Literature DB >> 32441298

Risk of gestational diabetes mellitus in women achieving singleton pregnancy spontaneously or after ART: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Julia K Bosdou1, Panagiotis Anagnostis2, Dimitrios G Goulis2, Georgios T Lainas1, Basil C Tarlatzis1, Grigoris F Grimbizis1, Efstratios M Kolibianakis1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Women who achieve pregnancy by ART show an increased risk of obstetric and perinatal complications compared with those with spontaneous conception (SC). OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesize the best available evidence regarding the association between ART and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in women with singleton pregnancies. The research question asked was whether the risk of GDM is higher in women achieving singleton pregnancy by ART compared with those achieving singleton pregnancy spontaneously. SEARCH
METHODS: A literature search, in MEDLINE, Scopus and Cochrane databases, covering the period 1978-2019, was performed aiming to identify studies comparing the risk of GDM in singleton pregnancies after ART versus after SC. Both matched and unmatched studies were considered eligible. Meta-analysis of weighted data was performed using the random effects model. Results were reported as risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was quantified with the I2 index. OUTCOMES: The study reports on 63 760 women who achieved a singleton pregnancy after ART (GDM was present in 4776) and 1 870 734 women who achieved a singleton pregnancy spontaneously (GDM in 158 526). Women with singleton pregnancy achieved by ART showed a higher risk of GDM compared with those with singleton pregnancy achieved spontaneously (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.39-1.69; I2 78.6%, n = 37, 1 893 599 women). The direction or the magnitude of the effect observed did not change in subgroup analysis based on whether the study was matched (n = 17) or unmatched (n = 20) (matched: RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.17-1.72; I2 61.5%-unmatched: RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.40-1.78; I2 84.1%) or whether it was prospective (n = 12) or retrospective (n = 25) (prospective studies: RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.27-1.83, I2 62.2%-retrospective studies: RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.36-1.72, I2 82.5%). Regarding the method of fertilization, a higher risk of GDM after ART versus SC was observed after IVF (n = 7), but not after ICSI (n = 6), (IVF: RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.56-2.44, I2 43.1%-ICSI: RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.94-2.15, I2 73.5%). Moreover, regarding the type of embryo transfer (ET), a higher risk of GDM after ART versus SC was observed after fresh (n = 14) but not after frozen (n = 3) ET (fresh ET: RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.03-1.85, I2 75.4%-frozen ET: RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.10-2.19; I2 73.1%). A higher risk of GDM was observed after ART regardless of whether the eligible studies included patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.33-1.66, I2 75.0%) or not (RR 4.12, 95% CI 2.63-6.45, I2 0%), or whether this information was unclear (RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.22-1.75, I2 77.7%). WIDER IMPLICATIONS: The present systematic review and meta-analysis, by analysing 1 893 599 women, showed a higher risk of GDM in women achieving singleton pregnancy by ART compared with those achieving singleton pregnancy spontaneously. This finding highlights the importance of early detection of GDM in women treated by ART that could lead to timely and effective interventions, prior to ART as well as during early pregnancy.
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ART; IVF/ICSI; embryo transfer; gestational diabetes mellitus; singleton pregnancy; spontaneous conception

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32441298      PMCID: PMC7317285          DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmaa011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod Update        ISSN: 1355-4786            Impact factor:   15.610


Introduction

The number of pregnancies resulting from ART is continuously increasing worldwide. Not unexpectedly, the interest in the potential risks to the mothers and children born after ART has also increased. Currently, a higher risk of obstetric and perinatal complications appears to be present in women achieving pregnancy after ART compared with those achieving pregnancy spontaneously (Nassar , Jackson , Pandey , Qin , Vermey ). One of the most common and important complications of pregnancy is gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). GDM has been associated with a higher risk of pre-eclampsia, caesarean section in the mother as well as macrosomia, shoulder dystocia, hypoglycaemia and jaundice in the newborn (Ashrafi ). In women undergoing ART, major risk factors for GDM, such as advanced maternal age, obesity, multiple pregnancy and polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) are often encountered, suggesting a potential association between GDM and ART (Szymanska ). Support for this association was offered by a meta-analysis published in 2012 (Pandey ), including, however, a limited number of studies (n = 7). Since the publication of that meta-analysis, several studies evaluating the association between GDM and ART have been published (Farhi , Stojnic , Ashrafi , Silberstein , Xu , Xu , Beyer and Amari, 2016, Valenzuela-Alcaraz , Zhu , Cai , Luke , Qin , Dayan , Frankenthal , Harlev , Lee , Nagata , Szymusik , Yang ), with some of them including thousands of patients (Xu , Luke ), allowing for more precise estimates to be obtained. Moreover, this is the first systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the influence of various moderators, such as the method of fertilization and type of embryo transfer (ET), as well as of various confounders, such as study type, in the association between GDM and ART. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesize the best available evidence regarding the association between ART and GDM in singleton pregnancies. The specific research question asked was whether the risk of GDM is higher in women achieving singleton pregnancy by ART compared with those achieving singleton pregnancy spontaneously. In addition, the influence of various moderators, such as the method of fertilization (IVF or ICSI) and type of embryo transfer (fresh versus frozen), as well as of various confounders, such as type of study (matched versus unmatched, prospective versus retrospective), was explored.

Methods

Identification of literature

A computerized literature search in MEDLINE, Scopus and Cochrane (CENTRAL) was performed independently by two reviewers (J.K.B and P.G.A), covering the period between 1978 and July 2019. This systematic review followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines (Liberati ) (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019124251).

Search strategy

The following PICO (Population, Intervention or exposure, Comparison, Outcome) elements were applied as inclusion criteria for this systematic review: Population: singleton pregnancies; Intervention: ART; Comparator: SC; Outcome: GDM. A search strategy with various synonyms was entered as free-text terms in the electronic databases in an attempt to maximize the sensitivity of the search strategy. The following search string was used: (microinjection[tiab] OR ‘intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection’[tiab] OR ICSI[tiab] OR ‘intracytoplasmic sperm injection’[tiab] OR IVF[tiab] OR ‘in-vitro fertilization’[tiab] OR ‘in vitro fertilization’[tiab] OR ‘in-vitro fertilization’[tiab] OR ‘in vitro fertilization’[tiab]) AND (‘Diabetes, Gestational’[MeSH] OR ‘gestational diabetes’[tiab] OR ‘pregnancy complications’[tiab] OR ‘obstetric complications’[tiab] OR (pregnancy[tiab] AND (diabet*[tiab] OR ‘hyperglycaemia’[tiab] OR ‘hyperglycemia’[tiab] OR ‘high blood glucose’[tiab] OR ‘high plasma glucose’[tiab]))) NOT (Animal[MeSH] NOT Human[MeSH]) NOT (letter[pt] OR comment[pt] OR editorial[pt] OR Review[pt] OR ‘practice guideline’[ptyp] OR ‘case reports’[ptyp]). No language limitations were applied. Institutional Board Review was not obtained as previously published data were used.

