Nakeisha A Lodge-Tulloch1, Flavia T S Elias1,2, Jessica Pudwell1, Laura Gaudet1, Mark Walker3, Graeme N Smith1, Maria P Velez4,5. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kingston General Hospital, Queen's University, Victory 4, 76 Stuart St, Kingston, Ontario, K7L 2V7, Canada. 2. Health Technology Assessment Program, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Brasilia, Brazil. 3. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Newborn Care, University of Ottawa, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8M5, Canada. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kingston General Hospital, Queen's University, Victory 4, 76 Stuart St, Kingston, Ontario, K7L 2V7, Canada. maria.velez@queensu.ca. 5. Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, 62 Fifth Field Company Lane, Kingston, Ontario, K7L 3N6, Canada. maria.velez@queensu.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Caesarean section rates are higher among pregnancies conceived by assisted reproductive technology (ART) compared to spontaneous conceptions (SC), implying an increase in neonatal and maternal morbidity. We aimed to compare caesarean section rates in ART pregnancies versus SC, overall, by indication (elective versus emergent), and by type of ART treatment (in-vitro fertilization (IVF), intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), fresh embryo transfer, frozen embryo transfer) in a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL databases using the OVID Platform from 1993 to 2019, and the search was completed in January 2020. The eligibility criteria were cohort studies with singleton conceptions after in-vitro fertilization and/or intracytoplasmic sperm injection using autologous oocytes versus spontaneous conceptions. The study quality was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale and GRADE approach. Meta-analyses were performed using odds ratios (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) using random effect models in RevMan 5.3, and I-squared (I2) test > 75% was considered as high heterogeneity. RESULTS: One thousand seven hundred fifty studies were identified from the search of which 34 met the inclusion criteria. Compared to spontaneous conceptions, IVF/ICSI pregnancies were associated with a 1.90-fold increase of odds of caesarean section (95% CI 1.76, 2.06). When stratified by indication, IVF/ICSI pregnancies were associated with a 1.91-fold increase of odds of elective caesarean section (95% CI 1.37, 2.67) and 1.38-fold increase of odds of emergent caesarean section (95% CI 1.09, 1.75). The heterogeneity of the studies was high and the GRADE assessment moderate to low, which can be explained by the observational design of the included studies. CONCLUSIONS: The odds of delivering by caesarean section are greater for ART singleton pregnancies compared to spontaneous conceptions. Preconception and pregnancy care plans should focus on minimizing the risks that may lead to emergency caesarean sections and finding strategies to understand and decrease the rate of elective caesarean sections.
BACKGROUND: Caesarean section rates are higher among pregnancies conceived by assisted reproductive technology (ART) compared to spontaneous conceptions (SC), implying an increase in neonatal and maternal morbidity. We aimed to compare caesarean section rates in ART pregnancies versus SC, overall, by indication (elective versus emergent), and by type of ART treatment (in-vitro fertilization (IVF), intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), fresh embryo transfer, frozen embryo transfer) in a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL databases using the OVID Platform from 1993 to 2019, and the search was completed in January 2020. The eligibility criteria were cohort studies with singleton conceptions after in-vitro fertilization and/or intracytoplasmic sperm injection using autologous oocytes versus spontaneous conceptions. The study quality was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale and GRADE approach. Meta-analyses were performed using odds ratios (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) using random effect models in RevMan 5.3, and I-squared (I2) test > 75% was considered as high heterogeneity. RESULTS: One thousand seven hundred fifty studies were identified from the search of which 34 met the inclusion criteria. Compared to spontaneous conceptions, IVF/ICSI pregnancies were associated with a 1.90-fold increase of odds of caesarean section (95% CI 1.76, 2.06). When stratified by indication, IVF/ICSI pregnancies were associated with a 1.91-fold increase of odds of elective caesarean section (95% CI 1.37, 2.67) and 1.38-fold increase of odds of emergent caesarean section (95% CI 1.09, 1.75). The heterogeneity of the studies was high and the GRADE assessment moderate to low, which can be explained by the observational design of the included studies. CONCLUSIONS: The odds of delivering by caesarean section are greater for ART singleton pregnancies compared to spontaneous conceptions. Preconception and pregnancy care plans should focus on minimizing the risks that may lead to emergency caesarean sections and finding strategies to understand and decrease the rate of elective caesarean sections.
Authors: Erica Ginström Ernstad; Christina Bergh; Ali Khatibi; Karin B M Källén; Göran Westlander; Staffan Nilsson; Ulla-Britt Wennerholm Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: T Perri; R Chen; R Yoeli; P Merlob; R Orvieto; Y Shalev; Z Ben-Rafael; I Bar-Hava Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: Tracy Shevell; Fergal D Malone; John Vidaver; T Flint Porter; David A Luthy; Christine H Comstock; Gary D Hankins; Keith Eddleman; Siobhan Dolan; Lorraine Dugoff; Sabrina Craigo; Ilan E Timor; Stephen R Carr; Honor M Wolfe; Diana W Bianchi; Mary E D'Alton Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Ties Boerma; Carine Ronsmans; Dessalegn Y Melesse; Aluisio J D Barros; Fernando C Barros; Liang Juan; Ann-Beth Moller; Lale Say; Ahmad Reza Hosseinpoor; Mu Yi; Dácio de Lyra Rabello Neto; Marleen Temmerman Journal: Lancet Date: 2018-10-13 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Clara Bermúdez-Tamayo; Emilia Fernández Ruiz; Guadalupe Pastor Moreno; Gracia Maroto-Navarro; Leticia Garcia-Mochon; Francisco Jose Perez-Ramos; Africa Caño-Aguilar; Maria Del Pilar Velez Journal: Reprod Health Date: 2017-08-29 Impact factor: 3.223
Authors: Tomáš Fait; Anna Šťastná; Jiřina Kocourková; Eva Waldaufová; Luděk Šídlo; Michal Kníže Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2022-06-06 Impact factor: 3.105
Authors: Alexa Fine; Natalie Dayan; Maya Djerboua; Jessica Pudwell; Deshayne B Fell; Simone N Vigod; Joel G Ray; Maria P Velez Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2022-08-25 Impact factor: 6.353