4.2 Article

Congenital malformations in infants conceived following assisted reproductive technology in comparison with spontaneously conceived infants

Journal

JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE
Volume 26, Issue 12, Pages 1171-1179

Publisher

INFORMA HEALTHCARE
DOI: 10.3109/14767058.2013.776535

Keywords

Assisted Reproductive Techniques; congenital abnormalities; fertilization in vitro; intracytoplasmic sperm injections

Funding

  1. Ministry of Health, Chief scientist office [36362-1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To evaluate the risk for congenital malformations diagnosed at birth following assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatments compared with live births conceived spontaneously. Methods: A retrospective cohort study including 9042 live births following ART and 213 288 spontaneously conceived (SC) live births during the period 1997-2004. The cohort was linked to the national live birth registry to determine the outcome of the pregnancies including congenital malformations. Results: An increased adjusted risk for all congenital malformations was observed in ART compared with SC infants [2.4% versus 1.9%; ORadj = 1.45; 95% CI: 1.26, 1.68]. The increased risk was observed in singleton births [2.4% versus 1.8%; ORadj = 1.41; 95% CI: 1.14, 1.71] but not in the ART conceived multiple births [2.5% versus 2.6%.; ORadj = 1.15; 95% CI: 0.90, 1.46]. Significantly increased adjusted risks for nervous, circulatory, digestive and genital system malformations were evident in the ART singleton group compared to SC infants. In addition, increased risks were also observed in separate comparisons of IVF births versus SC [ORadj = 1.28; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.63] and ICSI births versus SC [ORadj = 1.56; 95% CI: 1.31, 1.84]. Data regarding pregnancy termination or congenital malformation diagnosed later in life were not included. Conclusion: Infants born following ART were at significantly increased risk for congenital malformations compared to live birth conceived spontaneously.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available