Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T17:47:12.158Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 12 - Perinatal Outcomes from IVF and ICSI

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 May 2020

R. John Aitken
Affiliation:
University of Newcastle, New South Wales
David Mortimer
Affiliation:
Oozoa Biomedical Inc, Vancouver
Gabor Kovacs
Affiliation:
Epworth Healthcare Melbourne
Get access

Summary

This chapter is a narrative review of the epidemiology of IVF and ICSI as the dominant sub-set of all available assisted reproductive technologies (ART).

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Kurinczuk, J. J., Hansen, M. and Bower, C. (2004) The risk of birth defects in children born after assisted reproductive technologies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 16:201209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kurinczuk, J. J. and Bower, C. (1997) Birth defects in infants conceived by intracytoplasmic sperm injection: an alternative interpretation. BMJ 315:12601265; discussion 5–6.Google Scholar
El-Chaar, D., Yang, Q., Gao, J., et al. (2009) Risk of birth defects increased in pregnancies conceived by assisted human reproduction. Fertil Steril 92:15571561.Google Scholar
Reefhuis, J., Honein, M. A., Schieve, L. A., Correa, A., Hobbs, C. A. and Rasmussen, S. A. (2009) Assisted reproductive technology and major structural birth defects in the United States. Hum Reprod 24:360366.Google Scholar
Rimm, A. A., Katayama, A. C., Diaz, M. and Katayama, K. P. (2004) A meta-analysis of controlled studies comparing major malformation rates in IVF and ICSI infants with naturally conceived children. J Assist Reprod Genet 21:437443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mansour, R., Ishihara, O., Adamson, G. D., et al. (2014) International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies world report: Assisted Reproductive Technology 2006. Hum Reprod 29:15361551.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Macaldowie, A., Wang, Y., Chughtai, A. and Chambers, G. (2014) Australia’s Mothers and Babies 2012. Sydney, NSW: AIHW National Perinatal Statistics Unit.Google Scholar
NHMRC (2007) Ethical Guidelines on the Use of Assisted Reproductive Technology in Clinical Practice and Research 2004 (revised in 2007). Canberra: NHMRC.Google Scholar
Hansen, M., Kurinczuk, J. J., Bower, C. and Webb, S. (2002) The risk of major birth defects after intracytoplasmic sperm injection and in vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 346:725730.Google Scholar
ABS. Australian Standard Classification of Occupations (1990) ASCO First Edition. Occupation Definitions. Canberra: ABS.Google Scholar
ABS (2006) Census of Population and Housing. Socio-economic Indices for Areas (SEIFA). Canberra: ABS.Google Scholar
Pinborg, A., Wennerholm, U. B., Romundstad, L. B., et al. (2013) Why do singletons conceived after assisted reproduction technology have adverse perinatal outcome? Systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 19:87104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lancaster, P. A. (1985) Obstetric outcome. Clin Obstet Gynaecol 12:847864.Google Scholar
Davies, M. J., Moore, V. M., Willson, K. J., et al. (2012) Reproductive technologies and the risk of birth defects. New Eng J Med 366:18031813.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marino, J. L., Moore, V. M., Willson, K. J., et al. (2014)Perinatal outcomes by mode of assisted conception and sub-fertility in an Australian data linkage cohort. PloS one 9:e80398.Google Scholar
Kallen, B., Finnstrom, O., Nygren, K. G. and Olausson, P. O. (2005) In vitro fertilization (IVF) in Sweden: risk for congenital malformations after different IVF methods. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 73:162169.Google Scholar
El-Chaar, D., Yang, Q., Gao, J., et al. (2008) Risk of birth defects increased in pregnancies conceived by assisted human reproduction. Fertil Steril 92(5):15571561.Google Scholar
Hansen, M., Bower, C., Milne, E., de Klerk, N. and Kurinczuk, J. J. (2005) Assisted reproductive technologies and the risk of birth defects–a systematic review. Hum Reprod 20:328338.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schieve, L. A., Rasmussen, S. A. and Reefhuis, J. (2005) Risk of birth defects among children conceived with assisted reproductive technology: providing an epidemiologic context to the data. Fertil Steril 84:13201324; discussion 7.Google Scholar
Lie, R. T., Lyngstadaas, A., Orstavik, K. H., Bakketeig, L. S., Jacobsen, G. and Tanbo, T. (2005) Birth defects in children conceived by ICSI compared with children conceived by other IVF-methods; a meta-analysis. Int J Epidem 34:696701.Google Scholar
