| Literature DB >> 34761114 |
Masumeh Ghazanfarpour1, Zahra Atarodi Kashani2, Reza Pakzad3, Fatemeh Abdi4,5, Fatemeh Alsadat Rahnemaei6, Pouran Akhavan Akbari7, Nasibeh Roozbeh4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The increasing use of new technologies by pregnant women inevitably exposes them to the risks of the electromagnetic fields (EMFs). According to the World Health Organization, EMFs are the major sources of pollutants which harm human health. This study was aimed to evaluate the effects of EMF exposure on abortion.Entities:
Keywords: abortion; electromagnetic field; miscarriage; radiofrequency waves
Year: 2021 PMID: 34761114 PMCID: PMC8569282 DOI: 10.1515/med-2021-0384
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Open Med (Wars)
Search Strategy for systematic review
| ID | Search term |
|---|---|
| 1. | “electromagnetic fields”[MeSH Terms] OR “electromagnetic field”[Title/Abstract] OR “magnetic field”[Title/Abstract] OR “electromagnetic wave”[Title/Abstract] OR “EMF”[Title/Abstract] OR “EMW”[Title/Abstract] OR “cell phone”[Title/Abstract] OR “cellphone”[Title/Abstract] OR “car phone”[Title/Abstract] OR “cellular phone”[Title/Abstract] OR “cellular telephone”[Title/Abstract] OR “mobile phone”[Title/Abstract] OR “mobile telephone”[Title/Abstract] OR “Telephone”[Title/Abstract] OR “Mobile”[Title/Abstract] OR “heated water”[Title/Abstract] OR “electric blanket”[Title/Abstract] OR “wire codes”[Title/Abstract] OR “X-rays”[Title/Abstract] OR “computer terminal”[Title/Abstract] OR “video display terminal”[Title/Abstract] OR “VDTs”[Title/Abstract] OR “Microwave”[Title/Abstract] OR “microwaves”[MeSH Terms] OR “radiofrequency”[Title/Abstract] OR “RF”[Title/Abstract] OR “RF-EMFs”[Title/Abstract] |
| 2. | “abortion, spontaneous”[MeSH Terms] OR “spontaneous abortion”[Title/Abstract] OR “Abortion”[Title/Abstract] OR “Miscarriage”[Title/Abstract] OR “fetal loss”[Title/Abstract] OR “early pregnancy loss”[Title/Abstract] OR “early pregnancy losses”[Title/Abstract] |
| 3. | #1 AND #2 |
Figure 1PRISMA Flowchart of selected studies.
Figure 2Forest plot for odds ratio of miscarriage based on random effects model. The midpoint of each line segment shows the odds ratio of miscarriage, the length of the line segment indicates the 95% confidence interval in each study, and the diamond mark illustrates the pooled odds ratio.
Overview of all studies included in systematic review
| Author (year) | Study design | Sample size | Region | Age (year) | GA (week) | EMF | Results | QS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Khan et al. (2018) [ | Cohort | 4,157 (574) | Finland | 18.4–39 (27.2) | 26.7–42.3 | EAS devices | No excess risk of miscarriage were observed between cashiers working in grocery stores with and without EAS systems (OR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.48–1.93) | 9 |
| Zhou et al. (2017) [ | CS | 32,296 | China | 16–45 (28.79 ± 2.80) | <28 | Mobile communication base station, mobile phone, microwave oven, induction cooker, electric blanket, and hair perming and dying appliance | There was no excess risk of spontaneous abortion in pregnant women using mobile phone ( | 8 |
| The residence within 100 m of mobile communication base station was an independent risk factor for spontaneous abortion ( | ||||||||
| Li et al. (2017) [ | Cohort | 913 | California | 18≤ | <10 | EMDEX Lite meter (Enertech Consultants Inc.) for 24 h during pregnancy | Women who were exposed to higher MF levels (higher than three quartiles) had 48% greater risk of miscarriage (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.03–2.14) than those with lower MF exposure in the lowest quartiles (OR: 1.54; 95% CI: 2.38–1.03) | 8 |
| Abad et al. (2016) [ | CS | 413 | Iran | 18–35 (28.2) | <12 | All wireless services, TV Band I, FM-Radio, mid wave, paging, Band III (DVB-T), trains, Band IV (DVB-T), Band V (DAB), GSM-R, GSM 900, L-Band (DAB), GSM 1800, DECT, UMTS-TDD, UMTS DL, W-LAN, and ISM. | An increased risk of miscarriage was observed in women who were exposed to significant levels of electromagnetic wave; however, Wald test did not confirm this finding (OR = 1.12 [0.83–1.52]; | 9 |
| Mahmoudabadi et al. (2015) [ | CC | 472 | Iran | 18–35 | <14 | Mobile phones | A significant association was observed between use of mobile phone during pregnancy and the risk of spontaneous abortion ( | 7 |
| Wang et al. (2013) [ | Cohort | 450 | China | 15–44 | 8 | High-voltage power lines and substations (110–500 kV) | Miscarriage risk was significantly associated with maximum alley exposure ( | 8 |
