Laura Romany1, Nicolas Garrido1, Ana Cobo1, Belen Aparicio-Ruiz1, Vicente Serra1, Marcos Meseguer2,3. 1. Instituto Valenciano de Infertilidad, Universidad de Valencia, Valencia, Spain. 2. Instituto Valenciano de Infertilidad, Universidad de Valencia, Valencia, Spain. marcos.meseguer@ivi.es. 3. Instituto Valenciano de Infertilidad, Plaza de la Policía Local, 3, Valencia, 46015, Spain. marcos.meseguer@ivi.es.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to assess outcomes after magnetic-activated cell sorting (MACS) technology on obstetric and perinatal outcomes compared with those achieved after swim up from randomized controlled trial. METHODS: This is a two-arm, unicentric, prospective, randomized, and triple-blinded trial and has a total of 237 infertile couples, between October 2010 and January 2013. A total of 65 and 66 newborns from MACS and control group, respectively, were described. RESULTS:MACS had no clinically relevant adverse effects on obstetric and perinatal outcomes. No differences were found for obstetric problems including premature rupture of membranes 6.1% (CI95% 0-12.8) vs. 5.9% (CI95% 0-12.4), 1st trimester bleeding 28.6% (CI95% 15.9-41.2) vs. 23.5% (CI95% 11.9-35.1), invasive procedures as amniocentesis 2.0% (CI95% 0-5.9) vs. 3.9% (CI95% 0-9.2), diabetes 14.3% (CI95% 4.5-24.1) vs. 9.8% (CI95% 1.6-17.9), anemia 6.1% (CI95% 0-12.8) vs. 5.9%(CI95% 0-12.4), 2nd and 3rd trimesters 10.2% (CI95% 1.7-18.7) vs. 5.9% (CI95% 0-12.4), urinary tract infection 8.2% (CI95% 0.5-15.9) vs. 3.9% (CI95% 0-9.2), pregnancy-induced hypertension 6.1% (CI95% 0-12.8) vs. 15.7% (CI95% 5.7-25.7), birth weight (g) 2684.10 (CI95% 2499.48-2868.72) vs. 2676.12 (CI95% 2499.02-2852.21), neonatal height (cm) 48.3 (CI95% 47.1-49.4) vs. 46.5 (CI95% 44.6-48.4), and gestational cholestasis 0%(CI95% 0-0) vs. 3.9% (CI95% 0-9.2), respectively, in MACS group compared with control group. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that MACS technology does not increase or decrease Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation adverse obstetric and perinatal outcomes in children conceived when this technology was performed, being the largest randomized control trial with live birth reported results with MACS.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to assess outcomes after magnetic-activated cell sorting (MACS) technology on obstetric and perinatal outcomes compared with those achieved after swim up from randomized controlled trial. METHODS: This is a two-arm, unicentric, prospective, randomized, and triple-blinded trial and has a total of 237 infertile couples, between October 2010 and January 2013. A total of 65 and 66 newborns from MACS and control group, respectively, were described. RESULTS:MACS had no clinically relevant adverse effects on obstetric and perinatal outcomes. No differences were found for obstetric problems including premature rupture of membranes 6.1% (CI95% 0-12.8) vs. 5.9% (CI95% 0-12.4), 1st trimester bleeding 28.6% (CI95% 15.9-41.2) vs. 23.5% (CI95% 11.9-35.1), invasive procedures as amniocentesis 2.0% (CI95% 0-5.9) vs. 3.9% (CI95% 0-9.2), diabetes 14.3% (CI95% 4.5-24.1) vs. 9.8% (CI95% 1.6-17.9), anemia 6.1% (CI95% 0-12.8) vs. 5.9%(CI95% 0-12.4), 2nd and 3rd trimesters 10.2% (CI95% 1.7-18.7) vs. 5.9% (CI95% 0-12.4), urinary tract infection 8.2% (CI95% 0.5-15.9) vs. 3.9% (CI95% 0-9.2), pregnancy-induced hypertension 6.1% (CI95% 0-12.8) vs. 15.7% (CI95% 5.7-25.7), birth weight (g) 2684.10 (CI95% 2499.48-2868.72) vs. 2676.12 (CI95% 2499.02-2852.21), neonatal height (cm) 48.3 (CI95% 47.1-49.4) vs. 46.5 (CI95% 44.6-48.4), and gestational cholestasis 0%(CI95% 0-0) vs. 3.9% (CI95% 0-9.2), respectively, in MACS group compared with control group. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that MACS technology does not increase or decrease Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation adverse obstetric and perinatal outcomes in children conceived when this technology was performed, being the largest randomized control trial with live birth reported results with MACS.
Authors: N Garrido; J A Martínez-Conejero; J Jauregui; J A Horcajadas; C Simón; J Remohí; M Meseguer Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2008-03-25 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Alberto Pacheco; Arancha Blanco; Fernando Bronet; María Cruz; Jaime García-Fernández; Juan Antonio García-Velasco Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2020-12-08 Impact factor: 4.241