Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
Published in: Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Review

Risk of adverse pregnancy and perinatal outcomes after high technology infertility treatment: a comprehensive systematic review

Authors: Stefano Palomba, Roy Homburg, Susanna Santagni, Giovanni Battista La Sala, Raoul Orvieto

Published in: Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

In the literature, there is growing evidence that subfertile patients who conceived after infertility treatments have an increased risk of pregnancy and perinatal complications and this is particularly true for patients who conceived through use of high technology infertility treatments. Moreover, high technology infertility treatments include many concomitant clinical and biological risk factors. This review aims to summarize in a systematic fashion the current evidence regarding the relative effect of the different procedures for high technology infertility treatments on the risk of adverse pregnancy and perinatal outcome. A literature search up to August 2016 was performed in IBSS, SocINDEX, Institute for Scientific Information, PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar and an evidence-based hierarchy was used to determine which articles to include and analyze. Data on prepregnancy maternal factors, low technology interventions, specific procedures for male factor, ovarian tissue/ovary and uterus transplantation, and chromosomal abnormalities and malformations of the offspring were excluded. The available evidences were analyzed assessing the level and the quality of evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine guidelines and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system, respectively. Current review highlights that every single procedure of high technology infertility treatments can play a crucial role in increasing the risk of pregnancy and perinatal complications. Due to the suboptimal level and quality of the current evidence, further well-designed studies are needed.
Literature
1.
Legro RS, Myers E. Surrogate end-points or primary outcomes in clinical trials in women with polycystic ovary syndrome? Hum Reprod. 2004;19:1697–704.PubMedCrossRef
2.
3.
4.
Bhattacharya S, Vanderpoel S, Bhattacharya S, Evers JL, Ng EH, Niederberger C, et al. Improving the Reporting of Clinical Trials of Infertility Treatments (IMPRINT): modifying the CONSORT statement. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:952–9.CrossRef
5.
Braakhekke M, Kamphuis EI, Van Rumste MM, Mol F, van der Veen F, Mol BW. How are neonatal and maternal outcomes reported in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in reproductive medicine? Hum Reprod. 2014;29:1211–7.PubMedCrossRef
6.
7.
Sunderam S, Kissin DM, Crawford SB, Folger SG, Jamieson DJ, Warner L, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), et al. Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance-United States, 2013. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2015;64:1–25.CrossRef
8.
Messerlian C, Maclagan L, Basso O. Infertility and the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:125–37.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Pinborg A, Wennerholm UB, Romundstad LB, Loft A, Aittomaki K, Soderstrom-Anttila V, et al. Why do singletons conceived after assisted reproduction technology have adverse perinatal outcome? Systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2013;19:87–104.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Ensing S, Abu-Hanna A, Roseboom TJ, Repping S, van der Veen F, Mol BW, et al. Risk of poor neonatal outcome at term after medically assisted reproduction: a propensity score-matched study. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:384–90.e1.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Palomba S, Santagni S, Gibbins K, La Sala GB, Silver RM. Pregnancy complications in spontaneous and assisted conceptions of women with infertility and factors of subfertility. A comprehensive review. Reprod Biomed Online. 2016; doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2016.08.007
12.
Seggers J, Pontesilli M, Ravelli AC, Painter RC, Hadders-Algra M, Heineman MJ, et al. Effects of in vitro fertilization and maternal characteristics on perinatal outcomes: a population-based study using siblings. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:590–8.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62:1006–12.PubMedCrossRef
14.
15.
Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J, et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:383–94.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Helmerhorst FM, Perquin DA, Donker D, Keirse MJ. Perinatal outcome of singletons and twins after assisted conception: a systematic review of controlled studies. BMJ. 2004;328:261–5.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
17.