| Shamsi Mohammadabadi (2013) [ | CC | 116 | Iran | 18–35 | <14 | EMF in the participants´ houses by an exposure level tester (3D EMF tester/Model: ELF-828; Taiwan) | The magnitude of ELF-EMF in the participants´ houses was significantly different between the two groups (miscarriage and normal delivery) ( | 8 |
| Zhang et al. (2011) [ | CC | 552 | China | 24–35 | 9.3 ± 2.8 | Computer and cell phone | Pregnant women who used computer and cell phone more than 6 h per week were more likely to have abortion ( | 8 |
| Fucic et al. (2008) [ | Cohort | 112 | Republic of Croatia | 15–44 | <26 | X-rays in radiological hospital and radioisotopes in nuclear medicine and biochemical diagnostics hospital | At least a three-fold higher rate of spontaneous abortions was found among women exposed to radioisotopes than those exposed to X-ray (OR = 3.68, 95% CI = 1.39–9.74, | 7 |
| Li et al. (2002) [ | Cohort | 969 | United States | <35 | <10 | Spot measurements were taken in the subject’s bedroom, the kitchen, and the most frequently occupied room that was neither a bedroom nor a kitchen | Prenatal maximum MF exposure above a certain level (possibly around 16 mG) may be associated with miscarriage risk (RR: 1.88 [1.2–2.7]) | 8 |
| Lee et al. (2002) [ | CC | 713 | California | ≥18 | <20 | Residential wire codes, very high current configuration, ordinary high current configuration, and ordinary low current configuration | The maximum personal MF exposures is associated with the risk of clinical miscarriages and there was a dose response effect with an increase in exposure and with the number of environments (OR: 1.24 [0.70–2.10]) | 7 |
| A prospective substudy showed that mothers exposed to EFMs greater than 2 mG had a 3.58 times (0.89–11.75) increased relative risk of miscarriage compared to mothers exposed to EFMs lower than 2 mG | ||||||||
| Lee et al. (2000) [ | CC | 5,144 | California | ≥18 | ≤13 | Electric bed heaters | Women who used electric blankets at low settings for most of the night ( | 7 |
| Grasso (1997) et al. [ | CC | 1,656 | Italy | 15–44 | 12 | Video display units | There was no association between video display terminal (VDT) exposure and spontaneous abortion (OR: 1.01 (0.80–1.21)) | 7 |
| Juutilainen et al. (1993) [ | CC | 191 | Finland | 29 ± 4.3 | ≤12 | MF in the living room, in the kitchen, and in the parents’ bedroom | Exposure to MF greater than 2.5 mG or 0.2 A/m in the case group had risks 5.44× higher than the controls (OR = 5.44, 1.10–28.0) | 7 |
| Ouellet-Hellstrom et al. (1993) [ | CC | 3,322 | United States | 20< | <28 | Radio and microwave-frequency electromagnetic radiation | The OR in physiotherapists exposed to microwave diathermy equipment (20 or more exposures/month) was 1.28. The overall OR was slightly lower after it was controlled for prior fetal loss (OR = 1.26, 95% CI: 1.00–1.59). The risk of miscarriage was not associated with the reported use of shortwave diathermy equipment (OR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.91–1.24) | 7 |
| Lindbohm et al. (1992) [ | CC | 585 | Finland | 20–35 | ≤12 | VDTS | Use of VDTs by pregnant women during the first trimester of pregnancy were not a risk factor for spontaneous abortion (OR: 93; CI: 063–1.38; | 7 |
| Workers who had used VDTs for more than 20 h per week compared to those who used VDTs for less than 20 h per week had a 2.1-fold increased risk for miscarriage (3.70–0.80) and based on the type of device used, workers exposed to EMFs more than 0.4 µT had a 3.8-fold increased risk of miscarriage compared to those exposed to EMFs lower than 0.4 µT (1.10–6.80) | ||||||||
| Goldhaber et al. (1988) [ | CC | 1,078 | California | 17< | <28 | VDTS | Exposure over 20 h per week was significantly associated with a relative risk for miscarriage (OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.2–2.8) | 7 |
EMF: electromagnetic field; GA: gestational age; QS: quality score; CC: case-control; CS: cross-sectional; OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; EAS: electronic article surveillance; MF: magnetic field.
Result of univariate meta-regression analysis for heterogeneity determinants of ORs of miscarriage
| Variables | Coefficient | 95% CI |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Mother’s age (year) | 0.051 | −0.133 to 0.236 | 0.537 |
| Publication year (year) | −0.011 | −0.032 to 0.010 | 0.300 |
| Sample size (number) | −10 × 105 | −19 × 105 to 1 × 105 | 0.030* |
*: significance; CI: confidence interval.
Figure 3Association between odds of miscarriage caused by EMF with the sample size (a) and publication year (b) using meta-regression. Size of the circles indicates sample magnitude. There was significant relationship between Ln OR of miscarriage with sample size; but did not change markedly during the study years in this survey.