Antenatal and intrapartum periods in singleton pregnancy after assisted reproductive technology


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the antenatal and intrapartum periods in singleton post-ART pregnancies according to the type of infertility and the method of assisted reproductive technology (ART). Materials and methods: The study group included 409newborns from women with singleton post-ART pregnancy; all children were born from 2007 to 2017 at the Avicenna Medical Center (Novosibirsk). The control group consisted of 210 newborns from women with spontaneous pregnancy (SP) without a history of infertility, with equal gravidity and parity, and born in the same period. The study group was divided into 2 subgroups according to the predominant type of infertility and the ART method. Group I (n=205) consisted of women who conceived by IVF and predominantly had female causes of infertility in the parents' history. Group II (n=204) included women conceived by IVF+ICSI and mainly had male factor infertility. A retrospective analysis included outpatient and antenatal care cards of pregnant women and the developmental histories of the newborns. The main parameters of the health status were evaluated using clinical and anamnestic methods. Results: Patients in in the post-ART group were more likely to have threatened miscarriage than those in the spontaneous pregnancy group, but only with the predominance of female causes of infertility (IVF group, OR=1.12). ART does not increase the risk of preterm labor and pathological conditions of the intrauterine fetus. Conclusion: A personalized plan for antenatal care and childbirth in women with post-ART pregnancy should take into account the predominant type of infertility and the ART method.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Darya A. Kinsht

Novosibirsk State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation

Email: kinshtd@yandex.ru
Teaching Assistant at the Department of Pediatrics and Neonatology

Igor O. Marinkin

Novosibirsk State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation; Medical Center "Avicenna" Group of Companies "Mother and Child"

Email: rectorngmu@yandex.ru
Dr. Med. Sci., Professor, Rector, Head of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Marya K. Soboleva

Novosibirsk State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation; Medical Center "Avicenna" Group of Companies "Mother and Child"

Email: m.k.soboleva@gmail.com
Dr. Med. Sci., Professor, Chair of Pediatrics of Medical Faculty

