Stern JE, Farland LV, Hwang SS, Dukhovny D, Coddington CC, Cabral HJ, Missmer SA, Declercq E, Diop H. Assisted Reproductive Technology or Infertility: What underlies adverse outcomes? Lessons from the Massachusetts Outcome Study of Assisted Reproductive Technology.
F&S REVIEWS 2022;
3:242-255. [PMID:
36505962 PMCID:
PMC9733832 DOI:
10.1016/j.xfnr.2022.06.003]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Numerous studies have demonstrated that assisted reproductive technology (ART: defined here as including only in vitro fertilization and related technologies) is associated with increased adverse pregnancy, neonatal, and childhood developmental outcomes, even in singletons. The comparison group for many had often been a fertile population that conceived without assistance. The Massachusetts Outcome Study of Assisted Reproductive Technology (MOSART) was initiated to define a subfertile population with which to compare ART outcomes. Over more than 10 years, we have used the MOSART database to study pregnancy abnormalities and delivery complications but also to evaluate ongoing health of women, infants, and children. This article will review studies from MOSART in the context of how they compare with those of other investigations. We will present MOSART studies that identified the influence of ART and subfertility/infertility on adverse pregnancy (pregnancy hypertensive disorder, gestational diabetes, placental abnormality) and delivery (preterm birth, low birthweight) outcomes as well as on maternal and child hospitalizations. We will provide evidence that although subfertility/infertility increases the risk of adverse outcomes, there is additional risk associated with the use of ART. Studies exploring the contribution of placental abnormalities as one factor adding to this increased ART-associated risk will be described.
Collapse