Literature DB >> 23219009

Neonatal and maternal outcomes comparing women undergoing two in vitro fertilization (IVF) singleton pregnancies and women undergoing one IVF twin pregnancy.

Antonina Sazonova1, Karin Källen, Ann Thurin-Kjellberg, Ulla-Britt Wennerholm, Christina Bergh.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes for women undergoing two in vitro fertilization (IVF) pregnancies with singletons and women undergoing one IVF twin pregnancy. The concept of single-embryo transfer in IVF has reduced the risks of both maternal and neonatal complications, but there is still a discussion of whether or not twins are a desired outcome of IVF.
DESIGN: Registry study.
SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): All reported twins after IVF with double-embryo transfer (n = 1,982) and their mothers (n = 991) and all mothers (n = 921) who gave birth to two IVF singletons (n = 1,842). INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Maternal and neonatal outcomes including severe neonatal morbidity. RESULT(S): Preterm birth, very preterm birth, low birth weight, very low birth weight, and small for gestational age were dramatically increased for IVF twins compared with two IVF singletons with the same mother, with adjusted odds ratios from 4 to 16. Significantly higher rates of respiratory complications, sepsis, and jaundice were detected among the IVF twins. Significantly higher rates of preeclampsia, preterm premature rupture of the membranes, and cesarean section were observed for IVF twin pregnancies. CONCLUSION(S): The neonatal and maternal outcomes were dramatically better for women undergoing two IVF singleton pregnancies compared with one IVF twin pregnancy after double-embryo transfer. These results support single-embryo transfer to minimize the risks associated with twin pregnancies.
Copyright © 2013 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23219009     DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.11.023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fertil Steril        ISSN: 0015-0282            Impact factor:   7.329


  27 in total

1.  Double trouble: should double embryo transfer be banned?

Authors:  Dominic Wilkinson; G Owen Schaefer; Kelton Tremellen; Julian Savulescu
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2015-04

2.  No difference in congenital anomalies prevalence irrespective of insemination methods and freezing procedure: cohort study over fourteen years of an ART population in the south of France.

Authors:  Any Beltran Anzola; Vanessa Pauly; Debbie Montjean; Line Meddeb; Cendrine Geoffroy-Siraudin; Roland Sambuc; Pierre Boyer; Marie-José Gervoise-Boyer
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-03-23       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 3.  "One for Sorrow, Two for Joy?": American embryo transfer guideline recommendations, practices, and outcomes for gestational surrogate patients.

Authors:  Pamela M White
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Reproductive outcomes in women with prior cesarean section undergoing in vitro fertilization: A retrospective case-control study.

Authors:  Ya-Qin Wang; Tai-Lang Yin; Wang-Min Xu; Qian-Rong Qi; Xiao-Chen Wang; Jing Yang
Journal:  J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci       Date:  2017-12-21

5.  Factors predicting double embryo implantation following double embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology: implications for elective single embryo transfer.

Authors:  Caitlin Martin; Jeani Chang; Sheree Boulet; Denise J Jamieson; Dmitry Kissin
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-07-14       Impact factor: 3.412

6.  Using the Eeva Test™ adjunctively to traditional day 3 morphology is informative for consistent embryo assessment within a panel of embryologists with diverse experience.

Authors:  Michael P Diamond; Vaishali Suraj; Erica J Behnke; Xinli Yang; Marlane J Angle; Jaclyn C Lambe-Steinmiller; Rachel Watterson; Kelly Athayde Wirka; Alice A Chen; Shehua Shen
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2014-10-21       Impact factor: 3.412

7.  Reducing the number of fetuses in a pregnancy: providers' and patients' views of challenges.

Authors:  Robert L Klitzman
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2016-10-06       Impact factor: 6.918

8.  Embryo re-expansion does not affect clinical pregnancy rates in frozen embryo transfer cycles: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Hunter Giunco; Meghan Connerney; Caitlin Boylan; Nathanael Koelper; Jennifer Mersereau; Dara S Berger
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-09-21       Impact factor: 3.412

9.  Mistaken advocacy against twin pregnancies following IVF.

Authors:  Norbert Gleicher; David H Bard
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2013-03-09       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 10.  What are the risks of the assisted reproductive technologies (ART) and how can they be minimized?

Authors:  Robert W Rebar
Journal:  Reprod Med Biol       Date:  2013-06-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.