Literature DB >> 19850400

Perinatal outcome in singletons after modified natural cycle IVF and standard IVF with ovarian stimulation.

Marie-José Pelinck1, Marjan H Keizer, Annemieke Hoek, Arnold H M Simons, Karin Schelling, Karin Middelburg, Maas Jan Heineman.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Singletons born after IVF treatment are at risk for adverse pregnancy outcome, the cause of which is unknown. The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of ovarian stimulation on perinatal outcome. STUDY
DESIGN: In this single-centre retrospective study, perinatal outcome of singleton pregnancies resulting from IVF treatment with (n=106) and without ovarian stimulation (n=84) were compared. For IVF without ovarian stimulation, a modified natural cycle protocol was used.
RESULTS: No differences were found in pregnancy duration, proportion of prematurity and proportion of low birth weight. Mean birth weight of modified natural cycle vs standard IVF singletons was 3485 (+/-527) vs 3218 (+/-670)g; P=0.003. After adjustment for prognostic factors by linear regression analysis, the difference in birth weight remaining was 134 g; P=0.045.
CONCLUSIONS: Birth weights of modified natural cycle IVF singletons found in this study are higher than standard IVF singletons, suggesting that ovarian stimulation may be a causative factor in the occurrence of low birth weight in standard IVF.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 19850400     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2009.09.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol        ISSN: 0301-2115            Impact factor:   2.435


  9 in total

1.  Natural cycle IVF reduces the risk of low birthweight infants compared with conventional stimulated IVF.

Authors:  Winifred Mak; Laxmi A Kondapalli; Gerard Celia; John Gordon; Michael DiMattina; Mark Payson
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 6.918

2.  Association of number of retrieved oocytes with live birth rate and birth weight: an analysis of 231,815 cycles of in vitro fertilization.

Authors:  Valerie L Baker; Morton B Brown; Barbara Luke; Kirk P Conrad
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2015-01-28       Impact factor: 7.329

3.  ISMAAR: Leading the global agenda for a more physiological, patient-centred, accessible and safer approaches in ART.

Authors:  Geeta Nargund; R C Chian
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Trends and correlates of good perinatal outcomes in assisted reproductive technology.

Authors:  Nikhil Joshi; Dmitry Kissin; John E Anderson; Donna Session; Maurizio Macaluso; Denise J Jamieson
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 7.661

Review 5.  Low birth weight: is it related to assisted reproductive technology or underlying infertility?

Authors:  Laxmi A Kondapalli; Alfredo Perales-Puchalt
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 7.329

Review 6.  ART and health: clinical outcomes and insights on molecular mechanisms from rodent studies.

Authors:  S K Feuer; L Camarano; P F Rinaudo
Journal:  Mol Hum Reprod       Date:  2012-12-20       Impact factor: 4.025

7.  The Efficacy and Safety of the Zhuyun Formula and Auricular Acupressure for the Infertile Women with Recurrent Implantation Failure: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Hang Zhou; Xiaoyan Zheng; Wanting Xia; Qianhong Ma; Jinmei Li; Qian Zeng; Jinzhu Huang
Journal:  Evid Based Complement Alternat Med       Date:  2022-10-11       Impact factor: 2.650

Review 8.  The placenta: phenotypic and epigenetic modifications induced by Assisted Reproductive Technologies throughout pregnancy.

Authors:  Cécile Choux; Virginie Carmignac; Céline Bruno; Paul Sagot; Daniel Vaiman; Patricia Fauque
Journal:  Clin Epigenetics       Date:  2015-08-21       Impact factor: 6.551

9.  Minimal Stimulation In Vitro Fertilization: A Better Outcome.

Authors:  Adrija Kumar Datta
Journal:  Int J Fertil Steril       Date:  2016-06-01
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.