Literature DB >> 28158570

Couples' body composition and time-to-pregnancy.

Rajeshwari Sundaram1, Sunni L Mumford2, Germaine M Buck Louis3.   

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION: Is couples' body compositions associated with reduced fecundity as measured by a longer time-to-pregnancy (TTP)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Couples whose BMI are within obese class II (≥35 kg/m2) have a longer TTP in comparison to leaner (BMI < 25 kg/m2) couples, observed only when both partner's BMI was jointly modeled. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Extremes of BMI have been associated with a longer TTP and with less successful assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcomes. To our knowledge, the association between measured adiposity in both partners of the couple and prospectively measured TTP has not been investigated despite pregnancy being a couple-dependent outcome. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Prospective cohort with preconception recruitment of 501 couples trying for pregnancy and recruited from 16 counties in Michigan and Texas between 2005 and 2009. Couples were followed daily for up to a year of trying or until a hCG pregnancy. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,
METHODS: In-home standardized anthropometric assessment of couples upon enrollment included measured height and weight using calibrated stadiometers and scales, and measured waist and hip circumferences. Discrete-time Cox regression was used to estimate fecundability odds ratios (FORs) and 95% CIs, controlling for potential confounders including age, number of days of vigorous physical activity, serum cotinine concentration, race, education, free cholesterol levels for each partner in partner-specific models and for both partners in couple-based models as well as average acts of intercourse per menstrual cycle and menstrual cycle regularity. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Neither male nor female partner's BMI was associated with TTP when modeled individually. However, obese class II (BMIs ≥ 35.0 kg/m2) couples experienced a reduction in fecundability in both unadjusted (FOR = 0.45; 95% CI: 0.23, 0.89) and adjusted analyses (aFOR = 0.41; 95% CI: 0.17, 0.98) resulting in a longer TTP in comparison to couples with normal BMI (<25 kg/m2). Female partners' waist circumference ≥88.6 cm was associated with a significant reduction in fecundability in the unadjusted model (FOR = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.48, 0.86) but not in the adjusted model (aFOR = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.55, 1.08) in comparison to females with a smaller (<80 cm) circumference. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: BMI and waist circumference are proxy measures of body composition and residual confounding cannot be eliminated. Findings may not be generalizable to clinical populations. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
FINDINGS: This is the first cohort study known to us with preconception enrollment of couples who underwent standardized anthropometric assessment and for whom TTP was prospectively measured. The findings underscore the importance of considering both partners' body composition for fecundity outcomes and preconception guidance. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Supported by the Intramural Research Program of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (Contracts #N01-HD-3-3355, N01-HD-3-3356 and N01-HD-3-3358). The authors have no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology 2017. This work is written by (a) US Government employee(s) and is in the public domain in the US.

Entities:  

Keywords:  body mass index; central adiposity; fertility; obesity; prospective study

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28158570      PMCID: PMC5400044          DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dex001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  31 in total

1.  Prediction of ovulation by urinary hormone measurements with the home use ClearPlan Fertility Monitor: comparison with transvaginal ultrasound scans and serum hormone measurements.

Authors:  H M Behre; J Kuhlage; C Gassner; B Sonntag; C Schem; H P Schneider; E Nieschlag
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 6.918

2.  Overweight men: clinical pregnancy after ART is decreased in IVF but not in ICSI cycles.

Authors:  Julia Keltz; Athena Zapantis; Sangita K Jindal; Harry J Lieman; Nanette Santoro; Alex J Polotsky
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2010-07-16       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Comparison of accuracy and certainty of results of six home pregnancy tests available over-the-counter.

Authors:  Catherine Tomlinson; Jayne Marshall; Jayne E Ellis
Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin       Date:  2008-05-02       Impact factor: 2.580

4.  Fecundability in relation to body mass and menstrual cycle patterns.

Authors:  T K Jensen; T Scheike; N Keiding; I Schaumburg; P Grandjean
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 4.822

5.  Effect of obesity on oocyte and embryo quality in women undergoing in vitro fertilization.

Authors:  Divya K Shah; Stacey A Missmer; Katharine F Berry; Catherine Racowsky; Elizabeth S Ginsburg
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  Six reasons why the waist-to-height ratio is a rapid and effective global indicator for health risks of obesity and how its use could simplify the international public health message on obesity.

