4.7 Article

Antenatal care in singleton pregnancies after ICSI as compared to spontaneous conception: data from a prospective controlled cohort study in Germany

期刊

HUMAN REPRODUCTION
卷 21, 期 3, 页码 713-720

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dei390

关键词

antenatal care; follow-up; ICSI; medication; pregnancy complication

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: The aim was to compare the antenatal care and the intake of vitamins and medications of infertility patients with singleton pregnancies after ICSI to women with a spontaneously conceived singleton pregnancy. METHODS: The data on the antenatal care of 2055 singleton pregnancies after ICSI from a prospective controlled multicentre study in Germany were analysed. The prospectively collected data of the control group of 7861 singletons were retrospectively assessed for the present analysis. RESULTS: The ICSI patients were significantly older (32.9 versus 27.0 years, P < 0.019) and more likely to be obese (body mass index >= 30 kg/m(2): 13.9 versus 4.8%, P < 0.001) than the controls. The control mothers were significantly more likely to smoke (19.2%) or to consume alcohol (23.5%) during pregnancy than the ICSI mothers (7.4 and 0.6% respectively). Only 38.1% of ICSI patients took folic acid before conception. Only 61.7% of ICSI patients received an iodine supplementation at some point during pregnancy. ICSI patients went more regularly to the routine antenatal care consultations at the gynaecologist and had ultrasound examinations performed more regularly than the controls. The absolute number of ultrasound examinations was significantly higher in the ICSI group (13.6 +/- 6.0 versus 4.1 +/- 2.4). CONCLUSION: In spite of the intensive use of antenatal medical care by patients pregnant after ICSI, simple methods, such as the use of supplementary iodine and periconceptional folic acid, were used rarely. This indicates that counselling pregnant patients after ICSI about periconceptional and antenatal care seems to be insufficient in Germany and must be improved.

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