McDonald S, Murphy K, Beyene J, Ohlsson A. Perinatal outcomes of in vitro fertilization twins: a systematic review and meta-analyses. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193:141–52.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Pandey S, Shetty A, Hamilton M, Bhattacharya S, Maheshwari A. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies resulting from IVF/ICSI: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2012;18:485–503.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Qin J, Liu X, Sheng X, Wang H, Gao S. Assisted reproductive technology and the risk of pregnancy-related complications and adverse pregnancy outcomes in singleton pregnancies: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:73–85.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Wang YA, Chugtai AA, Farquhar CM, Pollock W, Lui K, Sullivan EA. Increased incidence of gestational hypertension and preeclampsia after assisted reproductive technology treatment. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:920–926.e2.PubMedCrossRef
21.
22.
Qin J, Wang H, Sheng X, Liang D, Tan H, Xia J. Pregnancy-related complications and adverse pregnancy outcomes in multiple pregnancies resulting from assisted reproductive technology: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Fertil Steril. 2015;103:1492–508.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Qin JB, Wang H, Sheng X, Xie Q, Gao S. Assisted reproductive technology and risk of adverse obstetric outcomes in dichorionic twin pregnancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:1180–92.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Declercq E, Luke B, Belanoff C, Cabral H, Diop H, Gopal D, et al. Perinatal outcomes associated with assisted reproductive technology: the Massachusetts Outcomes Study of Assisted Reproductive Technologies (MOSART). Fertil Steril. 2015;103:888–95.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
25.
Jauniaux E, Ben-Ami I, Maymon R. Do assisted-reproduction twin pregnancies require additional antenatal care? Reprod Biomed. 2013;26:107–19.CrossRef
26.
Simões T, Queirós A, Marujo AT, Valdoleiros S, Silva P, Blickstein I. Outcome of monochorionic twins conceived by assisted reproduction. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:629–32.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Bensdorp AJ, Hukkelhoven CW, van der Veen F, Mol BW, Lambalk CB, Van Wely M. Dizygotic twin pregnancies after medically assisted reproduction and after natural conception: maternal and perinatal outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:371–7.PubMedCrossRef
28.
McLernon DJ, Harrild K, Bergh C, Davies MJ, De Neubourg D, Dumoulin JC, et al. Clinical effectiveness of elective single versus double embryo transfer: meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;341:c6945.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
Kissin DM, Kulkarni AD, Kushnir VA, Jamieson DJ, National ART Surveillance System Group. Number of embryos transferred after in vitro fertilization and good perinatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:239–47.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
30.
De Sutter P, Delbaere I, Gerris J, Verstraelen H, Goetgeluk S, Van der Elst J, et al. Birthweight of singletons after assisted reproduction is higher after single- than after double-embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:2633–7.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Wang YA, Sullivan EA, Healy DL, Black DA. Perinatal outcomes after assisted reproductive technology treatment in Australia and New Zealand: single versus double embryo transfer. Med J Aust. 2009;190:234–7.PubMed
32.
Poikkeus P, Gissler M, Unkila-Kallio L, Hyden-Granskog C, Tiitinen A. Obstetric and neonatal outcome after single embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2007;22:1073–9.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Sazonova A, Källen K, Thurin-Kjellberg A, Wennerholm UB, Bergh C. Obstetric outcome after in vitro fertilization with single or double embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:442–50.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Levi S. Ultrasonic assessment of the high rate of human multiple pregnancy in the first trimester. J Clin Ultrasound. 1976;4:3–5.PubMedCrossRef
35.
36.
Pinborg A, Lidegaard O, La Cour Freiesleben N, Nyboe Andersen A. Consequences of vanishing twins in IVF/ICSI pregnancies. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:2821–9.PubMedCrossRef
37.
La Sala GB, Villani MT, Nicoli A, Gallinelli A, Nucera G, Blickstein I. Effect of the mode of assisted reproductive technology conception on obstetric outcomes for survivors of the vanishing twin syndrome. Fertil Steril. 2006;86:247–9.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Luke B, Brown MB, Grainger DA, Stern JE, Klein N, Cedars MI. The effect of early fetal losses on singleton assisted-conception pregnancy outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:2578–85.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Pinborg A, Lidegaard O, Freiesleben N, Andersen AN. Vanishing twins: a predictor of small-for-gestational age in IVF singletons. Hum Reprod. 2007;22:2707–14.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Shebl O, Ebner T, Sommergruber M, Sir A, Tews G. Birth weight is lower for survivors of the vanishing twin syndrome: a case–control study. Fertil Steril. 2008;90:310–4.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Van Oppenraaij RH, Jauniaux E, Christiansen OB, Horcajadas JA, Farquharson RG, Exalto N, ESHRE Special Interest Group for Early Pregnancy (SIGEP). Predicting adverse obstetric outcome after early pregnancy events and complications: a review. Hum Reprod. 2009;15:409–21.CrossRef
