| Literature DB >> 35055804 |
Andreea Carp-Veliscu1,2, Claudia Mehedintu1,3, Francesca Frincu1,3, Elvira Bratila1,2, Simona Rasu2, Ioana Iordache1,2, Alina Bordea1,2, Mihaela Braga2.
Abstract
As the coronavirus pandemic is far from ending, more questions regarding the female reproductive system, particularly fertility issues, arise. The purpose of this paper is to bring light upon the possible link between COVID-19 and women's reproductive health. This review emphasizes the effect of SARS-CoV-2 on the hormones, endometrium and menstrual cycle, ovarian reserve, follicular fluid, oocytes, and embryos. The results showed that endometrial samples did not express SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Regarding the menstrual cycle, there is a large range of alterations, but they were all reversible within the following months. The ovarian reserve was not significantly affected in patients recovering from both mild and severe infection in most cases, except one, where the levels of AMH were significantly lower and basal follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) levels were increased. All COVID-19 recovered patients had positive levels of SARS-CoV-2 IgG in the follicular fluid. The amount of retrieved and mature oocytes and the fertilization rate were unharmed in three studies, except for one study, where the quantity of retrieved and mature oocytes was reduced in patients with higher levels of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The numbers of blastocysts, top-quality embryos, and euploid embryos were affected in most of the studies reviewed.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; embryos; endometrium; female reproductive system; follicular fluid; in vitro fertilization; menstrual cycle; oocytes; ovarian reserve
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35055804 PMCID: PMC8775865 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19020984
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
A summary of the effects of SARS-CoV-2 on menstrual cycle (before and during COVID-19 pandemic) found in the studies reviewed.
| Author and Year | Study Design | Population Sample and Selection Criteria | Data Collection | Main Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bruinvels et al. 2021 [ | Cross-sectional online questionnaire | 749 women | For a period of 21 days (27 May–17 June 2020) | 25%—an increased cycle length |
| Malloy et al. | Cross-sectional online questionnaire | 12,302 women | For a period of 13 months (March 2020–April 2021) | 87%—disruptions in cycle pattern |
| Phelan et al. | Cross-sectional online questionnaire | 1031 women | Recruited via social media | No modification with regard to the average menstrual cycle length or total bleeding days |
| Khan et al. | Prospective cohort study | 127 women | Data extracted from ARIZONA CoVHORT study | 16% reported alterations of menstrual pattern, had more COVID-19 symptoms and more likely to be of Hispanic background |
| Takmaz et al. | Cross-sectional online questionnaire | 952 women | November 2020– December 2020 | 28.7% experienced irregularities of menstrual cycle |
| Demir et al. | Cross-sectional online questionnaire | 263 women | May 2020 | Menstrual cycle length and volume decreased significantly |
| Ozimek et al. | Online survey | 210 women | July–August 2020 | 54% experienced changes in their periods. Out of these: |
| Nguyen et al. | Retrospective cohort study | 18.076 women | March–September 2019 (before pandemic) | 61.1% felt tremendously stressed during pandemic (46.2% before pandemic) |
| Yuksel et al. | Observational study | 58 women | March–April 2020 | More women experienced menstrual modifications during the pandemic (27.6 vs. 12.1%) |
A summary of the effects of SARS-CoV-2 on menstrual cycle in COVID-19 positive patients found in the reviewed studies.
| Li et al. | Retrospective cross-sectional study | 177 women | June 2019–March 2020 | 25% had modified menstrual flow (mainly decreased flow) |
| Ding et al. | Cross-sectional study | 78 women (61 mild cases, 17 severe cases) | January–March 2020 | The more severe cases experienced: |
A summary of the effects of SARS-CoV-2 on oocytes and embryos in the studies reviewed.
| Bentov et al. [ | Cohort study | 9 women vaccinated | 2 January–3 October 2021 | No significant difference among the three groups regarding: |
| Wang et al. [ | Retrospective cohort study | 195 women in case group | May 2020–February 2021 | No significant difference in: |
| Herrero et al. [ | Cohort study | 46 women who recovered from COVID-19 infection | November 2020–April 2021 | Significantly decreased in women with higher SARS-CoV-2 infection: |
| Orvieto et al. [ | Observational study | 9 women undergoing IVF before and after COVID-19 infection and reached ovum pick-up stage | A tertiary, university-affiliated medical center | No significant difference in: |
| Chamani et al. [ | Retrospective cohort study | 1881 women undergoing IVF procedures during the pandemic compared to women undergoing IVF procedures in the prior year | 6-month period | No difference in: |