Selection of studies

Criteria for inclusion/exclusion of studies were established prior to the literature search. Studies had to fulfil the following criteria for eligibility: comparative data regarding the risk of GDM in women achieving singleton pregnancy by ART or spontaneously; ovarian stimulation, performed by gonadotropins and GnRH analogues. ART pregnancies included those achieved by IVF or ICSI, after fresh and/or frozen/thawed embryo transfer with autologous gametes. Studies were excluded if pregnancies were achieved using donor gametes, surrogacy, gamete intrafallopian transfer or zygote intrafallopian transfer. Studies performed exclusively in women with PCOS were also excluded due to the known association between PCOS and GDM (Toulis , Yu ). Selection of eligible studies was performed independently by two of the reviewers (J.K.B and E.M.K). Any disagreement was resolved by discussion.

Data extraction

Data extraction was performed independently by two of the reviewers (J.K.B and E.M.K). When a study provided data separately for the method of fertilization and type of ET, the relevant datasets were used for subgroup analyses. Any disagreement between the two reviewers responsible for data extraction was resolved by discussion. In case of missing data or ambiguities in study design or trial conduction, the study authors were contacted by e-mail to request additional information.

Risk of bias and study quality assessment

The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used for assessing the quality of each study. Briefly, this system evaluates studies based on three criteria: participant selection; comparability of study groups; and assessment of outcome or exposure. A study can be awarded a maximum of four stars for the selection category, a maximum of two stars for the comparability category and a maximum of three stars for the outcome/exposure category (Wells ).

Subgroup analyses and meta-regression

The influence of various factors, such as type of study (matched versus unmatched, prospective versus retrospective) method of fertilization (IVF or ICSI), type of ET (fresh or frozen), inclusion or not of patients with PCOS and study quality (‘good quality’ versus ‘poor quality’ studies), was explored by performing pre-planned subgroup analyses and meta-regression.

Statistical analysis

The dichotomous data results for each of the eligible studies were expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI. These results were combined for meta-analysis using the random effects model (DerSimonian and Laird, 1986). Study-to-study variation was assessed by using the Chi2 statistic (the hypothesis tested was that the studies are all drawn from the same population, i.e. from a population with the same effect size). In addition, the use of the I2 statistic was employed to indicate heterogeneity between studies that could not be attributed to chance, with I2 ≥ 40% (Higgins and Green, 2011) indicating significant heterogeneity. The presence of publication bias was tested by using the Harbord–Egger’s test (Harbord ). Statistical significance was set at a P level of 0.05. A meta-analysis of weighted average effect sizes was performed using STATA v14.0 (StataCorp. 2015. Stata Statistical Software: Release 14. College Station, TX, USA: StataCorp LP).

Results

The initial literature search yielded 1356 studies, 73 of which were further evaluated by retrieving their full text and 34 of these were excluded (Supplementary Table SI). Eventually, 38 eligible studies were included in the systematic review, 37 of which offered extractable data for the meta-analysis. A flow diagram of this process is present in Fig. 1.
Figure 1

Flow diagram for selection of studies on risk of gestational diabetes mellitus after spontaneous and ART pregnancies.

Flow diagram for selection of studies on risk of gestational diabetes mellitus after spontaneous and ART pregnancies.

Systematic review

Thirty-eight cross-sectional studies (17 matched and 21 unmatched; 13 prospective and 25 retrospective), published between 1995 and 2019, were eligible for the systematic review, including a total of 1 934 494 women. Characteristics of the studies included in the systematic review are presented in Table I. Of the 38 studies, 24 were graded as being of ‘good quality’ and 14 of ‘poor quality’, according to the NOS (Supplementary Table SII). The definition of GDM was reported in 12 out of the 38 studies. After communication with the corresponding authors, further data on the definition of GDM was obtained for 23 studies (Table I).
Table I

Characteristics of the 38 eligible studies included in the systematic review.