42.
Evron E, Sheiner E, Friger M, Sergienko R, Harlev A. Vanishing twin syndrome: is it associated with adverse perinatal outcome? Fertil Steril. 2015;103:1209–14.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Nakashima A, Araki R, Tani H, Ishihara O, Kuwahara A, Irahara M, et al. Implications of assisted reproductive technologies on term singleton birth weight: an analysis of 25,777 children in the national assisted reproduction registry of Japan. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:450–5.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Malchau SS, Loft A, Henningsen AK, Nyboe Andersen A, Pinborg A. Perinatal outcomes in 6,338 singletons born after intrauterine insemination in Denmark, 2007 to 2012: the influence of ovarian stimulation. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:1110–6.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Griesinger G, Kolibianakis EM, Diedrich K, Ludwig M. Ovarian stimulation for IVF has no quantitative association with birth weight: a registry study. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:2549–54.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Budinetz TH, Mann JS, Griffin DW, Benadiva CA, Nulsen JC, Engmann LL. Maternal and neonatal outcomes after gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist trigger for final oocyte maturation in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:753–8.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Lainas GT, Kolibianakis EM, Sfontouris IA, Zorzovilis IZ, Petsas GK, Lainas TG, et al. Pregnancy and neonatal outcomes following luteal GnRH antagonist administration in patients with severe early OHSS. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:1929–42.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Weiss A, Beck-Fruchter R, Golan J, Lavee M, Geslevich Y, Shalev E. Ectopic pregnancy risk factors for ART patients undergoing the GnRH antagonist protocol: a retrospective study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2016;14:12.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
49.
Sunkara SK, La Marca A, Seed PT, Khalaf Y. Increased risk of preterm birth and low birthweight with very high number of oocytes following IVF: an analysis of 65 868 singleton live birth outcomes. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:1473–80.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Kalra SK, Ratcliffe SJ, Coutifaris C, Molinaro T, Barnhart KT. Ovarian stimulation and low birth weight in newborns conceived through in vitro fertilization. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118:863–71.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
51.
Farhi J, Ben-Haroush A, Andrawus N, Pinkas H, Sapir O, Fisch B, et al. High serum oestradiol concentrations in IVF cycles increase the risk of pregnancy complications related to abnormal placentation. Reprod Biomed. 2010;21:331–7.CrossRef
52.
Imudia AN, Awonuga AO, Doyle JO, Kaimal AJ, Wright DL, Toth TL, et al. Peak serum estradiol level during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation is associated with increased risk of small for gestational age and preeclampsia in singleton pregnancies after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:1374–9.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Imudia AN, Awonuga AO, Kaimal AJ, Wright DL, Styer AK, Toth TL. Elective cryopreservation of all embryos with subsequent cryothaw embryo transfer in patients at risk for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome reduces the risk of adverse obstetric outcomes: a preliminary study. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:168–73.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Wiser A, Levron J, Kreizer D, Achiron R, Shrim A, Schiff E, et al. Outcome of pregnancies complicated by severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS): a follow-up beyond the second trimester. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:910–4.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Courbiere B, Oborski V, Braunstein D, Desparoir A, Noizet A, Gamerre M. Obstetric outcome of women with in vitro fertilization pregnancies hospitalized for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: a case–control study. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:1629–32.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Haas J, Baum M, Meridor K, Hershko-Klement A, Elizur S, Hourvitz A, et al. Is severe OHSS associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes? Evidence from a case–control study. Reprod Biomed. 2014;29:216–21.CrossRef
57.
Calhoun KC, Fritz MA, Steiner AZ. Examining the relationship between ovarian reserve, as measured by basal FSH levels, and the risk of poor obstetric outcome in singleton IVF gestations. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:3424–30.PubMedCrossRef
58.
59.
Maheshwari A, Kalampokas T, Davidson J, Bhattacharya S. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies resulting from the transfer of blastocyst-stage versus cleavage-stage embryos generated through in vitro fertilization treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:1615–21.PubMedCrossRef