Zhu, J. L., Basso, O., Obel, C., Bille, C. and Olsen, J. (2006) Infertility, infertility treatment, and congenital malformations: Danish national birth cohort. BMJ:333:679.Google Scholar
Lambert, R. D. (2002) Safety issues in assisted reproduction technology: the children of assisted reproduction confront the responsible conduct of assisted reproductive technologies. Hum Reprod 17:30113015.Google Scholar
Schieve, L. A., Rasmussen, S. A., Buck, G. M., Schendel, D. E., Reynolds, M. A. and Wright, V. C. (2004) Are children born after assisted reproductive technology at increased risk for adverse health outcomes? Obstet Gynecol 103:11541163.Google Scholar
Lambert, R. D. (2003) Safety issues in assisted reproductive technology: aetiology of health problems in singleton ART babies. Hum Reprod 18:19871991.Google Scholar
Maheshwari, A., Pandey, S., Shetty, A., Hamilton, M. and Bhattacharya, S. (2012) 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 98:368–77e1–9.Google Scholar
Hansen, M. and Bower, C. (2014) The impact of assisted reproductive technologies on intra-uterine growth and birth defects in singletons. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 19:228233.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnhart, K. T. (2013) Assisted reproductive technologies and perinatal morbidity: interrogating the association. Fertil Steril 99:299302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinborg, A., Henningsen, A. A., Loft, A., Malchau, S. S., Forman, J. and Andersen, A. N. (2014) Large baby syndrome in singletons born after frozen embryo transfer (FET): is it due to maternal factors or the cryotechnique? Hum Reprod 29:618627.Google Scholar
Whitelaw, N., Bhattacharya, S., Hoad, G., Horgan, G. W., Hamilton, M. and Haggarty, P. (2014) Epigenetic status in the offspring of spontaneous and assisted conception. Hum Reprod 29(7):14521458.Google Scholar
Henningsen, A. A., Gissler, M., Skjaerven, R., et al. (2015) Trends in perinatal health after assisted reproduction: a Nordic study from the CoNARTaS group. Hum Reprod 30(3):710716.Google Scholar
Sazonova, A., Källen, K., Thurin-Kjellberg, A., Wennerholm, U-B. and Bergh., C. (2012) Obstetric outcome in singletons after in vitro fertilization with cryopreserved/thawed embryos. Hum Reprod 27:13431350.Google Scholar
Macaldowie., A., Wang., Y., Chambers., G. and Sullivan., E. (2012) Assisted reproductive technology in Australia and New Zealand 2010. Canberra: AIHW.Google Scholar
Boulet., S. L., Mehta., A., Kissin., D. M., Warner., L., Kawwass, J. F. and Jamieson., D. J. (2015) Trends in use of and reproductive outcomes associated with intracytoplasmic sperm injection. JAMA 313:255263.Google Scholar
Tararbit., K., Houyel., L., Bonnet., D., et al. (2011) Risk of congenital heart defects associated with assisted reproductive technologies: a population-based evaluation. Eur Heart J 32:500508.Google Scholar
van Heesch., M. M., Evers., J. L., Dumoulin., J. C., et al. (2014) A comparison of perinatal outcomes in singletons and multiples born after in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection stratified for neonatal risk criteria. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 93:277286.Google Scholar
Toshimitsu., M., Nagamatsu., T., Nagasaka., T., et al. (2014) Increased risk of pregnancy-induced hypertension and operative delivery after conception induced by in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection in women aged 40 years and older. Fertil Steril 102(4):10651070.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Okun, N. and Sierra, S. Genetics Committee: Special Contributors (2014) Pregnancy outcomes after assisted human reproduction. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 36:6483.Google Scholar
Pinborg, A., Lidegaard, O. and Andersen, A. N. (2006) The vanishing twin: a major determinant of infant outcome in IVF singleton births. Br J Hosp Med (Lond) 67:417420.Google Scholar
Davies, M. J., Rumbold, A. R., Whitrow, M. J., et al. (2016) Spontaneous loss of a co-twin and the risk of birth defects after assisted conception. J Dev Orig Health Dis 7:678684.Google Scholar
Teklenburg, G., Salker, M., Molokhia, M., et al. (2010) Natural selection of human embryos: decidualizing endometrial stromal cells serve as sensors of embryo quality upon implantation. PloS one 5:e10258.Google Scholar
Liu, S. Y., Teng, B., Fu, J., Li, X., Zheng, Y. and Sun, X. X. (2013) Obstetric and neonatal outcomes after transfer of vitrified early cleavage embryos. Hum Reprod 28:20932100.Google Scholar
AbdelHafez, F. F., Desai, N., Abou-Setta, A. M., Falcone, T. and Goldfarb, J. (2010) Slow freezing, vitrification and ultra-rapid freezing of human embryos: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed online 20:209222.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vega, M., Breborowicz, A., Moshier, E. L., McGovern, P. G. and Keltz, M. D. (2014) Blastulation rates decline in a linear fashion from euploid to aneuploid embryos with single versus multiple chromosomal errors. Fertil Steril 102:394398.Google Scholar
Kanter, J. R., Boulet, S. L., Kawwass, J. F., Jamieson, D. J. and Kissin, D. M. (2015) Trends and correlates of monozygotic twinning after single embryo transfer. Obstet Gynecol 125:111117.Google Scholar
Wright, V., Schieve, L. A., Vahratian, A. and Reynolds, M. A. (2004) Monozygotic twinning associated with day 5 embryo transfer in pregnancies conceived after IVF. Hum Reprod 19:18311836.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinborg, A., Henningsen, A. K., Malchau, S. S. and Loft, A. (2013) Congenital anomalies after assisted reproductive technology. Fertil Steril 99:327332.Google Scholar
Kallen, B., Finnstrom, O., Lindam, A., Nilsson, E., Nygren, K. G. and Olausson, P. O. (2010) Blastocyst versus cleavage stage transfer in in vitro fertilization: differences in neonatal outcome? Fertil Steril 94:16801683.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gardner, D. K. (2016) The impact of physiological oxygen during culture, and vitrification for cryopreservation, on the outcome of extended culture in human IVF. Reprod Biomed Online 32:137141.Google Scholar
Chambers, G. M., Chughtai, A. A., Farquhar, C. M. and Wang, Y. A. (2015) Risk of preterm birth after blastocyst embryo transfer: a large population study using contemporary registry data from Australia and New Zealand. Fertil Steril 104:9971003.Google Scholar
Zander-Fox, D., Lane, M. and Hamilton, H. (2013) Slow freezing and vitrification of mouse morula and early blastocysts. J Assist Reprod Genet 30:10911098.Google Scholar
Banwell, K. M., Lane, M., Russell, D. L., Kind, K. L. and Thompson, J. G. (2007) Oxygen concentration during mouse oocyte in vitro maturation affects embryo and fetal development. Hum Reprod 22:27682775.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kleijkers, S. H., van Montfoort, A. P., Smits, L. J., et al. (2014) IVF culture medium affects post-natal weight in humans during the first 2 years of life. Hum Reprod 29(4):661669.Google Scholar
Eskild, A., Monkerud, L. and Tanbo, T. (2013) Birthweight and placental weight; do changes in culture media used for IVF matter? Comparisons with spontaneous pregnancies in the corresponding time periods. Hum Reprod 28:32073214.Google Scholar
Vergouw, C. G., Kostelijk, E. H., Doejaaren, E., Hompes, P. G. A., Lambalk, C. B. and Schats, R. (2012) The influence of the type of embryo culture medium on neonatal birthweight after single embryo transfer in IVF. Hum Reprod (Oxford, UK) 27:26192626.Google Scholar
Carrasco, B., Boada, M., Rodriguez, I., Coroleu, B., Barri, P. N. and Veiga, A. (2013) Does culture medium influence offspring birth weight? Fert Steril 100:12831288.Google Scholar
Davies, M. J., Moore, V. M. and Haan, E. A. (2012) Reproductive technologies and the risk of birth defects reply. New Eng J Med 367:875876.Google Scholar
Davies, M. J., Rumbold, A. R., Marino, J. L., et al. (2017) Maternal factors and the risk of birth defects after IVF and ICSI: a whole of population cohort study. BJOG: Int J Obstet Gyn 124:15371544.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raunig, J. M., Yamauchi, Y., Ward, M. A. and Collier, A. C. (2011) Placental inflammation and oxidative stress in the mouse model of assisted reproduction. Placenta 32:852858.Google Scholar
Nelissen, E. C., Dumoulin, J. C., Daunay, A., Evers, J. L., Tost, J. and van Montfoort, A. P. (2013) Placentas from pregnancies conceived by IVF/ICSI have a reduced DNA methylation level at the H19 and MEST differentially methylated regions. Hum Reprod 28:11171126.Google Scholar
Allen, V. M., Wilson, R. D. and Cheung, A. (2006) Pregnancy outcomes after assisted reproductive technology. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 28:220250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Medical Advisory Secretariat (2006) In vitro fertilization and multiple pregnancies: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser 6:163.Google Scholar
Myers, E. R., McCrory, D. C., Mills, A. A., et al. (2008) Effectiveness of Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART). Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep) 1195.Google Scholar
Petrou, S., Eddama, O. and Mangham, L. (2011) A structured review of the recent literature on the economic consequences of preterm birth. Arch Dis Childhood Fetal Neonatal Edn 96:F225232.Google Scholar
Hart, R. and Norman, R. J. (2013) The longer-term health outcomes for children born as a result of IVF treatment. Part I: General health outcomes. Hum Reprod Update 19:232243.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×