Study, country of origin, journal or meeting Type of study/Study period Patients    ART/SC Matching Inclusion/exclusion criteria PCOS patients included Clear definition of GDM Gonadotropin type (dose) in patients undergoing ART GnRH analogue/protocol in patients undergoing ART Criteria for hCG administration in patients undergoing ART Fertilization method in patients undergoing ART Fresh/Frozen ET in patients undergoing ART Day of ET in patients undergoing ART Luteal phase support/endometrial preparation in patients undergoing ART Authors contacted/replied
Ashrafi et al., 2014, Iran, Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod BiolRetrospective cross-sectional/September 2011–October 201295/215NoWomen with singleton pregnancies conceived following ART or spontaneously/PCOS, age > 40 years, family history of diabetes in first-degree relatives, pre-pregnancy diabetes, glucose intolerance treated with hypoglycemic agent, history of GDM, history of stillbirth, recurrent miscarriage, history of macrosomia, parity >3, Cushing syndrome, congenital adrenal hyperplasia, hypothyroidismNo≥2 of the 100-g OGTT glucose levels exceeded: fasting, >5.3 mmol/l (>95 mg/dl); 1 h, >10.0 mmol/l (>180 mg/dl); 2 h > 8.6 mmol/l (>155 mg/dl); and 3 h, >7.8 mmol/l (>140 mg/dl)(American Diabetes Association)Not reportedLong agonist and antagonist protocolsNot reportedIVF/ICSIFreshNot reportedProgesteroneYes/yes
Barros Delgadillo et al., 2006, Mexico, Ginecol Obstet MexRetrospective cross-sectional/October 1999–November 200426/52Yes (by maternal age and the number of fetus)Control group was selected from the institutional registry/pregnancies resolved before Week 26, diabetes mellitus, systemic chronic arterial hypertension, nephropathies, heart disease and diseases of collagenUnclear≥2 altered values of the glucose tolerance curve of 180 min and by sieve of 50 g of glucose (>180 mg/dl/h).rFSH (300–450 IU)Leuprolide/long≥3 follicles ≥18 mm and E2 ≥ 500 pg/mlIVFFreshDay 3Progesterone vag. or I.M. gel and oral estradiolYes/no
Beyer et al, 2016, Germany, Middle East Fertility Society JournalRetrospective cross-sectional/13-year period467/6417NoART and delivery at the universityCenter/Cryoconservation of 2PN oocytes resulting from IVM cycles and/or assisted hatching; delivery <24w, multiple pregnancies and incomplete data.UnclearNot reportedrFSHCetrorelix or Decapeptyl (long)≥3 follicles ≥17 mm with corresponding E2 serum levelsIVF/ICSIFresh/frozenNot reportedTransdermal estradiol with transvaginal progesteroneYes/no
Cai et al, 2017, Singapore, Hum ReprodProspective cross-sectional/June 2009–September 201076/1013NoAged ≥18 years at 11–14 weeks of gestation/Type 1 diabetes mellitus or were receiving chemotherapy or psychotropic drugs.Yes75 g OGTT after 8–10 h of overnight fasting at 26–28 weeks’ gestation.GDM: ≥7.0 mmol/L for fastingand/or ≥7.8 mmol/L for 2-h postprandial plasma glucose levels (WHO criteria, 1999, 2013)Not reportedNot reportedNot reportedUndefinedUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
Caserta et al., 2008, Italy, Acta Obstetricia et GynecologicaProspective cross-sectional/February 2004–October 2006358/304Yes (parity, age, height, weight, ethnic origin, smoking and no history of infertility)Male cause of infertility/chronic medical disorders, OHSS, female causes of infertilityUnclearNot reportedrFSH (225 IU)Decapeptyl (long)≥3 follicles reached 17 mmICSIFreshDay 2Progesterone vagYes/no
Chaveeva et al, 2011, UK, Fetal Diagnosis and TherapyProspective cross -sectional/January 2000–December 2001634/40 261No11–13 + 6 weeks of gestation/pregnancies conceived by IUI, those with fetal aneuploidies or major defectsUnclearFasting plasma glucose level is at least 6 mmol/l or the plasma glucose level 2 h after the oral administration of 75 g glucose is ≥7.8 mmol/lNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVFUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/no
Dayan et al., 2018, Canada, Hum ReprodRetrospective cross-sectional/January 2013–January 20141596/112 813NoA live or stillborn infant weighing ≥500 g at ≥20 weeks’ gestation/women ≤18 years or with missing maternal age, those with multiple gestations, elective terminations or ectopic or molar pregnancies, and if another form of ART was usedYesNo:BORN birth registry (codes: D0013 & M0531)andCIHI-DAD (codes: O24.5 to O24.8)Not reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVF/ICSIFresh/frozenNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
De Geyter et al., 2006, Switzerland, Hum ReprodProspective cross -sectional/August 1996–March 2004261/443NoPregnancies from infertile couples during the study periodUnclearNot reporteduhMG or rFSHTriptorelin acetate/long or GanirelixNot reportedIVF/ICSIFresh/frozenDay 2Both estradiol valerate and vaginal micronized progesteroneYes/no
Farhi et al., 2013, Israel, Reprod Biomed OnlineProspective cross -sectional/June 2006–December 2008509/587No6–12 weeks of gestation demonstrating one gestational sac with a fetal heart pulseYesNo:The definition of GDM for diagnosis was based solely on patients’ reportNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVF/ICSIFresh/frozenNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
Frankenthal et al., 2018, Israel, Obes Res Clin PractProspective cross -sectional/June 2006–December 2008504/554No6–12 weeks of gestationYesNo:The definition of GDM for diagnosis was based solely on patients’ reportNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedUndefinedUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
Harlev et al., 2018, Israel, Int J Gynaecol ObstetRetrospective cross-sectional/January 1991–December 2013229/7929NoWomen aged at least 40 years/conceived following oocyte donation, were surrogate mothers, or if they had multifetal pregnancies; aged >45 yearsYesOGTT>200 or an OGTT of 100gr with 2 abnormal values in a non-previously diagnosed patient as diabeticNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVF/ICSIUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
Isaksson et al., 2002, Finland, Hum ReprodRetrospective cross-sectional/January 1993–March 199969/345Yes (maternal age, parity, year of birth, mother’s residence, number of children at birth)Pregnancies ending in birth/Triplet pregnancies and those ending in spontaneous abortionUnclearNot reportedhMGBuserelin long≥3 mature follicles ≥18 mmIVF/ICSIUndefinedDay 2Progesterone vagYes/no
Katalinic et al., 2004, Germany, Fertil SterilProspective cross -sectional/ART: August 1998–August 2000Control: January 1993–December 20012687/7938NoPregnancies, conceived after an ICSI procedure and the transfer of fresh embryos before the 16th week of gestation. Control cohort was taken from the Congenital Malformation Monitoring-Centre Saxony-Anhalt/those who could not be contacted after inclusion, congenital malformationYesNo:EUROCAT(code: O24)Not reportedNot reportedNot reportedICSIFreshNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
Knoester et al., 2008, The Netherlands, Fertil SterilProspective cross -sectional/June 1996–December 199987/85Yes (socioeconomic status, gender and birth date)Singletons conceived by ICSI. Regular preschools and primary schools with zip codes that indicated social class distributions similar to the ICSI cohort assisted in the recruitment of naturally conceived singletons/Oocyte or sperm donation, cryopreservation of the embryo and selective embryo reduction with medical indicationUnclearNo:Glucose intolerance of variable degree with onset or first recognition during pregnancyNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedICSIFreshNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
Koivurova et al., 2002, Finland, Hum ReprodRetrospective cross-sectional/1990–1995153/580Yes (sex of the child, year of birth, area, maternal age, parity, social class and fetal plurality)All IVF live births and stillbirths after completion of week 22 of gestation or with a birth weight of ≥500 g derived from registers at the IVF outpatient clinic in the University Hospital and the Infertility Clinic of the Family Federation of Finland/not reportedYesAltered glucose metabolism requiring dietary or insulin treatment. GDM was detected by a 2 h OGTT(Finnish Diabetes Association and international recommendations)hMGBuserelin or Nafarelin longNot reportedIVF/ICSIFreshDay 2Progesterone or chorionic gonadotropin for 14 daysYes/yes
Lee et al., 2018, USA, Fertil SterilProspective cross-sectional/not reported34/74Yes (maternal age, race, ethnicity and fetal sex)All pregnancies at late first trimester at the time of chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and followed until delivery.UnclearNo:Standard ACOG criteria(ICD-10-CM: O24.415)Not reportedNot reportedNot reportedUndefinedFresh/frozenNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
Luke et al., 2017, USA, AJOGRetrospective cross-sectional/July 2004–December 201010 149/459 623NoAll live births of ≥22 weeks’ gestation and ≥350 g birth weight to Massachusetts resident womenYesNo:ICD-9 code: 648.8 (abnormal glucose tolerance of mother, antepartum condition, or complication)Not reportedA range of protocols were used (aromatase inhibitors, minimal stimulation, agonist, agonist flare, antagonist)Not reportedIVF/ICSIFresh/frozenNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