60.
Dar S, Lazer T, Shah PS, Librach CL. Neonatal outcomes among singleton births after blastocyst versus cleavage stage embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2014;20:439–48.CrossRef
61.
Kalra SK, Ratcliffe SJ, Barnhart KT, Coutifaris C. Extended embryo culture and an increased risk of preterm delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120:69–75.PubMedCrossRef
62.
Oron G, Sokal-Arnon T, Son WY, Demirtas E, Buckett W, Zeadna A, et al. Extended embryo culture is not associated with increased adverse obstetric or perinatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211:165.e1–7.CrossRef
63.
Oron G, Nayot D, Son WY, Holzer H, Buckett W, Tulandi T. Obstetric and perinatal outcome from single cleavage transfer and single blastocyst transfer: a matched case–control study. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2015;31:469–72.PubMedCrossRef
64.
Chambers GM, Chughtai AA, Farquhar CM, Wang YA. Risk of preterm birth after blastocyst embryo transfer: a large population study using contemporary registry data from Australia and New Zealand. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:997–1003.PubMedCrossRef
65.
Mäkinen S, Söderström-Anttila V, Vainio J, Suikkari AM, Tuuri T. Does long in vitro culture promote large for gestational age babies? Hum Reprod. 2013;28:828–34.PubMedCrossRef
66.
Ginström Ernstad E, Bergh C, Khatibi A, Källén KB, Westlander G, Nilsson S, et al. Neonatal and maternal outcome after blastocyst transfer: a population-based registry study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214:378.e1–378.e10.CrossRef
67.
Grace KS, Sinclair KD. Assisted reproductive technology, epigenetics, and long-term health: a developmental time bomb still ticking. Semin Reprod Med. 2009;27:409–16.PubMedCrossRef
68.
Chason RJ, Csokmay J, Segars JH, DeCherney AH, Armant DR. Environmental and epigenetic effects upon preimplantation embryo metabolism and development. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2011;22:412–20.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
69.
Rizos D, Lonergan P, Boland MP, Arroyo-García R, Pintado B, de la Fuente J, et al. Analysis of differential messenger RNA expression between bovine blastocysts produced in different culture systems: implications for blastocyst quality. Biol Reprod. 2002;66:589–95.PubMedCrossRef
70.
Chang HJ, Lee JR, Jee BC, Suh CS, Kim SH. Impact of blastocyst transfer on offspring sex ratio and the monozygotic twinning rate: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:2381–90.PubMedCrossRef
71.
Shiozaki A, Yoneda S, Nakabayashi M, Takeda Y, Takeda S, Sugimura M, et al. Multiple pregnancy, short cervix, part-time worker, steroid use, low educational level and male fetus are risk factors for preterm birth in Japan: a multicenter, prospective study. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2014;40:53–61.PubMedCrossRef
72.
Maheshwari A, Hamilton M, Bhattacharya S. Should we be promoting embryo transfer at blastocyst stage? Reprod Biomed. 2016;32:142–6.CrossRef
73.
Lemmen JG, Pinborg A, Rasmussen S, Ziebe S. Birthweight distribution in ART singletons resulting from embryo culture in two different culture media compared with the national population. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:2326–32.PubMedCrossRef
74.
Zhu J, Li M, Chen L, Liu P, Qiao J. The protein source in embryo culture media influences birthweight: a comparative study between G1 v5 and G1-PLUS v5. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:1387–92.PubMedCrossRef
75.
De Vos A, Janssens R, Vande Velde H, Haentjens P, Bonduelle M, Tournaye H, et al. The type of culture medium and the duration of in vitro culture do not influence birthweight of ART singletons. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:20–7.PubMedCrossRef
76.
Roque M, Lattes K, Serra S, Sola I, Geber S, Carreras R, et al. Fresh embryo transfer versus frozen embryo transfer in in vitro fertilizationcycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:156–62.PubMedCrossRef
77.
Evans J, Hannan NJ, Edgell TA, Vollenhoven BJ, Lutjen PJ, Osianlis T, et al. Fresh versus frozen embryo transfer: backing clinical decisions with scientific and clinical evidence. Hum Reprod. 2014;20:808–21.CrossRef
78.
Londra L, Moreau C, Strobino D, Garcia J, Zacur H, Zhao Y. Ectopic pregnancy after in vitro fertilization: differences between fresh and frozen-thawed cycles. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:110–8.PubMedCrossRef
79.
Fang C, Huang R, Wei LN, Jia L. Frozen-thawed day 5 blastocyst transfer is associated with a lower risk of ectopic pregnancy than day 3 transfer and fresh transfer. Fertil Steril. 2015;103:655–61.PubMedCrossRef
80.
Wennerholm UB, Soderstrom-Anttila V, Bergh C, Aittomaki K, Hazekamp J, Nygren KG, et al. Children born after cryopreservation of embryos or oocytes: a systematic review of outcome data. Hum Reprod. 2009;24:2158–72.PubMedCrossRef
81.
Maheshwari A, Pandey S, Shetty A, Hamilton M, Bhattacharya S. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies resulting from the transfer of frozen thawed versus fresh embryos generated through in vitro fertilization treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:368–77.PubMedCrossRef
