Lifestyle intervention prior to IVF does not improve embryo utilization rate and cumulative live birth rate in women with obesity: a nested cohort study

Effect of BMI on cumulative live birth rates in patients that completed IVF treatment: a retrospective cohort study of 16,126 patients

Although several studies have reported that high maternal BMI could influence the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) in fresh embryo transfer cycles, the association of BMI with CLBR remains unclear in patients that completed IVF treatment. In this study, we examined the association of maternal BMI with CLBR, including repetitive one oocyte pick-up (OPU) and all fresh and frozen embryo transfer until live birth or embryos were run out. A total of 16,126 patients' data were included in the analysis and were divided into four groups based on BMI. We found that patients' characteristics, embryo parameters, and pregnancy outcomes differed among different BMI groups. Multivariate logistic regression showed that being underweight was associated with a higher possibility of having live birth than the reference group (OR (95% CI) 1.40 (1.22-1.59), P < 0.001), whereas being overweight and obese were associated with a lower possibility of having live birth than the reference group ((OR (95% CI) 0.81 (0.74-0.90), P < 0.001) and (OR (95% CI) 0.68 (0.55-0.85), P < 0.001)). After adjustment for confounding factors, the reference group was associated with a higher possibility of having live birth, with a significant difference found between the obese and reference groups (OR (95% CI) 0.55 (0.43-0.70), P < 0.001). An association was found between CLBR and BMI, indicating that an increase in BMI results in a decline in CLBR. Moreover, the CLBR of patients with different characteristics differed in the various BMI groups. Taken together, our data show that maternal BMI has a significant impact on CLBR.

Does body mass index compromise assisted reproductive technique outcomes? A cross-sectional study

Background

Overweight and obese people face several health problems. Female obesity has been shown to reduce fertility in the general population. Assisted reproductive technology outcomes in obese cases are widely studied, but the results are inconclusive.

Objective

This study aimed to compare live birth rate (LBR) among women with 4 different types of body mass index (BMI).

Materials and Methods

In this cross-sectional study, data of 1611 women, who were candidates for fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles, was extracted from 2051 medical files at the Reproductive Sciences Institute, Yazd, Iran from May 2019-May 2021. The participants were divided into 4 groups (underweight, normal, overweight, and obese) according to their BMI, and LBR was considered to be the main outcome.

Results

Of 1611 women, 39 were underweight, 585 were normal, 676 were overweight, and 311 were obese. Underweight women had the lowest LBR (12.8%), but there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.55). In addition, LBR was compared in the 4 BMI groups according to age, type of transfer cycle (fresh or freeze), and cause of infertility, and there was comparable LBR in the 4 BMI groups. However, metaphase 2 oocyte rate, doses of gonadotropin usage in the cycles, and estradiol level had statistically significant differences (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

According to our study, obesity does not affect LBR in the IVF cycle, regardless of fresh or frozen embryo transfer cycles, different age groups, and causes of infertility.

ESHRE good practice recommendations on recurrent implantation failure

STUDY QUESTION

How should recurrent implantation failure (RIF) in patients undergoing ART be defined and managed?

SUMMARY ANSWER

This is the first ESHRE good practice recommendations paper providing a definition for RIF together with recommendations on how to investigate causes and contributing factors, and how to improve the chances of a pregnancy.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

RIF is a challenge in the ART clinic, with a multitude of investigations and interventions offered and applied in clinical practice, often without biological rationale or with unequivocal evidence of benefit.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

This document was developed according to a predefined methodology for ESHRE good practice recommendations. Recommendations are supported by data from the literature, if available, and the results of a previously published survey on clinical practice in RIF and the expertise of the working group. A literature search was performed in PubMed and Cochrane focussing on 'recurrent reproductive failure', 'recurrent implantation failure', and 'repeated implantation failure'.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

The ESHRE Working Group on Recurrent Implantation Failure included eight members representing the ESHRE Special Interest Groups for Implantation and Early Pregnancy, Reproductive Endocrinology, and Embryology, with an independent chair and an expert in statistics. The recommendations for clinical practice were formulated based on the expert opinion of the working group, while taking into consideration the published data and results of the survey on uptake in clinical practice. The draft document was then open to ESHRE members for online peer review and was revised in light of the comments received.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The working group recommends considering RIF as a secondary phenomenon of ART, as it can only be observed in patients undergoing IVF, and that the following description of RIF be adopted: 'RIF describes the scenario in which the transfer of embryos considered to be viable has failed to result in a positive pregnancy test sufficiently often in a specific patient to warrant consideration of further investigations and/or interventions'. It was agreed that the recommended threshold for the cumulative predicted chance of implantation to identify RIF for the purposes of initiating further investigation is 60%. When a couple have not had a successful implantation by a certain number of embryo transfers and the cumulative predicted chance of implantation associated with that number is greater than 60%, then they should be counselled on further investigation and/or treatment options. This term defines clinical RIF for which further actions should be considered. Nineteen recommendations were formulated on investigations when RIF is suspected, and 13 on interventions. Recommendations were colour-coded based on whether the investigations/interventions were recommended (green), to be considered (orange), or not recommended, i.e. not to be offered routinely (red).