Machtinger et al., 2015, USA, RBMOnlineRetrospective cross-sectional/January 2007–December 2011464/1171NoAll women with either spontaneous or IVF singleton pregnancies followed at the outpatient clinics of the hospital during study period/Pregnancies from Day 5 transfers, multiple pregnancies, pregnancies with vanishing twins, cryopreserved cycles, oocyte donors and gestational carrier cyclesYesNo:Glucose intolerance with onset or first recognition during pregnancyNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVF/ICSIFreshDay 3Not reportedYes/no
Maman et al., 1998, Israel, Fertil SterilRetrospective cross-sectional/1989–1994169/496Yes (maternal age, gestational age and parity)Pregnancies that led to a live birth (≥25 weeks’ gestation or ≥500 g birth weight)UnclearAbnormal fasting blood glucose level or abnormal OGTT result between 24 and 28 weeksof gestation/sequential pregnanciesNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedUndefinedUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
Nagata et al., 2019, Japan, BMC Pregnancy and ChildbirthProspective cross -sectional/January 2011- March2993/88 873NoAll live births of ≥22 weeks’ gestationYesOGTT with 75 g sugar, diagnostic criteria: blood glucose values of (i) ≥92 mg/dl in a fasted state; (ii) ≥180 mg/dl after 1 h; or (iii) ≥153 mg/dL after 2 hNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVF/ICSIFresh/frozenNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
Ochsenkuhnet al, 2003, Germany, Arch Gynecol ObstetRetrospective cross-sectional/1991–1996163/322Yes (maternal age, gestational age and parity)Gestational age of at least 24 completed weeks and/or children with >499 g birth weightYesNo:Screening test with 50 g Glucose and a 100 g OGTTNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedUndefinedUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
Qin et al, 2016, China, Reprod Sci.Prospective cross -sectional/March 2013–February 20161260/2480NoWomen who provided informed consent, belonged to singleton pregnancies, participated in the follow-up process and had a complete case report form/deliveries of women <15 years and >60 years, twin, triplet, and quadruplet) pregnancies, egg donationUnclearNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVF/ICSIUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/no
Reubinoff et al., 1997, Israel, Fertil SterilRetrospective cross-sectional/1983–1993260/260Yes (maternal age, parity, ethnic origin, location and date of delivery)Pregnancies leading to live births (>25 weeks’ gestation or > 500 g birth weight)YesNo:Two abnormal values in OGTTCC + hMG or hMG aloneGnRH analogue (long luteal or follicular)Leading follicle reached 17–20 mm and serum E2 levels >500 pg/mlIVFFresh/frozenNot reportedProgesterone I.M.Yes/yes
Sazonova et al., 2011, Sweden, Hum ReprodRetrospective cross-sectional/2002–200620 236/571 914NoData from 16 IVF clinics were cross-linked with the Swedish Medical Birth Registry and compared with all children born after spontaneous conception during the same time periodYesNo:ICD-10 codesrFSH or hMGAgonist or antagonist protocolsNot reportedIVF/ICSIFresh/frozenNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
Schieve et al., 2007, USA, Matern Child Health JRetrospective cross-sectional/1997–19981400/1400Yes (birth month and year, maternal age, parity, race/ethnicity)Restriction to singletons AND exclusion if: maternal age <20, education <high school, mother not married, public/no health insurance for prenatal care, public/no health insurance for labour and delivery; no or inadequate prenatal care or third trimester initiation of prenatal care, and data on race/ethnicity missingUnclearNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVF/ICSIFresh/frozenNot reportedNot reportedYes/no
Sebastiani et al., 2009, Spain, An Pediatr (Barc).Retrospective cross-sectional/January 1999–December 2005176/185NoData collected from all pregnancies that were conceived in the study period/Hereditary disease, children of alcoholic mothers, drug addicts and children of mothers who have used drugs with potential teratogenic effect during pregnancyUnclearNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVF/ICSIUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/no
Silberstein et al., 2014, Israel, J Matern Fetal Neonatal MedRetrospective cross-sectional/1988–20061294/171 513NoAll women who conceived and delivered singletons at the Soroka University Medical Center in the study periodUnclearNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVFUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/no
Stojnic et al., 2013, Serbia, Clin Exp Obstet GynecolProspective cross-sectional/January 2006–January 2010634/634Yes (maternal age, parity, education, and BMI)All pregnancies with duration of >26 weeks/pregnancies resulting from an oocyte donation, cryopreserved cycles or conceived as twin but continued as singletonYesIf at least two values of plasma glucose concentrations are ≥5.28, 10.0, 8.61 or 7.78 mmol/l for fasting, 1-, 2- and 3-h post-glucose load glucose values, after performing a 100 g OGTT (American Diabetes Association, WHO, 1999)rFSH or hMGGnRH agonist longWhen at least of half of the dominant follicles reached 18 mm in average diameterIVF/ICSIFreshDay 2 or 3Micronized oral/vaginal progesterone 600 mg per day or muscular progesterone 250 mg on every second dayYes/yes
Suzuki et al., 2007, Japan, Reprod Med BiolRetrospective cross-sectional/2002–200689/849NoElderly primiparous women (aged ≥35 years)/Women who underwent GIFT, IUI and OI.NoA 75-g, 2-h OGTTPlasma glucose level meeting two of the following criteria: ≥100 mg/dl while fasting, ≥180 mg/dl after 1 h or ≥150 mg/dl after 2 h (Japan Society of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 1995)Not reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVF/ICSIFreshNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
Szymusik et al., 2019, Poland, Arch Med SciRetrospective cross-sectional/2004–2014336/308Yes (maternal age and parity)Pregnancies who delivered >22 weeks of gestation/history of preterm birth, gestational hypertensive disorders or placental pathologies in the previous pregnancy, oocyte donation, frozen/thawed ET and major fetal anomaliesUnclearOGTT of 75 g ≥92 (fasting), ≥180 (1 h) and ≥153 mg/dl (2 h)Not reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVF/ICSIFreshNot reportedNot reportedYes/yes
Tomic et al., 2011, Croatia, Arch Gynecol ObstetProspective cross-sectional/2006–2009283/283Yes (ethnic origin, maternal age, gravidity, smoking, BMI, weight gain in pregnancy, site and time of delivery)Primiparous women ≥35 years of age with a birth weight at least 500 gUnclearNot reportedrFSH or hMGGnRH agonist long≥2 follicles reached 16–17 mm in diameterUndefinedFreshDay 3–5Progesterone vag gel or capsuleYes/no
Valenzuela-Alcaraz et al., 2016, Spain, J Matern Fetal Neonatal MedRetrospective cross-sectional/2004–2010223/460NoOnly pregnancies that were treated, followed-up and delivered at the Infertility and Assisted Reproduction Unit, Hospital ClinicUnclearNot reportedFSHGnRH agonistNot reportedIVF/ICSIUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/no
Verlaenen et al., 1995, Belgium, Obstet GynecolRetrospective cross-sectional/January 1988–June 1994140/140Yes (parity, maternal age, height, weight, no fertility history)Singleton pregnancies of >20 weeks’ gestation/early pregnancy loss (<20w), embryo reduction, women referred later than 20w’ gestation due to complicationsUnclearNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVFUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/no
Xu et al., 2014, Australia, BMC Pregnancy and ChildbirthRetrospective cross-sectional/January 2007–December 200912 105/381 345NoSingleton births during the study period/records that did not state ART status or gestational ageUnclearNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVF/ICSIUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/no
Xu et al., 2015, China, Zhongguo Dang Dai Er Ke Za ZhiRetrospective cross-sectional/October 2010–October 201294/164NoNewborns admitted to the hospital after deliveryUnclearNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVF/ICSIUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/no
Yang et al., 2019, China, Gynecol EndocrinolRetrospective cross-sectional/January 2015–January 20181663/3326Yesv (maternal age, BMI, parity and gravidity)Deliveries at ≥24 weeks of gestation/uterine malformation, adenomyosis, uterine myoma, submucous myoma, obesity or low weight, severe intrauterine adhesions, chronic hypertension, and diabetesYes2-h 75 g OGTT between 24 and 28 weeks of gestation, if ≥1 of the three plasma glucose concentrations equalled or exceeded the following values: fasting glucose 5.1 mmol/L, 1-h level 10.0 mmol/L and 2-h level 8.5 mmol/LNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVF/ICSIFrozenNot reportedNot reportedYes/no
Zadori et al., 2003, Hungary, J Assist Reprod GenetRetrospective cross-sectional/January 1995–February 2002185/185Yes (maternal age, parity, gravidity and previous obstetric outcome)Deliveries at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Szeged in the study periodUnclearNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedUndefinedUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/no
Zhu et al., 2016, China, Sci RepRetrospective cross-sectional/2006–20141659/5193Yes (maternal age and birth year)Pregnancies conceived during the study periodUnclearNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedNot reportedIVF/ICSIUndefinedNot reportedNot reportedYes/no

