PURPOSE: Genetic aspects of male subfertility and the novelty of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) as a new technique can influence the development of zygotes and children born after ICSI. Therefore, we evaluated the outcome of ICSI compared to in vitro fertilization (IVF). METHODS: Data from medical records of 233 total pregnancies and the follow-up of 132 children born after IVF and 120 after ICSI were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: No differences were found between ICSI and IVF for early embryonic development and obstetric outcome. In both groups the rate of women undergoing prenatal chromosomal diagnosis was low, 30.0%. The congenital malformation rate was 3.0% after IVF and 1.7% after ICSI, which was not significantly different. Follow-up on development of children born after IVF and ICSI also showed no significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that at this moment ICSI is a safe procedure. However, a consistent prospective follow-up is still mandatory to exclude possible risks.
PURPOSE: Genetic aspects of male subfertility and the novelty of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) as a new technique can influence the development of zygotes and children born after ICSI. Therefore, we evaluated the outcome of ICSI compared to in vitro fertilization (IVF). METHODS: Data from medical records of 233 total pregnancies and the follow-up of 132 children born after IVF and 120 after ICSI were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: No differences were found between ICSI and IVF for early embryonic development and obstetric outcome. In both groups the rate of women undergoing prenatal chromosomal diagnosis was low, 30.0%. The congenital malformation rate was 3.0% after IVF and 1.7% after ICSI, which was not significantly different. Follow-up on development of children born after IVF and ICSI also showed no significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that at this moment ICSI is a safe procedure. However, a consistent prospective follow-up is still mandatory to exclude possible risks.
Authors: J A Kremer; J H Tuerlings; E J Meuleman; F Schoute; E Mariman; D F Smeets; L H Hoefsloot; D D Braat; H M Merkus Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 1997-04 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: D Van Opstal; F J Los; S Ramlakhan; J O Van Hemel; A M Van Den Ouweland; H Brandenburg; M H Pieters; A Verhoeff; M C Vermeer; M Dhont; P A In't Veld Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 1997-04 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: M Bonduelle; A Wilikens; A Buysse; E Van Assche; A Wisanto; P Devroey; A C Van Steirteghem; I Liebaers Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 1996-12 Impact factor: 6.918