References

  1. Bhandari S., Ganguly I., Agarwal P., Munaganuru N., Gupta N., Singh A. Relationship of number of embryos transferred with perinatal outcome of singleton pregnancy. J. Reprod. Infertil. 2017; 18(1): 179-84.
  2. Пыхтина Л.А., Филькина О.М., Гаджимурадова Н.Д., Малышкина А.И., Назаров С.Б. Факторы риска и прогнозирование нарушений здоровья у детей первого года жизни, родившихся от одноплодной беременности после экстракорпорального оплодотворения. Анализ риска здоровью. 2017; 1: 55-65. [Pykhtina L.A., Filkina O.M., Gadzhimuradova N.D., Malyshkina A.I., Nazarov S.B. Risk factors and prediction of health disorders in children of the first year of life born from a singleton pregnancy after in vitro fertilization. Analiz riska zdorov'yu/Health risk analysis. 2017; 1: 55-65. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.21668/health.risk/2017.1.07.
  3. Регистр центров ВРТ России. Отчет за 2018 год. Российская Ассоциация Репродукции Человека. [Register of ART centers in Russia. Report for 2018. Russian Association of Human Reproduction. (in Russian)]. Available at: http://www.rahr.ru/d_registr_otchet/otchet2019.pdf
  4. Martin A.S., Chang J., Zhang Y., Kawwass J.F., Boulet S.L., McKane P. et al. Perinatal outcomes among singletons after assisted reproductive technology with single-embryo or double-embryo transfer versus no assisted reproductive technology. Fertil. Steril. 2017; 107(4): 954-60. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.01.024.
  5. Wyns C., Bergh C., Calhaz-Jorge C., De Geyter C., Kupka M.S., Motrenko T. et al. ART in Europe, 2016: results generated from European registries by ESHRE. Hum. Reprod. Open. 2020; 31(3): 1957-73. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoaa032.
  6. Yeung E.H., Sundaram R., Bell E.M., Druschel C., Kus C., Xie Y. et al. Infertility treatment and children's longitudinal growth between birth and 3 years of age. Hum. Reprod. 2016; 31(7): 1621-8. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew106.
  7. Bergh C., Wennerholm U.B. Long-term health of children conceived after assisted reproductive technology. Ups. J. Med. Sci. 2020; 125(2): 152-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03009734.2020.1729904.
  8. Berntsen S., Soderstrom-Anttila V., Wennerholm U.B., Laivuori H., Loft A., Oldereid N.B. et al. The health of children conceived by ART: 'the chicken or the egg?' Hum. Reprod. Update. 2019; 25(2): 137-58. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmz001.
  9. Sun H., Liu Y., Huang S., Liu X., Li G., Du Q. Association between pre-pregnancy body mass index and maternal and neonatal outcomes of singleton pregnancies after assisted reproductive technology. Front. Endocrinol. (Lausanne). 2022; 12: 825336. https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2021.825336.
  10. Sullivan-Pyke C.S., Senapati S., Mainigi M.A., Barnhart K.T. In vitro fertilization and adverse obstetric and perinatal outcomes. Semin. Perinatol. 2017; 41(6): 345-53. https://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.semperi.2017.07.001.
  11. Баранов А.А., Намазова-Баранова Л.С., Беляева И.А., Бомбардирова Е.П., Смирнов И.Е. Медико-социальные проблемы вспомогательных репродуктивных технологий с позиции педиатрии. Вестник российской академии медицинских наук. 2015; 70(3): 307-14. [Baranov A.A., Namazova-Baranova L.S., Belyaeva I.A., Bombardirova E.P., Smirnov I.E. Medicosocial problems of assisted reproductive technologies from the point of view of pediatrics. Vestnik rossijskoj akademii medicinskih nauk/Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences. 2015; 70(3): 307-14. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.15690/vramn.v70i3.1326.
  12. Hwang S.S., Dukhovny D., Gopal D., Cabral H., Missmer S., Diop H. et al. Health of infants after ART-Treated, subfertile, and fertile deliveries. Pediatrics. 2018; 142(2): e20174069. https://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2017-4069.
  13. Wennberg A.L., Opdahl S., Bergh C., Aaris Henningsen A.K., Gissler M., Romundstad L.B. et al. Effect of maternal age on maternal and neonatal outcomes after assisted reproductive technology. Fertil. Steril. 2016; 106(5): 1142-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.06.021.
  14. Kalayci H., Ozdemir H., Alkas D., Cok T., Tarim E. Is primiparity a risk factor for advanced maternal age pregnancies? J. Matern. Fetal Neonatal Med. 2017; 33(10): 1283-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2016.1211633.
  15. Pinheiro R.L., Areia A.L., Pinto A.M., Donato H. Advanced maternal age: adverse outcomes of pregnancy, A meta-analysis. Acta Med. Port. 2019; 32(3): 219-26. https://dx.doi.org/10.20344/amp.11057.
  16. Luke B. Pregnancy and birth outcomes in couples with infertility with and without assisted reproductive technology: with an emphasis on US population-based studies. Am. J. Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 217(3): 270-81. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.03.012.
  17. Fledderjohann J., Barnes L.W. Reimagining infertility: a critical examination of fertility norms, geopolitics and survey bias. Health Policy Plan. 2018; 33(1): 34-40. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czx148.
  18. Пыхтина Л.А., Филькина О.М., Гаджимурадова Н.Д., Маркова О.В. Прогнозирование наиболее частых нарушений здоровья у детей от одноплодной беременности после ЭКО. Российский вестник перинатологии и педиатрии. 2016; 61(4): 166.
  19. Мурзаханова А.Ф., Ослопов В.Н., Хазова Е.В. Состояние здоровья детей, рожденных после экстракорпорального оплодотворения: вероятные риски и возможные осложнения. Практическая медицина. 2020; 18(3): 43-50. [Murzakhanova A.F., Oslopov V.N., Khazova E.V. The state of health of children born after in vitro fertilization: probable risks and possible complications. Practical medicine. 2020; 18(3): 43-50. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.32000/2072-1757-2020-3-43-50.
  20. 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(1): 73-85. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.09.007.
  21. Stern J.E., Liu C.L., Cabral H.J., Richards E.G., Coddington C.C., Hwang S. et al. Birth outcomes of singleton vaginal deliveries to ART-treated, subfertile, and fertile primiparous women. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2018; 35(9): 1585-93. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1238-x.
  22. Velez M.P., Hamel C., Hutton B., Gaudet L., Walker M., Thuku M. et al. Care plans for women pregnant using assisted reproductive technologies: a systematic review. Reprod. Health. 2019; 16(1): 9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12978-019-0667-z.
  23. R Core Team R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R. Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria; 2022. Available at: https://www.R-project.org/
  24. Patefield W.M. Algorithm AS 159: An Efficient Method of Generating Random R. x C. Tables with Given Row and Column Totals. Appl. Stat. 1981; 30(1): 91-7.
  25. Bellver J., Donnez J. Introduction: infertility etiology and offspring health. Fertil. Steril. 2019; 111(6): 1033-5. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.04.043.
  26. Cavoretto P., Candiani M., Giorgione V., Inversetti A., Abu-Saba M.M., Tiberio F. et al. Risk of spontaneous preterm birth in singleton pregnancies conceived after IVF/ICSI treatment: meta-analysis of cohort studies. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2018; 51(1): 43-53. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.18930.
  27. Casu G., Zaia V., Montagna E., de Padua Serafim A., Bianco B., Parente C. et al. The infertility-related stress scale: validation of a brazilian-portuguese version and measurement invariance across Brazil and Italy. Front. Psychol. 2022; 12: 784222. https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.784222.
  28. Sunkara S.K., Antonisamy B., Redla A.C., Kamath M.S. Female causes of infertility are associated with higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight: analysis of 117 401 singleton live births following IVF. Hum. Reprod. 2021; 36(3): 676-82. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deaa283.
  29. Mortimer R., James K., Bormann C.L., Harris A.L., Yeh J., Toth T.L. et al. Male factor infertility and placental pathology in singleton live births conceived with in vitro fertilization. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2021; 38(12): 3223-32. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10815-021-02344-5.
  30. Stern J.E., Liu C.L., Hwang S.S., Dukhovny D., Farland L.V., Diop H. et al. Influence of placental abnormalities and pregnancy-induced hypertension in prematurity associated with various assisted reproductive technology techniques. J. Clin. Med. 2021; 10(8): 1681. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10081681.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies