4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Children born after assisted fertilization have an increased rate of major congenital anomalies

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 84, Issue 5, Pages 1300-1307

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.03.085

Keywords

major congenital anomaly; ART; register-based study

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To study the occurrence of major congenital anomalies (CAs) among children born after IVF (IVF, microinjections, and frozen embryo transfers) and after ovulation inductions with or without insemination (other assisted reproduction technologies [ART]). Design: Register-based study. Setting: Data regarding CAs were obtained from the Register of Congenital Malformations. Patient(s): Children from IVF (n = 4,559) children from other ART (n = 4,467), and controls (n = 27,078, a random sample of naturally conceived children) from the Medical Birth Register. Intervention(s): In vitro fertilization and other ART treatment in ordinary practice. Main Outcome Measure(s): Rate of major CAs. Children from IVF and other ART were compared with control children, both overall and by plurality, controlling for confounding factors by logistic regression. Result(s): For IVF children, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) was 1.3 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-1.6). Stratifying by gender and plurality showed that the risk was only increased for boys, and the risk was decreased for multiple IVF girls (OR = 0.5, 95% CI 0.2-0.9). The crude OR of major CA for other ART children was 1.3 (95% CI 1.1-1.5), but adjusted differences by gender and plurality were statistically insignificant. Conclusion(s): In vitro fertilization was associated with an increased risk for major CAs among singleton boys and a decreased risk among multiple girls. The risk after other ART was only slightly increased. (Fertil Steril (R) 2005; 84:1300-7. (c) 2005 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine).

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available