Top

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

Published in:

01-10-2020 | Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Seasonal variation, temperature, day length, and IVF outcomes from fresh cycles

Authors: Leslie V. Farland, Katharine F. B. Correia, Stacey A. Missmer, Catherine Racowsky

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 10/2020

Abstract

Purpose

It is known that delivery rates from spontaneous conception vary according to season which may be due to cultural or environmental factors; however, conflicting data exist regarding whether outcomes from IVF are also seasonally dependent. The present study was designed to test the hypothesis that the season at oocyte retrieval is associated with livebirth after fresh transfer.

Methods

Dates of oocyte retrieval for all autologous cycles in our IVF program between January 2012 and December 2017 were categorized by season. Dates were linked to local temperature (min, max, average) and day length obtained from meteorological records. Average maximum temperature and day length were categorized into tertiles. Multivariable logistic regression, adjusted for age and quadratic age, were used to model odds (aOR) of implantation, clinical pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, and livebirth.

Results

Patient characteristics were similar across seasons. As expected, temperature and day length varied by season. When compared with cycles started during winter, there was no difference in the age-adjusted odds of livebirth for the other three seasons (spring: aOR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.82–1.13; summer: aOR: 1.05, 0.90–1.23; fall: aOR: 0.98, 0.84–1.15). There was a positive linear trend between temperature and odds of implantation, and clinical pregnancy (p value, test for linear trend (implantation, p = 0.02; clinical pregnancy, p = 0.01)) but no association with livebirth for temperature or day length.

Conclusions

We found that season at oocyte retrieval was not associated with livebirth, contrary to patterns seen in naturally conceived populations. However, our data did suggest modestly higher odds of clinical pregnancy for retrievals in June and July, and that higher temperature at time of retrieval was associated with higher odds of clinical pregnancy but not livebirth.

Available only for authorised users

Rosenberg HM. Seasonal variation of births, United States, 1933-63. Vital Health Stat 1. 1966;21(9):1–59.

Cowgill U. Season of birth in man, contemporary situation with special refernce to Europe and the Southern Hemisphere. Ecology. 1965;47(4):614–23.CrossRef

Lam DA, Miron JA. Seasonality of births in human populations. Soc Biol. 1991;38(1-2):51–78.PubMed

Becker S. Seasonal patterns of births and conception throughout the world. Adv Exp Med Biol. 1991;286:59–72.CrossRef

Becker S. Seasonality of deaths in Matlab, Bangladesh. Int J Epidemiol. 1981;10(3):271–80.CrossRef

James WH. Seasonal variation in human births. J Biosoc Sci. 1990;22(1):113–9.CrossRef

Wesselink AK, Wise LA, Hatch EE, Mikkelsen EM, Sørensen HT, Riis AH, et al. Seasonal patterns in fecundability in North America and Denmark: a preconception cohort study. Hum Reprod. 2020:dez265. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dez265.

Lam DA, Miron JA. Global patterns of seasonal variation in human fertility. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1994;709:9–28.CrossRef

Seiver DA. Trend and variation in the seasonality of U.S. fertility, 1947-1976. Demography. 1985;22(1):89–100.CrossRef

10.

Russell D, Douglas AS, Allan TM. Changing seasonality of birth--a possible environmental effect. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1993;47(5):362–7. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.47.5.362.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Bronson FH. Seasonal variation in human reproduction: environmental factors. Q Rev Biol. 1995;70(2):141–64.CrossRef

12.

Robinson D, Rock J. Intrascrotal hyperthermia induced by scrotal insulation: effect on spermatogenesis. Obstet Gynecol. 1967;29(2):217–23.PubMed

13.

Rojansky N, Brzezinski A, Schenker JG. Seasonality in human reproduction: an update. Hum Reprod. 1992;7(6):735–45.CrossRef

14.

Liu X, Bai H, Mol BW, Shi W, Gao M, Shi J. Seasonal variability does not impact in vitro fertilization success. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):17185. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-53919-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Kirshenbaum M, Ben-David A, Zilberberg E, Elkan-Miller T, Haas J, Orvieto R. Influence of seasonal variation on in vitro fertilization success. PLoS One. 2018;13(7):e0199210-e. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0199210.CrossRef

16.

Fleming C, Nice L, Hughes AO, Hull MG. Apparent lack of seasonal variation in implantation rates after in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 1994;9(11):2164–6.CrossRef

17.

