Reproductive and obstetric outcomes in mildly and significantly underweight women undergoing IVF.
Romanski Phillip A,Bortoletto Pietro,Chung Alice,Magaoay Brady,Rosenwaks Zev,Spandorfer Steven D
Reproductive biomedicine online
RESEARCH QUESTION:What is the impact of low body mass index (BMI) on live birth rates and obstetric outcomes in infertile women treated with IVF and fresh embryo transfer? DESIGN:This was a retrospective cohort study of infertile patients in an academic hospital setting who underwent their first oocyte retrieval with planned autologous fresh embryo transfer between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2018. The primary study outcome was live birth rate. Secondary outcomes were IVF treatment and delivery outcomes. Underweight patients were stratified into a significantly underweight group (body mass index [BMI] <17.5 kg/m) and a mildly underweight group (BMI 17.5-18.49 kg/m), and were compared with a normal-weight group (BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m). RESULTS:A total of 5229 patients were included (significantly underweight, 76; mildly underweight, 231; normal weight, 4922), resulting in 4798 embryo transfers. After oocyte retrieval, there were no significant differences between groups for total oocytes, mature oocyte yield and number of supernumerary blastocysts cryopreserved. Among women who had an embryo transfer, there were no significant differences in the live birth rates in significantly (31.0%, odds ratio [OR] 0.67, confidence interval [0.95, CI] 0.40-1.13) and mildly (37.7%, OR 0.95, CI 0.73-1.33) underweight patients compared with normal-weight patients (35.9%). Additionally, there were no statistically significant increased risks of preterm delivery, Caesarean delivery or a low birthweight (<2500 g) neonate. CONCLUSIONS:Mildly and significantly underweight infertile women have similar pregnancy and live birth rates to normal-weight patients after IVF treatment. In addition, underweight patients do not have an increased risk of preterm delivery (<37 weeks), Caesarean delivery or a low birthweight neonate.
Why do singletons conceived after assisted reproduction technology have adverse perinatal outcome? Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Pinborg A,Wennerholm U B,Romundstad L B,Loft A,Aittomaki K,Söderström-Anttila V,Nygren K G,Hazekamp J,Bergh C
Human reproduction update
BACKGROUND:Assisted reproduction technology (ART) is used worldwide, at increasing rates, and data show that some adverse outcomes occur more frequently than following spontaneous conception (SC). Possible explanatory factors for the well-known adverse perinatal outcome in ART singletons were evaluated. METHODS:PubMed and Cochrane databases from 1982 to 2012 were searched. Studies using donor or frozen oocytes were excluded, as well as those with no control group or including <100 children. The main outcome measure was preterm birth (PTB defined as delivery <37 weeks of gestation), and a random effects model was used for meta-analyses of PTB. Other outcomes were very PTB, low-birthweight (LBW), very LBW, small for gestational age and perinatal mortality. RESULTS:The search returned 1255 articles and 65 of these met the inclusion criteria. The following were identified as predictors for PTB in singletons: SC in couples with time to pregnancy (TTP) > 1 year versus SC singletons in couples with TTP ≤ 1 year [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22, 1.50]; IVF/ICSI versus SC singletons from subfertile couples (TTP > 1 year; AOR 1.55, 95% CI 1.30, 1.85); conception after ovulation induction and/or intrauterine insemination versus SC singletons where TTP ≤ 1 year (AOR 1.45, 95% CI 1.21, 1.74); IVF/ICSI singletons versus their non-ART singleton siblings (AOR 1.27, 95% CI 1.08, 1.49). The risk of PTB in singletons with a 'vanishing co-twin' versus from a single gestation was AOR of 1.73 (95% CI 1.54, 1.94) in the narrative data. ICSI versus IVF (AOR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69-0.93), and frozen embryo transfer versus fresh embryo transfer (AOR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76, 0.94) were associated with a lower risk of PTB. CONCLUSIONS:Subfertility is a major risk factor for adverse perinatal outcome in ART singletons, however, even in the same mother an ART singleton has a poorer outcome than the non-ART sibling; hence, factors related to the hormone stimulation and/or IVF methods per se also may play a part. Further research is required into mechanisms of epigenetic modification in human embryos and the effects of cryopreservation on this, whether milder ovarian stimulation regimens can improve embryo quality and endometrial conditions, and whether longer culture times for embryos has a negative influence on the perinatal outcome.
Live-Birth Rate Associated With Repeat In Vitro Fertilization Treatment Cycles.
Smith Andrew D A C,Tilling Kate,Nelson Scott M,Lawlor Debbie A
IMPORTANCE:The likelihood of achieving a live birth with repeat in vitro fertilization (IVF) is unclear, yet treatment is commonly limited to 3 or 4 embryo transfers. OBJECTIVE:To determine the live-birth rate per initiated ovarian stimulation IVF cycle and with repeated cycles. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:Prospective study of 156,947 UK women who received 257,398 IVF ovarian stimulation cycles between 2003 and 2010 and were followed up until June 2012. EXPOSURES:In vitro fertilization, with a cycle defined as an episode of ovarian stimulation and all subsequent separate fresh and frozen embryo transfers. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:Live-birth rate per IVF cycle and the cumulative live-birth rates across all cycles in all women and by age and treatment type. Optimal, prognosis-adjusted, and conservative cumulative live-birth rates were estimated, reflecting 0%, 30%, and 100%, respectively, of women who discontinued due to poor prognosis and having a live-birth rate of 0 had they continued. RESULTS:Among the 156,947 women, the median age at start of treatment was 35 years (interquartile range, 32-38; range, 18-55), and the median duration of infertility for all 257,398 cycles was 4 years (interquartile range, 2-6; range, <1-29). In all women, the live-birth rate for the first cycle was 29.5% (95% CI, 29.3%-29.7%). This remained above 20% up to and including the fourth cycle. The cumulative prognosis-adjusted live-birth rate across all cycles continued to increase up to the ninth cycle, with 65.3% (95% CI, 64.8%-65.8%) of women achieving a live birth by the sixth cycle. In women younger than 40 years using their own oocytes, the live-birth rate for the first cycle was 32.3% (95% CI, 32.0%-32.5%) and remained above 20% up to and including the fourth cycle. Six cycles achieved a cumulative prognosis-adjusted live-birth rate of 68.4% (95% CI, 67.8%-68.9%). For women aged 40 to 42 years, the live-birth rate for the first cycle was 12.3% (95% CI, 11.8%-12.8%), with 6 cycles achieving a cumulative prognosis-adjusted live-birth rate of 31.5% (95% CI, 29.7%-33.3%). For women older than 42 years, all rates within each cycle were less than 4%. No age differential was observed among women using donor oocytes. Rates were lower for women with untreated male partner-related infertility compared with those with any other cause, but treatment with either intracytoplasmic sperm injection or sperm donation removed this difference. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Among women in the United Kingdom undergoing IVF, the cumulative prognosis-adjusted live-birth rate after 6 cycles was 65.3%, with variations by age and treatment type. These findings support the efficacy of extending the number of IVF cycles beyond 3 or 4.