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

While awaiting the results of further studies and trials, the ESHRE Working Group on Recurrent Implantation Failure recommends identifying RIF based on the chance of successful implantation for the individual patient or couple and to restrict investigations and treatments to those supported by a clear rationale and data indicating their likely benefit.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This article provides not only good practice advice but also highlights the investigations and interventions that need further research. This research, when well-conducted, will be key to making progress in the clinical management of RIF.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The meetings and technical support for this project were funded by ESHRE. N.M. declared consulting fees from ArtPRED (The Netherlands) and Freya Biosciences (Denmark); Honoraria for lectures from Gedeon Richter, Merck, Abbott, and IBSA; being co-founder of Verso Biosense. He is Co-Chief Editor of Reproductive Biomedicine Online (RBMO). D.C. declared being an Associate Editor of Human Reproduction Update, and declared honoraria for lectures from Merck, Organon, IBSA, and Fairtility; support for attending meetings from Cooper Surgical, Fujifilm Irvine Scientific. G.G. declared that he or his institution received financial or non-financial support for research, lectures, workshops, advisory roles, or travelling from Ferring, Merck, Gedeon-Richter, PregLem, Abbott, Vifor, Organon, MSD, Coopersurgical, ObsEVA, and ReprodWissen. He is an Editor of the journals Archives of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biomedicine Online, and Editor in Chief of Journal Gynäkologische Endokrinologie. He is involved in guideline developments and quality control on national and international level. G.L. declared he or his institution received honoraria for lectures from Merck, Ferring, Vianex/Organon, and MSD. He is an Associate Editor of Human Reproduction Update, immediate past Coordinator of Special Interest Group for Reproductive Endocrinology of ESHRE and has been involved in Guideline Development Groups of ESHRE and national fertility authorities. D.J.M. declared being an Associate Editor for Human Reproduction Open and statistical Advisor for Reproductive Biomedicine Online. B.T. declared being shareholder of Reprognostics and she or her institution received financial or non-financial support for research, clinical trials, lectures, workshops, advisory roles or travelling from support for attending meetings from Ferring, MSD, Exeltis, Merck Serono, Bayer, Teva, Theramex and Novartis, Astropharm, Ferring. The other authors had nothing to disclose.

DISCLAIMER

This Good Practice Recommendations (GPR) document represents the views of ESHRE, which are the result of consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders and are based on the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. ESHRE GPRs should be used for information and educational purposes. They should not be interpreted as setting a standard of care or be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care, or be exclusive of other methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. They do not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, or variations based on locality and facility type. Furthermore, ESHRE GPRs do not constitute or imply the endorsement, or favouring, of any of the included technologies by ESHRE.

Obesity and female infertility

Infertility is a significant global health issue, with a negative impact on people's wellbeing and human rights. Despite the longstanding association between obesity and infertility, there remains uncertainty, about the precise mechanisms underpinning this association and best management strategies. In this article, we aimed to address these uncertainties by reviewing the recent literature, and focusing on studies which evaluated live birth rates. We found that just over half of the studies, investigating the relationship between preconception maternal weight and live birth rates found an inverse correlation. There was, however, insufficient evidence, that preconception maternal lifestyle or pharmacological interventions in obese women with infertility, resulted in improved live birth rates. The implications for clinical practice and future research are highlighted. For example, the need to consider some flexibility in applying strict preconception body mass index targets, limiting access to fertility treatment, and a need for large clinical trials of new pharmacological options and bariatric surgery.

Update on obesity and assisted reproductive technology

Background

The effect of obesity on IVF consequences is still debatable.

Main body

Obesity is linked to a greater likelihood of maternal and fetal complications all through gestation, including miscarriage, premature births, fetal demise, and adverse pregnancy outcomes. There was no increase in chromosomal abnormality percentages with increasing body mass index (BMI), implying that poor oocyte “performance” in obese patients could be caused by variables other than chromosomal expertise. Ribonucleic acid (RNA)-sequence research showed molecular changes in the oocytes of obese patients. Each 5-unit rise in female BMI is attributed with both a 5% and 7% reduction in hazard for CPR and LBR, in both, and a 9% rise in the comparative chance of miscarriage. There is no clinical or moral mandate for establishing a societal BMI limit for rejecting a client or couple direct exposure to infertility treatment. Assessment with an interdisciplinary approach prior to an IVF treatment should be done to assess the safety of oocyte retrieval under anesthesia, taking into account variables including body mass index and comorbid conditions. On LBR, there is no convincing evidence of the significance of lifestyle modification for losing weight. There is contradictory information on the impacts of weight loss surgery on pregnancy outcomes. IVF success rate was unaffected by weight loss surgery.

Conclusion

Obesity has been linked to anovulation, decreased ovarian response to ovulatory prescription medications, changed oocyte and endometrial activity, an elevated risk of fertility problems, and reduced rates of live birth following IVF.