GDM: gestational diabetes mellitus; OGTT: oral glucose tolerance test; rFSH: recombinant FSH, CC: clomiphene citrate; E2: estradiol, CC; Clomiphene citrate, ACOG: SC: spontaneous conception, ET: embryo transfer, PCOS: polycystic ovary syndrome, PN: pronuclei, WHO: World Health Organization, OHSS: ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

In the current systematic review and meta-analysis, studies including only patients with PCOS were excluded, as per protocol. In two of the eligible studies, no patients with PCOS were included (Suzuki and Miyake, 2007, Ashrafi ), while in 15 studies, they were included in the population analysed (Reubinoff , Koivurova , Ochsenkuhn , Katalinic , Sazonova , Farhi , Stojnic , Machtinger , Cai , Luke , Dayan , Frankenthal , Harlev , Nagata , Yang ). In the remaining 21 eligible studies, it was unclear whether patients with PCOS were included or not (Verlaenen , Maman , Isaksson , Zadori , Barros Delgadillo , De Geyter , Schieve , Caserta , Knoester , Sebastiani , Chaveeva , Tomic and Tomic, 2011, Silberstein , Xu , Xu , Beyer and Amari, 2016, Valenzuela-Alcaraz , Zhu , Qin , Lee , Szymusik ), although this specific information was requested from the corresponding authors (Table I). No data regarding the proportion of patients with PCOS were available in 12 out of the 15 studies that included women with PCOS, while this proportion was reported in the remaining three studies (Farhi : 12.5%, Machtinger : 2%, Frankenthal : 6.5%). Diagnosis of GDM was present in 4776 out of 63 760 women who achieved singleton pregnancy after ART and in 158 526 out of 1 870 734 women who achieved singleton pregnancy spontaneously. In studies evaluating GDM after ART, IVF/ICSI was performed in 22 studies, IVF only in 5 and ICSI only in 3, whereas this information was not present in eight studies. Fresh and frozen ET were performed in 10 studies, fresh ET only in 11 and frozen ET only in 1, whereas this information was not present in 16 studies. Maternal age (n = 16), parity (n = 11), ethnic origin (n = 7), date of delivery (n = 6) and BMI (n = 3) were the most commonly used variables for matching pregnant women after ART with their counterparts after SC. Additional matching variables included smoking (n = 3), social class (n = 3), gravidity (n = 3), fertility history (n = 3), height (n = 2), weight (n = 2), gestational age (n = 2), education (n = 1) and obstetric outcome (n = 1). Characteristics of the 38 eligible studies included in the systematic review. GDM: gestational diabetes mellitus; OGTT: oral glucose tolerance test; rFSH: recombinant FSH, CC: clomiphene citrate; E2: estradiol, CC; Clomiphene citrate, ACOG: SC: spontaneous conception, ET: embryo transfer, PCOS: polycystic ovary syndrome, PN: pronuclei, WHO: World Health Organization, OHSS: ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

