Marsit
- Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
| |
Collapse
|
57
|
Obstetric complications after frozen versus fresh embryo transfer in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: results from a randomized trial. Fertil Steril 2018; 109:324-329. [DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.10.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2017] [Revised: 09/27/2017] [Accepted: 10/12/2017] [Indexed: 01/27/2023]
|
58
|
Sha T, Yin X, Cheng W, Massey IY. Pregnancy-related complications and perinatal outcomes resulting from transfer of cryopreserved versus fresh embryos in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2018; 109:330-342.e9. [DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.10.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 102] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2017] [Revised: 09/24/2017] [Accepted: 10/12/2017] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
59
|
von Versen-Höynck F, Petersen JS, Chi YY, Liu J, Baker VL. First trimester pregnancy ultrasound findings as a function of method of conception in an infertile population. J Assist Reprod Genet 2018; 35:863-870. [PMID: 29380277 DOI: 10.1007/s10815-018-1120-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2017] [Accepted: 01/05/2018] [Indexed: 10/18/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this study was to determine whether first trimester ultrasound measurements of crown rump length (CRL) and gestational sac diameter (GSD) differ depending on the method of conception among infertile women. METHOD Infertile women, ages 21-50 years old, who conceived viable, singleton pregnancies via fresh embryo transfer (ET), frozen ET, non-in vitro fertilization (IVF) fertility treatment, or spontaneously were included in this observational cohort study at an academic fertility practice. Embryonic growth trajectories defined by the CRL and GSD at 6 and 8 weeks' gestation were analyzed and compared among the methods of conception. RESULTS Crown rump length at 6 weeks' gestation was smaller for conceptions achieved via fresh ET compared with frozen ET in a natural cycle (1.50 vs. 2.50 mm, p = 0.017). Crown rump length was smaller at 8 weeks' gestation in conceptions achieved via fresh ET compared to frozen ET in a programmed cycle (16.13 vs. 17.02 mm, p = 0.039). CONCLUSION Among infertile women, embryo growth may differ between fresh and frozen ET as early as 6 and 8 weeks' gestation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frauke von Versen-Höynck
- Stanford Medicine Fertility and Reproductive Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, 1195 West Fremont Avenue, Suite 1301, Sunnyvale, CA, 94087, USA. .,Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Lower Saxony, Germany.
| | - Jenna S Petersen
- Department of Internal Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd, Portland, OR, 97239, USA
| | - Yueh-Yun Chi
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Florida, 2004 Mowry Road, Gainesville, FL, 32611, USA
| | - Jing Liu
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Florida, 2004 Mowry Road, Gainesville, FL, 32611, USA
| | - Valerie L Baker
- Stanford Medicine Fertility and Reproductive Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, 1195 West Fremont Avenue, Suite 1301, Sunnyvale, CA, 94087, USA
| |
Collapse
|
60
|
Mackay DJ, Temple IK. Human imprinting disorders: Principles, practice, problems and progress. Eur J Med Genet 2017; 60:618-626. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmg.2017.08.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2017] [Revised: 08/02/2017] [Accepted: 08/11/2017] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
|
61
|
Luke B. Pregnancy and birth outcomes in couples with infertility with and without assisted reproductive technology: with an emphasis on US population-based studies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017; 217:270-281. [PMID: 28322775 PMCID: PMC9761478 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.03.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 138] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2016] [Revised: 02/26/2017] [Accepted: 03/13/2017] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
Infertility, defined as the inability to conceive within 1 year of unprotected intercourse, affects an estimated 80 million individuals worldwide, or 10-15% of couples of reproductive age. Assisted reproductive technology includes all infertility treatments to achieve conception; in vitro fertilization is the process by which an oocyte is fertilized by semen outside the body; non-in vitro fertilization assisted reproductive technology treatments include ovulation induction, artificial insemination, and intrauterine insemination. Use of assisted reproductive technology has risen steadily in the United States during the past 2 decades due to several reasons, including childbearing at older maternal ages and increasing insurance coverage. The number of in vitro fertilization cycles in the United States has nearly doubled from 2000 through 2013 and currently 1.7% of all live births in the United States are the result of this technology. Since the birth of the first child from in vitro fertilization >35 years ago, >5 million babies have been born from in vitro fertilization, half within the past 6 years. It is estimated that 1% of singletons, 19% of twins, and 25% of triplet or higher multiples are due to in vitro fertilization, and 4%, 21%, and 52%, respectively, are due to non-in vitro fertilization assisted reproductive technology. Higher plurality at birth results in a >10-fold increase in the risks for prematurity and low birthweight in twins vs singletons (adjusted odds ratio, 11.84; 95% confidence interval, 10.56-13.27 and adjusted odds ratio, 10.68; 95% confidence interval, 9.45-12.08, respectively). The use of donor oocytes is associated with increased risks for pregnancy-induced hypertension (adjusted odds ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-1.78) and prematurity (adjusted odds ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.83). The use of thawed embryos is associated with higher risks for pregnancy-induced hypertension (adjusted odds ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.57) and large-for-gestation birthweight (adjusted odds ratio, 1.74; 95% confidence interval, 1.45-2.08). Among singletons, in vitro fertilization is associated with increased risk of severe maternal morbidity compared with fertile deliveries (vaginal: adjusted odds ratio, 2.27; 95% confidence interval, 1.78-2.88; cesarean: adjusted odds ratio, 1.67; 95% confidence interval, 1.40-1.98, respectively) and subfertile deliveries (vaginal: adjusted odds ratio, 1.97; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-3.00; cesarean: adjusted odds ratio, 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-2.35, respectively). Among twins, cesarean in vitro fertilization deliveries have significantly greater severe maternal morbidity compared to cesarean fertile deliveries (adjusted odds ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-1.93). Subfertility, with or without in vitro fertilization or non-in vitro fertilization infertility treatments to achieve a pregnancy, is associated with increased risks of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. The major risk from in vitro fertilization treatments of multiple births (and the associated excess of perinatal morbidity) has been reduced over time, with fewer and better-quality embryos being transferred.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Barbara Luke
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, College of Human Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
| |
Collapse
|
62
|
Abstract
The phenotype of the human embryo conceived through in vitro fertilization (IVF), that is its morphology, developmental kinetics, physiology and metabolism, can be affected by numerous components of the laboratory and embryo culture system (which comprise the laboratory environment). The culture media formulation is important in determining embryo phenotype, but this exists within a culture system that includes oxygen, temperature, pH and whether an embryo is cultured individually or in a group, all of which can influence embryo development. Significantly, exposure of an embryo to one suboptimal component of the culture system of laboratory typically predisposes the embryo to become more vulnerable to a second stressor, as has been well documented for atmospheric oxygen and individual culture, as well as for oxygen and ammonium. Furthermore, the inherent viability of the human embryo is derived from the quality of the gametes from which it is created. Patient age, aetiology, genetics, lifestyle (as well as ovarian stimulation in women) are all known to affect the developmental potential of gametes and hence the embryo. Thus, as well as considering the impact of the IVF laboratory environment, one needs to be aware of the status of the infertile couple, as this impacts how their gametes and embryos will respond to an in vitro environment. Although far from straight forward, analysing the interactions that exist between the human embryo and its environment will facilitate the creation of more effective and safer treatments for the infertile couple.
Collapse
|