Flavia T S Elias1,2, Danielle Weber-Adrian1, Jessica Pudwell1, Jillian Carter1, Mark Walker3, Laura Gaudet1, Graeme Smith1, Maria P Velez4,5. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kingston General Hospital, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, K7L 2V7, Canada. 2. Health Technology Assessment Program, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Brasilia, Brazil. 3. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Newborn Care, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, K1H 8M5, Canada. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kingston General Hospital, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, K7L 2V7, Canada. maria.velez@queensu.ca. 5. Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, K7L 3N6, Canada. maria.velez@queensu.ca.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The use of assisted reproductive technology (ART) has increased in the last 2 decades and continuous surveillance is needed. This systematic review aims to assess the risk of adverse neonatal outcomes (preterm birth [PTB], low birth weight [LBW], small-for-gestationalage [SGA] and large for gestational-age [LGA]), in singleton pregnancies conceived by fresh or frozen embryo transfer (FET) compared to spontaneous conceptions. METHODS: Cohort studies were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library (January 2019), and manual search. Meta-analyses were performed to estimate odds ratios (OR) using random effects models in RevMan 5.3 and I-squared (I2) test > 50% was considered as high heterogeneity. RESULTS: After 3142 titles and abstracts were screened, 1180 full-text articles were assessed, and 14 were eligible. For fresh embryo transfer, the pooled ORs were PTB 1.64 (95% CI 1.46, 1.84); I2 = 97%; LBW 1.67 (95% CI 1.52, 1.85); I2 = 94%; SGA 1.46 [95% CI 1.11, 1.92]; I2 = 99%, LGA 0.88 (95% CI 0.80, 0.87); I2 = 80%). For frozen, the pooled ORs were PTB 1.39 (95% CI 1.34, 1.44); I2 = 0%; LBW 1.38 (95% CI 0.91, 2.09); I2 = 98%; SGA 0.83 (95% CI 0.57, 1.19); I2 = 0%, LGA 1.57 (95% CI 1.48, 1.68); I2 = 22%). CONCLUSIONS: When compared with spontaneous pregnancies, fresh, but not frozen was associated with LBW and SGA. Both fresh and frozen were associated with PTB. Frozen was uniquely associated with LGA. Despite improvements in ART protocols in relation to pregnancy rates, attention is needed towards monitoring adverse neonatal outcomes in these pregnancies.
PURPOSE: The use of assisted reproductive technology (ART) has increased in the last 2 decades and continuous surveillance is needed. This systematic review aims to assess the risk of adverse neonatal outcomes (preterm birth [PTB], low birth weight [LBW], small-for-gestationalage [SGA] and large for gestational-age [LGA]), in singleton pregnancies conceived by fresh or frozen embryo transfer (FET) compared to spontaneous conceptions. METHODS: Cohort studies were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library (January 2019), and manual search. Meta-analyses were performed to estimate odds ratios (OR) using random effects models in RevMan 5.3 and I-squared (I2) test > 50% was considered as high heterogeneity. RESULTS: After 3142 titles and abstracts were screened, 1180 full-text articles were assessed, and 14 were eligible. For fresh embryo transfer, the pooled ORs were PTB 1.64 (95% CI 1.46, 1.84); I2 = 97%; LBW 1.67 (95% CI 1.52, 1.85); I2 = 94%; SGA 1.46 [95% CI 1.11, 1.92]; I2 = 99%, LGA 0.88 (95% CI 0.80, 0.87); I2 = 80%). For frozen, the pooled ORs were PTB 1.39 (95% CI 1.34, 1.44); I2 = 0%; LBW 1.38 (95% CI 0.91, 2.09); I2 = 98%; SGA 0.83 (95% CI 0.57, 1.19); I2 = 0%, LGA 1.57 (95% CI 1.48, 1.68); I2 = 22%). CONCLUSIONS: When compared with spontaneous pregnancies, fresh, but not frozen was associated with LBW and SGA. Both fresh and frozen were associated with PTB. Frozen was uniquely associated with LGA. Despite improvements in ART protocols in relation to pregnancy rates, attention is needed towards monitoring adverse neonatal outcomes in these pregnancies.
Authors: Nakeisha A Lodge-Tulloch; Flavia T S Elias; Jessica Pudwell; Laura Gaudet; Mark Walker; Graeme N Smith; Maria P Velez Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2021-03-22 Impact factor: 3.007
Authors: Siri E Håberg; Christian M Page; Yunsung Lee; Haakon E Nustad; Maria C Magnus; Kristine L Haftorn; Ellen Ø Carlsen; William R P Denault; Jon Bohlin; Astanand Jugessur; Per Magnus; Håkon K Gjessing; Robert Lyle Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2022-04-07 Impact factor: 17.694
Authors: Kjersti Westvik-Johari; Liv Bente Romundstad; Deborah A Lawlor; Christina Bergh; Mika Gissler; Anna-Karina A Henningsen; Siri E Håberg; Ulla-Britt Wennerholm; Aila Tiitinen; Anja Pinborg; Signe Opdahl Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2021-06-25 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Doretta Caramaschi; James Jungius; Christian M Page; Boris Novakovic; Richard Saffery; Jane Halliday; Sharon Lewis; Maria C Magnus; Stephanie J London; Siri E Håberg; Caroline L Relton; Deborah A Lawlor; Hannah R Elliott Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2021-07-19 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Mitana Purkayastha; Stephen A Roberts; Julian Gardiner; Daniel R Brison; Scott M Nelson; Deborah Lawlor; Barbara Luke; Alastair Sutcliffe Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-07-19 Impact factor: 2.692