82.
Kalra SK, Ratcliffe SJ, Milman L, Gracia CR, Coutifaris C, Barnhart KT. Perinatal morbidity after in vitro fertilization is lower with frozen embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:548–53.CrossRef
83.
Wennerholm UB, Henningsen AK, Romundstad LB, Bergh C, Pinborg A, Skjaerven R, et al. Perinatal outcomes of children born after frozen-thawed embryo transfer: a Nordic cohort study from the CoNARTaS group. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:2545–53.PubMedCrossRef
84.
Sazonova A, Källen K, Thurin-Kjellberg A, Wennerholm UB, Bergh C. Obstetric outcome in singletons after in vitro fertilization with cryopreserved/thawed embryos. Hum Reprod. 2012;27:1343–50.PubMedCrossRef
85.
Pelkonen S, Koivunen R, Gissler M, Nuojua-Huttunen S, Suikkari AM, Hyden-Granskog C, et al. Perinatal outcome of children born after frozen and fresh embryo transfer: the Finnish cohort study 1995–2006. Hum Reprod. 2010;25:914–23.PubMedCrossRef
86.
Pinborg A, Loft A, Aaris Henningsen AK, Rasmussen S, Andersen AN. Infant outcome of 957 singletons born after frozen embryo replacement: the Danish National Cohort Study 1995–2006. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1320–7.PubMedCrossRef
87.
Kato O, Kawasaki N, Bodri D, Kuroda T, Kawachiya S, Kato K, et al. Neonatal outcome and birth defects in 6623 singletons born following minimal ovarian stimulation and vitrified versus fresh single embryo transfer. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2012;161:46–50.PubMedCrossRef
88.
Mansour R, Ishihara O, Adamson GD, Dyer S, De Mouzon J, Nygren KG, et al. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies world report: Assisted Reproductive Technology 2006. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:1536–51.PubMedCrossRef
89.
Ishihara O, Araki R, Kuwahara A, Itakura A, Saito H, Adamson GD. Impact of frozen-thawed single-blastocyst transfer on maternal and neonatal outcome: an analysis of 277,042 single-embryo transfer cycles from 2008 to 2010 in Japan. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:128–33.PubMedCrossRef
90.
Kaser DJ, Melamed A, Bormann CL, Myers DE, Missmer SA, Walsh BW, et al. Cryopreserved embryo transfer is an independent risk factor for placenta accreta. Fertil Steril. 2015;103:1176–84.e2.PubMedCrossRef
91.
Opdahl S, Henningsen AA, Tiitinen A, Bergh C, Pinborg A, Romundstad PR, et al. Risk of hypertensive disorders in pregnancies following assisted reproductive technology: a cohort study from the CoNARTaS group. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:1724–31.PubMedCrossRef
92.
Chen ZJ, Shi Y, Sun Y, Zhang B, Liang X, Cao Y, et al. Fresh versus Frozen Embryos for Infertility in the Polycystic Ovary Syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:523–33.PubMedCrossRef
93.
Nakashima A, Araki R, Tani H, Ishihara O, Kuwahara A, Irahara M, et al. Implications of assisted reproductive technologies on term singleton birth weight: an analysis of 25,777 children in the national assisted reproduction registry of Japan. Fertil Steril. 2012;282:2246–7.
94.
Dumoulin JC, Land JA, Van Montfoort AP, Nelissen EC, Coonen E, Derhaag JG, et al. Effect of in vitro culture of human embryos on birthweight of newborns. Hum Reprod. 2010;25:605–12.PubMedCrossRef
95.
Nelissen EC, Van Montfoort AP, Coonen E, Derhaag JG, Geraedts JP, Smits LJ, et al. Further evidence that culturemedia affect perinatal outcome: findings after transfer of fresh and cryopreserved embryos. Hum Reprod. 2012;27:1966–76.PubMedCrossRef
96.
Vergouw CG, Kostelijk EH, Doejaaren E, Hompes PG, Lambalk CB, Schats R. The influence of the type of embryo culture medium on neonatal birthweight after single embryo transfer in IVF. Hum Reprod. 2012;27:2619–26.PubMedCrossRef
97.
De Geyter C, De Geyter M, Steimann S, Zhang H, Holzgreve W. Comparative birth weights of singletons born after assisted reproduction and natural conception in previously infertile women. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:705–12.PubMedCrossRef
98.
Pinborg A, Henningsen AA, Loft A, Malchau SS, Forman J, Andersen AN. Large baby syndrome in singletons born after frozen embryo transfer (FET): is it due to maternal factors or the cryotechnique? Hum Reprod. 2014;29:618–27.PubMedCrossRef
99.
Maheshwari A, Raja EA, Bhattacharya S. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes after either fresh or thawed frozen embryo transfer: an analysis of 112,432 singleton pregnancies recorded in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority anonymized dataset. Fertil Steril. 2016;24.
100.
Li Z, Sullivan EA, Chapman M, Farquhar C, Wang YA. Risk of ectopic pregnancy lowest with transfer of single frozen blastocyst. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:2048–54.PubMedCrossRef
101.
Mateizel I, Santos-Ribeiro S, Done E, Van Landuyt L, Van de Velde H, Tournaye H, et al. Do ARTs affect the incidence of monozygotic twinning? Hum Reprod. 2016 Sep 22.
102.
Vajta G, Holm P, Greve T, Callesen H. Overall efficiency of in vitro embryo production and vitrification in cattle. Theriogenology. 1996;45:683–9.PubMedCrossRef
103.
Kuwayama M, Vajta G, Kato O, Leibo SP. Highly efficient vitrification method for cryopreservation of human oocytes. Reprod Biomed. 2005;11:300–8.CrossRef