Dunphy BC, Anderson-Sykes S, Brant R, Pattinson HA, Greene CA. Human embryo implantation following in-vitro fertilization: is there a seasonal variation? Hum Reprod. 1995;10(7):1825–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136184.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Wunder DM, Limoni C, Birkhäuser MH, Swiss F-G. Lack of seasonal variations in fertilization, pregnancy and implantation rates in women undergoing IVF. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(11):3122–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dei177.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Zhao M, Zhang H, Waters THB, Chung JPW, Li TC, Chan DYL. The effects of daily meteorological perturbation on pregnancy outcome: follow-up of a cohort of young women undergoing IVF treatment. Environmental health: a global access science source. 2019;18(1):103. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-019-0538-7.CrossRef

20.

Chamoun D, Udoff L, Scott L, Magder L, Adashi EY, McClamrock HD. A seasonal effect on pregnancy rates in an in vitro fertilization program. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1995;12(9):585–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02212579.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Rojansky N, Benshushan A, Meirsdorf S, Lewin A, Laufer N, Safran A. Seasonal variability in fertilization and embryo quality rates in women undergoing IVF. Fertil Steril. 2000;74(3):476–81.CrossRef

22.

Stolwijk AM, Reuvers MJ, Hamilton CJ, Jongbloet PH, Hollanders JM, Zielhuis GA. Seasonality in the results of in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 1994;9(12):2300–5. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a138441.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Weigert M, Feichtinger W, Kulin S, Kaali SG, Dorau P, Bauer P. Seasonal influences on in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2001;18(11):598–602. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1013160905497.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria. R Core Team 2017.

25.

gee: Generalized Estimation Equation Solver. In: Ripley. VJCPtRbTLaB, editor.2015.

26.

Vandekerckhove F, Van der Veken H, Tilleman K, De Croo I, Van den Abbeel E, Gerris J, et al. Seasons in the sun: the impact on IVF results one month later. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2016;8(2):75–83.PubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Khoudja RY, Xu Y, Li T, Zhou C. Better IVF outcomes following improvements in laboratory air quality. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013;30(1):69–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-012-9900-1.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Perin PM, Maluf M, Czeresnia CE, Januário DANF, Saldiva PHN. Impact of short-term preconceptional exposure to particulate air pollution on treatment outcome in couples undergoing in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF/ET). J Assist Reprod Genet. 2010;27(7):371–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-010-9419-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Conforti A, Mascia M, Cioffi G, De Angelis C, Coppola G, De Rosa P, et al. Air pollution and female fertility: a systematic review of literature. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2018;16(1):117. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-018-0433-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Choe SA, Jun YB, Lee WS, Yoon TK, Kim SY. Association between ambient air pollution and pregnancy rate in women who underwent IVF. Hum Reprod. 2018;33(6):1071–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dey076.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Mortimer D, Cohen J, Mortimer ST, Fawzy M, McCulloh DH, Morbeck DE, et al. Cairo consensus on the IVF laboratory environment and air quality: report of an expert meeting. Reprod BioMed Online. 2018;36(6):658–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2018.02.005.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Dawson J, Adams P, Pandis S. Sensitivity of PM 2.5 to climate in the Eastern US: a modeling case study. Atmos Chem Phys. 2007;7(16):4295–309.CrossRef

33.

Kroll MH, Bi C, Garber CC, Kaufman HW, Liu D, Caston-Balderrama A, et al. Temporal relationship between vitamin D status and parathyroid hormone in the United States. PLoS One. 2015;10(3):e0118108-e. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118108.CrossRef

34.

Rudick B, Ingles S, Chung K, Stanczyk F, Paulson R, Bendikson K. Characterizing the influence of vitamin D levels on IVF outcomes. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(11):3321–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/des280.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Franasiak JM, Molinaro TA, Dubell EK, Scott KL, Ruiz AR, Forman EJ, et al. Vitamin D levels do not affect IVF outcomes following the transfer of euploid blastocysts. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212(3):315 e1-e6.CrossRef

Title: Seasonal variation, temperature, day length, and IVF outcomes from fresh cycles
Authors: Leslie V. Farland
Katharine F. B. Correia
Stacey A. Missmer
Catherine Racowsky
Publication date: 01-10-2020
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 10/2020
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-020-01915-2

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Seasonal variation, temperature, day length, and IVF outcomes from fresh cycles

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2020

Discordance between human sperm quality and telomere length following differential gradient separation/swim-up

Ovarian stimulation outcomes among transgender men compared with fertile cisgender women

Intrauterine insemination cycles: prediction of success and thresholds for poor prognosis and futile care

All Models Are Wrong, but Some Are Useful

PICSI vs. MACS for abnormal sperm DNA fragmentation ICSI cases: a prospective randomized trial

Artificial intelligence in the IVF laboratory: overview through the application of different types of algorithms for the classification of reproductive data