Transferencia de embriones congelados y riesgo de parto prematuro: estudio de la cohorte española

Jose Moreno-Sepulveda , Miguel A. Checa
{"title":"Transferencia de embriones congelados y riesgo de parto prematuro: estudio de la cohorte española","authors":"Jose Moreno-Sepulveda ,&nbsp;Miguel A. Checa","doi":"10.1016/j.medre.2020.09.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Current evidence suggest that perinatal outcomes of children of patients subjected to in vitro fertilisation (IVF) with fresh embryo transfer (ET) are worse compared to frozen embryo transfer (FET). There are doubts if the cause might be related to the technique of vitrification or ovarian stimulation performed in IVF. The aim of this study is to assess the risk of preterm delivery in patients undergoing IVF with fresh ET versus FET.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>Retrospective cohort study using data from the National Registry of Assisted Reproduction Techniques Activity - Registry of the Spanish Fertility Society (RNATRA) from 2010 to 2015, including women with a singleton pregnancy following autologous IVF (IVF-AO), or IVF with donation of oocytes (IVF-DO).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 371,308 cycles of IVF were performed, of which 263,306 followed IVF-AO (172,626 fresh ET, and 90,680 FET), and 108,002 underwent IVF-DO (57,944 fresh ET and 50,048 FET). The prevalence of preterm delivery was 12% in IVF-AO group and 18.6% in IVF-DO group. A decreased risk of early preterm delivery was observed after FET only in IVF-AO (OR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.75-0.99), while an increased risk of late and moderate preterm delivery was found after FET, both in IVF-AO (OR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.04-1.20) and IVF-DO (OR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.08-1.26).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Both IVF-AO and IVF-DO have a high prevalence of preterm delivery. Cryopreservation is associated with a lower risk of early preterm delivery compared to fresh ET in patients undergoing IVF-AO; however, an increased risk of late and moderate preterm delivery was observed in both IVF-AO and IVF-DO. These findings should be analysed with caution due to methodological limitations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100911,"journal":{"name":"Medicina Reproductiva y Embriología Clínica","volume":"7 3","pages":"Pages 75-82"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicina Reproductiva y Embriología Clínica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2340932020300165","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Current evidence suggest that perinatal outcomes of children of patients subjected to in vitro fertilisation (IVF) with fresh embryo transfer (ET) are worse compared to frozen embryo transfer (FET). There are doubts if the cause might be related to the technique of vitrification or ovarian stimulation performed in IVF. The aim of this study is to assess the risk of preterm delivery in patients undergoing IVF with fresh ET versus FET.

Material and methods

Retrospective cohort study using data from the National Registry of Assisted Reproduction Techniques Activity - Registry of the Spanish Fertility Society (RNATRA) from 2010 to 2015, including women with a singleton pregnancy following autologous IVF (IVF-AO), or IVF with donation of oocytes (IVF-DO).

Results

A total of 371,308 cycles of IVF were performed, of which 263,306 followed IVF-AO (172,626 fresh ET, and 90,680 FET), and 108,002 underwent IVF-DO (57,944 fresh ET and 50,048 FET). The prevalence of preterm delivery was 12% in IVF-AO group and 18.6% in IVF-DO group. A decreased risk of early preterm delivery was observed after FET only in IVF-AO (OR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.75-0.99), while an increased risk of late and moderate preterm delivery was found after FET, both in IVF-AO (OR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.04-1.20) and IVF-DO (OR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.08-1.26).

Conclusions

Both IVF-AO and IVF-DO have a high prevalence of preterm delivery. Cryopreservation is associated with a lower risk of early preterm delivery compared to fresh ET in patients undergoing IVF-AO; however, an increased risk of late and moderate preterm delivery was observed in both IVF-AO and IVF-DO. These findings should be analysed with caution due to methodological limitations.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
冷冻胚胎移植与早产风险:西班牙队列研究
目前的证据表明,与冷冻胚胎移植(FET)相比,接受新鲜胚胎移植(ET)的体外受精(IVF)患者的围产儿结局更差。有怀疑,如果原因可能与玻璃化技术或卵巢刺激进行体外受精。本研究的目的是评估使用新鲜ET与FET进行IVF的患者早产的风险。材料和方法回顾性队列研究使用2010年至2015年西班牙生育协会(RNATRA)国家辅助生殖技术活动登记处(RNATRA)的数据,包括自体体外受精(IVF- ao)或体外受精捐赠卵母细胞(IVF- do)后单胎妊娠的妇女。结果共进行体外受精371,308例,其中IVF- ao 263,306例(新鲜ET 172,626例,FET 90,680例),IVF- do 108,002例(新鲜ET 57,944例,FET 50,048例)。IVF-AO组早产发生率为12%,IVF-DO组为18.6%。仅在IVF-AO中观察到FET后早期早产风险降低(OR: 0.87;95% CI: 0.75-0.99),而在IVF-AO中,FET后发现晚期和中度早产的风险增加(OR: 1.12;95% CI: 1.04-1.20)和IVF-DO (OR: 1.17;95% ci: 1.08-1.26)。结论IVF-AO和IVF-DO均有较高的早产发生率。与IVF-AO患者的新鲜ET相比,冷冻保存与早期早产风险较低相关;然而,在IVF-AO和IVF-DO中观察到晚期和中度早产的风险增加。由于方法上的限制,这些发现应谨慎分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Extended embryo culture up to 14 days Impact of administration route on serum progesterone levels in women undergoing artificial endometrial preparation Efecto de la abstinencia sexual masculina en los resultados reproductivos Sperm DNA fragmentation and microfluidics: A new era in human sperm selection Aplicación de la inteligencia artificial en el laboratorio de reproducción asistida. Trabajo de revisión
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1