104.
105.
Chian RC, Huang JY, Gilbert L, Son WY, Holzer H, Cui SJ, et al. Obstetric outcomes following vitrification of in vitro and in vivo matured oocytes. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:2391–8.PubMedCrossRef
106.
Levi Setti PE, Albani E, Morenghi E, Morreale G, Delle Piane L, Scaravelli G, et al. Comparative analysis of fetal and neonatal outcomes of pregnancies from fresh and cryopreserved/thawed oocytes in the same group of patients. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:396–401.PubMedCrossRef
107.
Cobo A, Serra V, Garrido N, Olmo I, Pellicer A, Remohì J. Obstetric and perinatal outcome of babies born from vitrified oocytes. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:1006–15.PubMedCrossRef
108.
Takahashi K, Mukaida T, Goto T, Oka C. Perinatal outcome of blastocyst transfer with vitrification using cryoloop: a 4-year follow-up study. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:88–92.PubMedCrossRef
109.
Rama Raju GA, Jaya Prakash G, Murali Krishna K, Madan K. Neonatal outcome after vitrified day 3 embryo transfers: a preliminary study. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:143–8.PubMedCrossRef
110.
Desai N, Abdelhafez F, Bedaiwy MA, Goldberg J, Falcone T, Goldfarb J. Clinical pregnancy and live births after transfer of embryos vitrified on day 3. Reprod Biomed. 2010;20:808–13.CrossRef
111.
Shi W, Xue X, Zhang S, Zhao W, Liu S, Zhou H, et al. Perinatal and neonatal outcomes of 494 babies delivered from 972 vitrified embryo transfers. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:1338–42.PubMedCrossRef
112.
Liu SY, Teng B, Fu J, Li X, Zheng Y, Sun XX. Obstetric and neonatal outcomes after transfer of vitrified early cleavage embryos. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:2093–100.PubMedCrossRef
113.
Kaartinen N, Kananen K, Huhtala H, Keränen S, Tinkanen H. The freezing method of cleavage stage embryos has no impact on the weight of the newborns. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016;33:393–9.PubMedCrossRef
114.
Wikland M, Hardarson T, Hillensjo T, Westin C, Westlander G, Wood M, et al. Obstetric outcomes after transfer of vitrified blastocysts. Hum Reprod. 2010;25:1699–707.PubMedCrossRef
115.
Li Z, Wang YA, Ledger W, Edgar DH, Sullivan EA. Clinical outcomes following cryopreservation of blastocysts by vitrification or slow freezing: a population-based cohort study. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:2794–801.PubMedCrossRef
116.
Roy TK, Bradley CK, Bowman MC, McArthur SJ. Single-embryo transfer of vitrified-warmed blastocysts yields equivalent live-birth rates and improved neonatal outcomes compared with fresh transfers. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:1294–301.PubMedCrossRef
117.
Ozgur K, Berkkanoglu M, Bulut H, Humaidan P, Coetzee K. Perinatal outcomes after fresh versus vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer: retrospective analysis. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:899–907.PubMedCrossRef
118.
Belva F, Bonduelle M, Roelants M, Verheyen G, Van Landuyt L. Neonatal health including congenital malformation risk of 1072 children born after vitrified embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:1610–20.PubMedCrossRef
119.
Coticchio G, Dal Canto M, Mignini Renzini M, Guglielmo MC, Brambillasca F, Turchi D, et al. Oocyte maturation: gamete-somatic cells interactions, meiotic resumption, cytoskeletal dynamics and cytoplasmic reorganization. Hum Reprod. 2015;21:427–54.CrossRef
120.
Siristatidis CS, Vrachnis N, Creatsa M, Maheshwari A, Bhattacharya S. In vitro maturation in subfertile women with polycystic ovarian syndrome undergoing assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013. doi:10.​1002/​14651858.​CD006606.​pub3.PubMed
121.
Cha KY, Chung HM, Lee DR, Kwon H, Chung MK, Park LS, et al. Obstetric outcome of patients with polycystic ovary syndrome treated by in vitro maturation and in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2005;83:1461–5.PubMedCrossRef
122.
Soderstrom-Anttila V, Makinen S, Tuuri T, Suikkari AM. Favourable pregnancy results with insemination of in vitro matured oocytes from unstimulated patients. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:1534–40.PubMedCrossRef
123.
Buckett WM, Chian RC, Holzer H, Dean N, Usher R, Tan SL. Obstetric outcomes and congenital abnormalities after in vitro maturation, in vitro fertilization, and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110:885–91.PubMedCrossRef
124.
Buckett WM, Chian RC, Dean N, Sylvestre C, Holzer H, Tan SL. Pregnancy loss in pregnancies conceived after in vitro oocyte maturation, conventional in vitro fertilization, and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril. 2008;110:885–91.
125.
Fadini R, Mignini Renzini M, Guarnieri T, Dal Canto M, De Ponti E, Sutcliffe A, et al. Comparison of the obstetric and perinatal outcomes of children conceived from in vitro or in vivo matured oocytes in vitro maturation treatments with births from conventional ICSI cycles. Hum Reprod. 2012;27:3601–8.PubMedCrossRef
126.
Anckaert E, De Rycke M, Smitz J. Culture of oocytes and risk of imprinting defects. Hum Reprod. 2013;19:52–66.CrossRef
127.