Authors:  Margaret Ashwell; Shiun Dong Hsieh
Journal:  Int J Food Sci Nutr       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 3.833

7.  Obesity and time to pregnancy.

Authors:  D C Gesink Law; R F Maclehose; M P Longnecker
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2006-11-09       Impact factor: 6.918

8.  Men's body mass index in relation to embryo quality and clinical outcomes in couples undergoing in vitro fertilization.

Authors:  Daniela S Colaci; Myriam Afeiche; Audrey J Gaskins; Diane L Wright; Thomas L Toth; Cigdem Tanrikut; Russ Hauser; Jorge E Chavarro
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2012-08-09       Impact factor: 7.329

9.  The influence of female and male body mass index on live births after assisted reproductive technology treatment: a nationwide register-based cohort study.

Authors:  Gitte Lindved Petersen; Lone Schmidt; Anja Pinborg; Mads Kamper-Jørgensen
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 7.329

10.  Subfecundity in overweight and obese couples.

Authors:  C H Ramlau-Hansen; A M Thulstrup; E A Nohr; J P Bonde; T I A Sørensen; J Olsen
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2007-03-07       Impact factor: 6.918

View more
  26 in total

1.  Association between parental anthropometric measures and the outcomes of intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles.

Authors:  Amanda Setti; Gabriela Halpern; Daniela Braga; Rita Figueira; Assumpto Iaconelli; Edson Borges
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Waist circumference in relation to outcomes of infertility treatment with assisted reproductive technologies.

Authors:  Ming-Chieh Li; Lidia Mínguez-Alarcón; Mariel Arvizu; Yu-Han Chiu; Jennifer B Ford; Paige L Williams; Jill Attaman; Russ Hauser; Jorge E Chavarro
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2019-02-11       Impact factor: 8.661

3.  Endocrine disrupting chemicals in seminal plasma and couple fecundity.

Authors:  Germaine M Buck Louis; Melissa M Smarr; Liping Sun; Zhen Chen; Masato Honda; Wei Wang; Rajendiran Karthikraj; Jennifer Weck; Kurunthachalam Kannan
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2018-02-22       Impact factor: 6.498

4.  Predictive models of pregnancy based on data from a preconception cohort study.

Authors:  Jennifer J Yland; Taiyao Wang; Zahra Zad; Sydney K Willis; Tanran R Wang; Amelia K Wesselink; Tammy Jiang; Elizabeth E Hatch; Lauren A Wise; Ioannis Ch Paschalidis
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 6.918

5.  Male waist circumference in relation to semen quality and partner infertility treatment outcomes among couples undergoing infertility treatment with assisted reproductive technologies.

Authors:  Haiyang Bian; Lidia Mínguez-Alarcón; Albert Salas-Huetos; David Bauer; Paige L Williams; Irene Souter; Jill Attaman; Jorge E Chavarro
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2022-03-04       Impact factor: 7.045

6.  Male alcohol consumption and fecundability.

Authors:  S Høyer; A H Riis; G Toft; L A Wise; E E Hatch; A K Wesselink; K J Rothman; H T Sørensen; E M Mikkelsen
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 6.918

Review 7.  The Role of Lifestyle in Male Infertility: Diet, Physical Activity, and Body Habitus.

Authors:  Russell P Hayden; Ryan Flannigan; Peter N Schlegel
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 3.092

8.  Evaluating effects of prenatal exposure to phthalate mixtures on birth weight: A comparison of three statistical approaches.

Authors:  Yu-Han Chiu; Andrea Bellavia; Tamarra James-Todd; Katharine F Correia; Linda Valeri; Carmen Messerlian; Jennifer B Ford; Lidia Mínguez-Alarcón; Antonia M Calafat; Russ Hauser; Paige L Williams
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2018-02-20       Impact factor: 9.621

9.  The sixth vital sign: what reproduction tells us about overall health. Proceedings from a NICHD/CDC workshop.

Authors:  Marcelle I Cedars; Susan E Taymans; Louis V DePaolo; Lee Warner; Stuart B Moss; Michael L Eisenberg
Journal:  Hum Reprod Open       Date:  2017-07-12

10.  The influence of fine particulate matter on the association between residential greenness and ovarian reserve.

Authors:  Robert B Hood; Peter James; Kelvin C Fong; Lidia Mínguez-Alarcón; Brent A Coull; Joel Schwartz; Itai Kloog; Francine Laden; Audrey J Gaskins
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2021-04-24       Impact factor: 8.431

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.