Meta-analysis

Main analysis

Thirty-seven studies (17 matched, 20 unmatched) provided data for the main comparison. Women with singleton pregnancies achieved by ART showed a higher risk of GDM compared with those women who achieved singleton pregnancy spontaneously (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.39–1.69, I2 78.6%, 1 893 599 women) (Fig. 2). No evidence for publication bias was detected using the Harbord–Egger’s test for the primary outcome (P = 0.84).
Figure 2

Gestational diabetes mellitus after ART versus after spontaneous conception in matched and unmatched studies. RR: risk ratio.

Gestational diabetes mellitus after ART versus after spontaneous conception in matched and unmatched studies. RR: risk ratio.

Subgroup analyses—meta-regression

Matched versus unmatched studies

Subgroup analysis was performed according to whether the eligible studies were matched (n = 17) or unmatched (n = 20). This, however, did not change the direction or the magnitude of the effect observed regarding the type of conception and the presence of GDM (matched studies: RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.17–1.72, I2 61.5%, 21 606 women—unmatched studies: RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.40–1.78, I2 84.1%, 1 871 993 women) (Fig. 2). Meta-regression analysis confirmed that the type of study (matched versus. unmatched) did not have a significant effect on the association between type of conception and GDM (coefficient: 0.91, 95% CI 0.67–1.22, P = 0.51).

Prospective versus retrospective cross-sectional studies

Subgroup analysis was performed according to whether eligible studies were prospective (n = 12) or retrospective (n = 25). This, however, did not change the direction or the magnitude of the effect observed regarding the type of conception and the presence of GDM (prospective studies: RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.27–1.83, I2 62.2%, 112 954 women—retrospective studies: RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.36–1.72, I2 82.5%, 1 780 645 women) (Supplementary Fig. S1). Meta-regression analysis confirmed that the type of study (prospective versus retrospective) did not have a significant effect on the association between type of conception and GDM (coefficient: 0.99, 95% CI 0.74–1.35, P = 0.99).

Type of ET

Subgroup analysis was performed according to whether pregnancies after ART were achieved exclusively either by fresh or by frozen ET (n = 17). Compared to women achieving pregnancy spontaneously, a higher risk of GDM was observed in women achieving singleton pregnancy after fresh ET (n = 14) (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.03–1.85, I2 75.4%, 605 740 women). This association was not present when women achieving pregnancy spontaneously were compared with those achieving singleton pregnancy after frozen ET (n = 3) (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.10–2.19; I2 73.1%, 12 186 women) (Fig. 3). Meta-regression analysis did not detect a significant effect of type of ET (fresh versus frozen) on the association between type of conception and GDM (coefficient: 0.53, 95% CI 0.19–1.44, P = 0.19).
Figure 3

Gestational diabetes mellitus after ART versus after spontaneous conception according to type of embryo transfer. ET: embryo transfer.

Gestational diabetes mellitus after ART versus after spontaneous conception according to type of embryo transfer. ET: embryo transfer.

Method of fertilization

Subgroup analysis was performed according to whether pregnancies were achieved exclusively after IVF or ICSI (n = 13). Compared to women achieving pregnancy spontaneously, a higher risk of GDM was observed in women achieving singleton pregnancy by IVF (n = 7) (RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.56–2.44, I2 43.1%, 265 253 women). This association was not present when women achieving singleton pregnancy spontaneously were compared with those achieving singleton pregnancy by ICSI (n = 6) (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.94–2.15, I2 73.5%, 103 402 women) (Fig. 4). Meta-regression analysis did not detect a significant effect of method of fertilization (IVF versus ICSI) on the association between type of conception and GDM (coefficient: 0.80, 95% CI 0.45–1.41, P = 0.40).
Figure 4

Gestational diabetes mellitus after ART versus after spontaneous conception according to method of fertilization.

Gestational diabetes mellitus after ART versus after spontaneous conception according to method of fertilization. Gestational diabetes mellitus after ART versus after spontaneous conception in studies including patients with PCOS or not, or whether this information was unclear. PCOS: polycystic ovary syndrome

Inclusion of patients with PCOS

Subgroup analysis was performed according to whether studies included patients with PCOS (n = 15), excluded specifically patients with PCOS (n = 2) or this information was unclear (n = 20). This, however, did not change the significance or the direction of the effect observed regarding the type of conception and the presence of GDM (patients with PCOS excluded: RR 4.12, 95% CI 2.63–6.45, I2 0%, − patients with PCOS included: RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.33–1.66, I2 75.0%, − unclear information: RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.22–1.75, I2 77.7%) (Fig. 5). Meta-regression analysis detected a significant effect (P < 0.03) of the population analysed on the association between type of conception and the presence of GDM. More specifically, the RR of GDM after ART compared to SC was significantly higher in studies that specifically excluded patients with PCOS compared to those which included patients with PCOS (P < 0.01) or to those in which this information was unclear (P < 0.01).
Figure 5

Gestational diabetes mellitus after ART versus after spontaneous conception in studies including patients with PCOS or not, or whether this information was unclear. PCOS: polycystic ovary syndrome

Quality assessment by NOS

Subgroup analysis was performed according to whether eligible studies were classified as of ‘good quality’ (n = 24) or as of ‘poor quality’ (n = 13). This, however, did not change the direction or the magnitude of the effect observed regarding the type of conception and the presence of GDM (‘good quality’ studies: RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.35–1.74, I2 74.8%, 709 503 women—‘poor quality’ studies: RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.26–1.79, I2 83.9%, 1 184 096 women) (Supplementary Fig. S2).