Palomba S, De Wilde MA, Falbo A, Koster MPH, La Sala GB, Fauser BCJM. Pregnancy complications in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: new clinical and pathophysiologic insight. Hum Reprod. 2015;21:575–92.CrossRef
128.
Hagemann AR, Lanzendorf SE, Jungheim ES, Chang AS, Ratts VS, Odem RR. A prospective, randomized, double-blinded study of assisted hatching in women younger than 38 years undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2010;93:586–91.PubMedCrossRef
129.
Zhou H, Zao W, Zhang W, Shi J, Shi W. No adverse effects were identified on the perinatal outcomes after laser-assisted hatching treatment. Reprod Biomed. 2014;29:692–8.CrossRef
130.
Knopman JM, Krey LC, Oh C, Lee J, McCaffrey C, Noyes N. What makes them split? Identifying risk factors that lead to monozygotic twins after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:82–9.PubMedCrossRef
131.
Harper JC, Wilton L, Traeger-Synodinos J, Goossens V, Moutou C, Sengupta SB, et al. The ESHRE PGD Consortium: 10 years of data collection. Hum Reprod. 2012;18:234–47.CrossRef
132.
Desmyttere S, De Rycke M, Staessen C, Liebaers I, De Schrijver F, Verpoest W, et al. Neonatal follow-up of 995 consecutively born children after embryo biopsy for PGD. Hum Reprod. 2012;27:288–93.PubMedCrossRef
133.
Eldar-Geva T, Srebnik N, Altarescu G, Varshaver I, Brooks B, Levy-Lahad E, et al. Neonatal outcome after preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:1016–21.PubMedCrossRef
134.
Chang J, Boulet SL, Jeng G, Flowers L, Kissin DM. Outcomes of in vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic diagnosis: an analysis of the United States Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance Data, 2011–2012. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:394–400.PubMedCrossRef
135.
136.
Jing S, Luo K, He H, Lu C, Zhang S, Tan Y, et al. Obstetric and neonatal outcomes in blastocyst-stage biopsy with frozen embryo transfer and cleavage-stage biopsy with fresh embryo transfer after preimplantation genetic diagnosis/screening. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:105–112.e4.PubMedCrossRef
137.
Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, Okun N, Sierra S. Pregnancy outcomes after assisted human reproduction. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2014;36:64–83.CrossRef
138.
Sheffer-Miouni G, Mashiach S, Dor J, Levran D, Seidman DS. Factors influencing the obstetric and perinatal outcome after oocyte donation. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:2636–40.CrossRef
139.
Rodríguez-González M, Serra V, Garcia-Velasco JA, Pellicer A, Remohí J. The “vanishing embryo” phenomenon in an oocyte donation programme. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:798–802.PubMedCrossRef
140.
Wiggins DA, Main E. Outcomes of pregnancies achieved by donor egg in vitro fertilization-a comparison with standard in vitro fertilization pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:2002–8.PubMedCrossRef
141.
Keegan DA, Krey LC, Chang HC, Noyes N. Increased risk of pregnancy induced hypertension in young recipients of donated oocytes. Fertil Steril. 2007;87:776–81.PubMedCrossRef
142.
Gundogan F, Bianchi DW, Scherjon SA, Roberts DJ. Placental pathology in egg donor pregnancies. Fertil Steril. 2010;93:397–404.PubMedCrossRef
143.
Zegers-Hochschild F, Masoli D, Schwarze JE, Iaconelli A, Borges E, Pacheco IM. Reproductive performance in oocyte donors and their recipients: comparative analysis from implantation to birth and lactation. Fertil Steril. 2010;93:2210–5.PubMedCrossRef
144.
Soderstrom-Anttila V, Tiitinen A, Foudila T, Hovatta O. Obstetric and perinatal outcome after oocyte donation: comparison with in-vitro fertilization pregnancies. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:483–90.PubMedCrossRef
145.
Klatsky PC, Delaney SS, Caughey AB, Tran ND, Scattman GL, Rosenwaks Z. The role of embryonic origin in preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116:1387–92.PubMedCrossRef
146.
Le Ray C, Scherier S, Anselem O, Marszalek A, Tsatsaris V, Cabrol D, et al. Association between oocyte donation and maternal and perinatal outcomes in women aged 43 years or older. Hum Reprod. 2012;27:896–901.PubMedCrossRef
147.
Yaron Y, Ochshorn Y, Amit A, Kogosowski A, Yovel I, Lessing JB, et al. Oocyte donation in Israel: a study of 1001 initiated cycles. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:1819–24.PubMedCrossRef
148.
Levron Y, Dviri M, Segol I, Yerushalmi GM, Hourvitz A, Orvieto R, et al. The ‘immunologic theory’ of preeclampsia revisited: a lesson from donor oocyte gestations. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211:383.e1–5.CrossRef
149.
Jeve YB, Potdar N, Opoku A, Khare M. Three-arm age-matched retrospective cohort study of obstetric outcomes of donor oocyte pregnancies. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016;133:156–8.PubMedCrossRef
150.
Gibbons WE, Cedars M, Ness RB. Toward understanding obstetrical outcome in advanced assisted reproduction: varying sperm, oocyte, and uterine source and diagnosis. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:1645–9.PubMedCrossRef
151.
Pecks U, Maass N, Neulen J. Oocyte donation: a risk factor for pregnancy-induced hypertension: a meta-analysis and case series. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2011;108:23–31.PubMedPubMedCentral
