4.7 Article

Increased risk of blastogenesis birth defects, arising in the first 4 weeks of pregnancy, after assisted reproductive technologies

期刊

HUMAN REPRODUCTION
卷 25, 期 1, 页码 59-65

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dep364

关键词

assisted reproduction; birth defects; blastogenesis; embryo transfer; cryopreservation

资金

  1. BUPA Foundation
  2. National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) [436904, 436914]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The reasons for increased birth defect prevalence following in-vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) are largely unknown. Classification of birth defects by pathology rather than organ system, and examination of the role of embryo freezing and thawing may provide clues to the mechanisms involved. This study aimed to investigate these two factors. Data on 6946 IVF or ICSI singleton pregnancies were linked to perinatal outcomes obtained from population-based data sets on births and birth defects occurring between 1991 and 2004 in Victoria, Australia. These were compared with 20 838 outcomes for singleton births in the same population, conceived without IVF or ICSI. Birth defects were classified according to pathogenesis. Overall, birth defects were increased after IVF or ICSI [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.36; 95% CI: 1.19-1.55] relative to controls. There was no strong evidence of risk differences between IVF and ICSI or between fresh and thawed embryo transfer. However, a specific group, blastogenesis birth defects, were markedly increased [adjusted OR 2.80, 95% CI: 1.63-4.81], with the increase relative to the controls being significant for fresh embryo transfer (adjusted OR 3.65; 95% CI: 2.02-6.59) but not for thawed embryo transfer (adjusted OR 1.60; 95% CI: 0.69-3.69). Our findings suggest that there is a specific risk of blastogenesis birth defects arising very early in pregnancy after IVF or ICSI and that this risk may be lower with use of frozen-thawed embryo transfer.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据