Discussion

Main findings

This systematic review and meta-analysis, including 1 934 494 pregnant women and 163 302 women with GDM, showed an increased risk of GDM in women achieving singleton pregnancy by ART compared with those achieving singleton pregnancy spontaneously. This higher risk was observed after IVF but not after ICSI, and after fresh but not after frozen ET. Nevertheless, meta-regression analyses did not detect any significant effect of method of fertilization or type of ET on the association between GDM and type of conception.

Strengths

To accurately evaluate the association between ART and risk of GDM, studies including exclusively women with PCOS and multiple pregnancies were excluded, since they are considered as strong risk factors for the development of GDM (Qin , Yu ). To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest systematic review and meta-analysis focusing on the association between ART and risk of GDM in singleton pregnancies. The present meta-analysis is sufficiently large to provide precise risk estimates. Moreover, it allowed us to perform subgroup analyses, aiming to evaluate the impact of fertilization method and type of ET on the risk of GDM.

Limitations

The definition of GDM was not reported or was unclear in several studies, while a high degree of heterogeneity in its definition was present among those studies that offered such data. Thus, no meaningful subgroup analysis was feasible. Moreover, although the quality of most of the studies was characterised as ‘good’ by NOS, the retrospective design in the majority of the included studies, as well as the fact that most of the studies were unmatched, are potential sources of bias. Nevertheless, the higher risk of GDM in women achieving singleton pregnancy after ART as compared to those achieving pregnancy after SC did not change in subgroup analyses, evaluating whether pooled studies were prospective/retrospective or matched/unmatched.

Comparison with the literature

Two previous meta-analyses evaluated the association between ART and risk of GDM in singleton pregnancies (Jackson , Pandey ). Both meta-analyses showed a higher risk for GDM, although with a limited number of studies [Jackson : odds ratio (OR) 2.00, 95% CI 1.36–2.99, n = 4, 2291 women; Pandey : RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.33–1.66, n = 6, 587 790 women]. In the present meta-analysis, the overall sample size increased from 587 790 to 1 934 494 women compared with the meta-analysis by Pandey ).

Interpretation of the study

The underlying mechanisms regarding the increased risk of GDM in women achieving singleton pregnancy by ART compared with those achieving singleton pregnancy spontaneously remain unclear. Moreover, whether the association observed is explained by the presence of infertility per se or the ART procedure performed cannot be evaluated on the basis of the data presented (Wang ). A potential explanation for the increased risk of GDM after ART might be the use of progesterone for luteal phase support in all ART cycles as well as during the first trimester of pregnancy (Rebarber , Ashrafi ). Progesterone is known to increase insulin resistance (Branisteanu and Mathieu, 2003), which can lead to GDM. Although a higher risk of GDM was observed after fresh but not after frozen ET, meta-regression analysis failed to detect a potential effect of the type of ET (fresh versus frozen) on the GDM risk. This might be due to the fact that the number of datasets pooled, comparing pregnancies after frozen ET versus pregnancies after SC, was limited (n = 3), in contrast to that comparing pregnancies after fresh ET versus pregnancies after SC (n = 14). Alternatively, the higher risk of GDM only after fresh ET might be due to the known adverse effects of ovarian stimulation on endometrial receptivity (Kolibianakis , Van Vaerenbergh ). Endometrial quality is reported to be associated with the incidence of GDM in singleton pregnancies, since a higher probability of GDM is shown to be present after frozen ET in a hormonal replacement cycle compared with frozen ET in a natural cycle (adjusted OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.39–0.69) (Saito ). The higher risk of GDM, observed only after fresh ET, might be attributed to differences in the quality of placentation between fresh cycles and frozen-thawed cycles (Kansal Kalra ), explained by differences in the hormonal peri-implantation environment in these two clinical scenarios. It has been suggested that supraphysiologic steroid hormone levels during the fresh stimulated cycles may lead to abnormal endometrial angiogenesis and abnormal placentation (Maheshwari ). Altered placental gene regulation has been associated with GDM, probably through epigenetic mechanisms involvement (Nomura , Finer , Reichetzeder ). Regarding the method of fertilization, although the higher risk of GDM was statistically significant only after IVF but not after ICSI, the direction and magnitude of the effect were similar in both groups, while meta-regression analysis did not detect any significant effect of the fertilization method on the association between GDM and type of conception. Thus, it appears that the method of fertilization does not affect the association between GDM and type of conception. The higher risk of GDM, observed only after IVF but not after ICSI, might be due to the expected higher proportion of women with female pathology associated not only with infertility, but also with GDM, such as advanced maternal age and obesity. On the contrary, in couples undergoing ICSI the expected main cause leading to infertility is male factor and the anticipated presence of the above risk factors in these couples is lower. Due to the fact that a higher risk of GDM has been reported among women with PCOS compared to those without PCOS (Palomba , Azziz , Bahri Khomami ), the observed association between the type of conception and GDM could be partially attributed to the inclusion of women with PCOS in many of the eligible studies. However, by performing subgroup analysis and meta-regression, the higher risk of GDM after ART compared to SC was still present in studies that specifically excluded PCOS women. In fact, the RR of GDM after ART compared to SC was significantly higher in studies that specifically excluded patients with PCOS compared to those which included them or to those in which this information was unclear. Thus, the effect of the presence of patients with PCOS in many of the eligible studies is probably negligible, which might be attributed to the relatively low proportion of women with PCOS patients in these studies. Women achieving pregnancy after ART should be monitored for GDM, since the risk is increased compared with SC pregnancies. Early detection as well as appropriate support and care is warranted, aiming to avoid serious complications during pregnancy. Whether this risk is attributed to the underlying infertility status of the couples undergoing ART as compared with those who conceived spontaneously needs to be further elucidated.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the present systematic review and meta-analysis, by analysing 1 893 599 women, showed a higher risk of GDM in women achieving singleton pregnancy by ART compared with those achieving pregnancy spontaneously. This finding highlights the importance of early detection of GDM in women treated by ART, which could lead to timely and effective interventions, prior to ART as well as during early pregnancy. Click here for additional data file. Click here for additional data file. Click here for additional data file. Click here for additional data file.
  61 in total

1.  Gestational diabetes in IVF and spontaneous pregnancies.

Authors:  Monika Szymanska; Edyta Horosz; Iwona Szymusik; Dorota Bomba-Opon; Miroslaw Wielgos
Journal:  Neuro Endocrinol Lett       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 0.765

2.  [Factors associated with assisted reproduction technologies and neonatal outcomes].