152.
Adams DH, Clark RA, Davies MJ, De Lacey S. A meta-analysis of neonatal health outcomes from oocyte donation. J Dev Orig Health Dis. 2015;27:1–16.
153.
Jeve YB, Potdar N, Opoku A, Khare M. Donor oocyte conception and pregnancy complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2016;123:1471–80.PubMedCrossRef
154.
Blázquez A, García D, Rodríguez A, Vassena R, Figueras F, Vernaeve V. Is oocyte donation a risk factor for preeclampsia? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016;33:855–63.PubMedCrossRef
155.
Storgaard M, Loft A, Bergh C, Wennerholm UB, Söderström-Anttila V, Romundstad LB, et al. Obstetric and neonatal complications in pregnancies conceived after oocyte donation - a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2016. doi:10.​1111/​1471-0528.​14257.PubMed
156.
Malchau SS, Loft A, Larsen EC, Aaris Henningsen AK, Rasmussen S, Andersen AN, et al. Perinatal outcomes in 375 children born after oocyte donation: a Danish national cohort study. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:1637–43.PubMedCrossRef
157.
Savasi VM, Mandia L, Laoreti A, Cetin I. Maternal and fetal outcomes in oocyte donation pregnancies. Hum Reprod. 2016;22:620–33.CrossRef
158.
159.
Salha O, Sharma V, Dada T, Nugent D, Rutherford AJ, Tomlinson AJ, et al. The influence of donated gametes on the incidence of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:2268–77.PubMedCrossRef
160.
Dekker GA, Sibai BM. Etiology and pathogenesis of preeclampsia: current concepts. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;179:1359–75.PubMedCrossRef
161.
Finger R, Sommerfelt C, Freeman M, Wilson CK, Wade A, Daly D. A cost-effectiveness comparison of embryo donation with oocyte donation. Fertil Steril. 2010;93:379–81.PubMedCrossRef
162.
Söderström-Anttila V, Wennerholm UB, Loft A, Pinborg A, Aittomäki K, Romundstad LB, Bergh C. Surrogacy: outcomes for surrogate mothers, children and the resulting families-a systematic review. Hum Reprod. 2016;22:260–76.
163.
Dar S, Lazer T, Swanson S, Silverman J, Wasser C, Moskovtsev SI, et al. Assisted reproduction involving gestational surrogacy: an analysis of the medical, psychosocial and legal issues: experience from a large surrogacy program. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:345–52.PubMedCrossRef
164.
Perkins KM, Boulet SL, Jamieson DJ, Kissin DM, National Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance System (NASS) Group. Trends and outcomes of gestational surrogacy in the United States. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:435–42.PubMedCrossRef
165.
166.
Van der Hoorn MLP, Lashley EELO, Biannchi DW, Claas FHJ, Schonkerren CMC, Scherjon SA. Clinical and immunologic aspects of egg donation pregnancies: a systematic review. Hum Reprod. 2010;16:704–12.CrossRef
167.
Palomba S, Russo T, Falbo A, Di Cello A, Tolino A, Tucci L, et al. Macroscopic and microscopic findings of the placenta in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:2838–47.PubMedCrossRef
168.
Wehby GL, Murray JC, Castilla EE, Lopez-Camelo JS, Ohsfeldt RL. Prenatal care effectiveness and utilization in Brazil. Health Policy Plan. 2009;24:175–88.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
169.
Alibekova R, Huang JP, Chen YH. Adequate prenatal care reduces the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with history of infertility: a nationwide population-based study. PLoS One. 2013;8, e84237.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
170.
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Provision of fertility services for women at increased risk of complications during fertility treatment or pregnancy: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2016; doi:10.​1016/​j.​fertnstert.​2016.​08.​015.
171.
Metadata
Title
Risk of adverse pregnancy and perinatal outcomes after high technology infertility treatment: a comprehensive systematic review
Authors
Stefano Palomba
Roy Homburg
Susanna Santagni
Giovanni Battista La Sala
Raoul Orvieto
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1477-7827
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-016-0211-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 1/2016 Go to the issue

Research

mRNA expression pattern of selected candidate genes differs in bovine oviductal epithelial cells in vitro compared with the in vivo state and during cell culture passages

Research

Ectopic pregnancy risk factors for ART patients undergoing the GnRH antagonist protocol: a retrospective study

Erratum

Erratum: Divergent activity of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor gene promoter among genetic lines of pigs is partially conferred by nuclear factor (NF)-kB, specificity protein (SP)1-like and GATA-4 binding sites

Review

Risks of spontaneously and IVF-conceived singleton and twin pregnancies differ, requiring reassessment of statistical premises favoring elective single embryo transfer (eSET)

Research

The effects of progesterone on the alpha2-adrenergic receptor subtypes in late-pregnant uterine contractions in vitro

Research

Analysis of 17β-estradiol (E2) role in the regulation of corpus luteum function in pregnant rats: Involvement of IGFBP5 in the E2-mediated actions