Authors:  G Sebastiani; A Pertierra Cortada; E Vidal Sordé; J Figueras Aloy; J Balasch Cortina
Journal:  An Pediatr (Barc)       Date:  2009-03-25       Impact factor: 1.500

3.  Contribution of method of conception on pregnancy outcome after the 11-13 weeks scan.

Authors:  Petya Chaveeva; Ilma F Carbone; Argyro Syngelaki; Ranjit Akolekar; Kypros H Nicolaides
Journal:  Fetal Diagn Ther       Date:  2011-02-24       Impact factor: 2.587

4.  Risk of preterm delivery in singletons conceived by in vitro fertilization.

Authors:  Puyu Yang; Huixian Kang; Caihong Ma; Yuan Wei; Liyuan Tao; Zhangxin Wu
Journal:  Gynecol Endocrinol       Date:  2019-05-19       Impact factor: 2.260

5.  Meta-analysis in clinical trials.

Authors:  R DerSimonian; N Laird
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1986-09

6.  Obstetric outcomes of elderly primiparous singleton pregnancies conceived by in vitro fertilization compared with those conceived spontaneously.

Authors:  Shunji Suzuki; Hidehiko Miyake
Journal:  Reprod Med Biol       Date:  2007-11-07

Review 7.  Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies resulting from IVF/ICSI: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Shilpi Pandey; Ashalatha Shetty; Mark Hamilton; Siladitya Bhattacharya; Abha Maheshwari
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2012-05-19       Impact factor: 15.610

8.  Differential gene expression during placentation in pregnancies conceived with different fertility treatments compared with spontaneous pregnancies.

Authors:  Bora Lee; Alex F Koeppel; Erica T Wang; Tania L Gonzalez; Tianyanxin Sun; Lindsay Kroener; Yayu Lin; Nikhil V Joshi; Tejal Ghadiali; Stephen D Turner; Stephen S Rich; Charles R Farber; Jerome I Rotter; Yii-Der Ida Chen; Mark O Goodarzi; Seth Guller; Bryna Harwood; Tania B Serna; John Williams; Margareta D Pisarska
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2019-01-02       Impact factor: 7.329

9.  Perinatal outcomes in singletons following in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Rebecca A Jackson; Kimberly A Gibson; Yvonne W Wu; Mary S Croughan
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  Are singleton pregnancies after assisted reproduction technology (ART) associated with a higher risk of placental anomalies compared with non-ART singleton pregnancies? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  B G Vermey; A Buchanan; G M Chambers; E M Kolibianakis; J Bosdou; M G Chapman; C A Venetis
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2018-05-08       Impact factor: 6.531

View more
  16 in total

1.  Obstetric and Perinatal Complications Associated with Assisted Reproductive Techniques - Review.

Authors:  Andreea Madalina Banica; Simona Daniela Popescu; Simona Vladareanu
Journal:  Maedica (Bucur)       Date:  2021-09

2.  Cohort profile: Anhui Maternal-Child Health Study in China.

Authors:  Jiaqian Yin; Yunxia Cao; Chunmei Liang; Xiaoqing Peng; Xiaofeng Xu; Weiju Zhou; Ranjit Khutan; Fang-Biao Tao; Ruoling Chen
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-06-28       Impact factor: 3.006

3.  GnRH Antagonist Protocol Versus GnRH Agonist Long Protocol: A Retrospective Cohort Study on Clinical Outcomes and Maternal-Neonatal Safety.

Authors:  Jieru Zhu; Weijie Xing; Tao Li; Hui Lin; Jianping Ou
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-06-29       Impact factor: 6.055

4.  Dose-response association between maternal pre-pregnancy bodyweight and gestational diabetes mellitus following ART treatment: a population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Yiquan Xiong; Jing Wang; Yana Qi; Chunrong Liu; Mingxi Li; Guanhua Yao; Wei Sun; Yongyao Qian; Lishan Ye; Hui Liu; Qiushi Xu; Kang Zou; Jing Tan; Xin Sun
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2022-06-22       Impact factor: 4.982

5.  In vitro fertilization increases the odds of gestational diabetes: a nationwide register-based cohort study.

Authors:  Matias Vaajala; Rasmus Liukkonen; Ville Ponkilainen; Ville M Mattila; Maiju Kekki; Ilari Kuitunen
Journal:  Acta Diabetol       Date:  2022-10-22       Impact factor: 4.087

6.  Association between pregravid liver enzyme levels and gestational diabetes in twin pregnancies: a secondary analysis of national cohort study.

Authors:  Jae-Young Park; Woo Jeng Kim; Yoo Hyun Chung; Bongseong Kim; Yonggyu Park; In Yang Park; Hyun Sun Ko
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-09-21       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Blastocyst Transfer: A Risk Factor for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Women Undergoing In Vitro Fertilization.

Authors:  Huijun Chen; Jian Li; Sufen Cai; Sha Tang; Suimin Zeng; Chang Chu; Carl-Friedrich Hocher; Benjamin Rösing; Bernhard K Krämer; Liang Hu; Ge Lin; Fei Gong; Berthold Hocher
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 5.958

8.  Pregnancy-related complications and perinatal outcomes following progesterone supplementation before 20 weeks of pregnancy in spontaneously achieved singleton pregnancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hanglin Wu; Songying Zhang; Xiaona Lin; Jing He; Shasha Wang; Ping Zhou
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2021-11-04       Impact factor: 5.211

9.  Effects of early maternal cancer and fertility treatment on the risk of adverse birth outcomes.

Authors:  Cathrine Everhøj; Filippa Nyboe Norsker; Catherine Rechnitzer; Sofie de Fine Licht; Thomas T Nielsen; Susanne K Kjær; Allan Jensen; Marie Hargreave; Jane Christensen; Federica Belmonte; Stine Kjaer Urhoj; Katrine Strandberg-Larsen; Jeanette F Winther; Line Kenborg
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2022-04-04

10.  Additional Adverse Perinatal Outcomes With No Effect on Neonatal Mortality and Birth Defects in Pregnancies Conceived by Assisted Reproductive Technology.

Authors:  Yingying Xiong; Xiaodong Zang; Tingting Xie; Chaolei Yang; Xiaohua Jiang; Mingwu Chen
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 3.418

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.