Cargando…
Comparison of neonatal outcomes and live-birth defects after progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: A large retrospective cohort study
Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) is a new ovarian stimulation regimen for in vitro fertilization (IVF), with the advantages of an oral administration route and more control over preovulatory luteinizing hormone (LH) levels. Assessing the safety of this novel regimen is an important premis...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Health
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6112954/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30142796 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000011906 |
_version_ | 1783350939234598912 |
---|---|
author | Wang, Ningling Lin, Jiaying Zhu, Qianqian Fan, Yong Wang, Yun Fu, Yonglun Kuang, Yanping |
author_facet | Wang, Ningling Lin, Jiaying Zhu, Qianqian Fan, Yong Wang, Yun Fu, Yonglun Kuang, Yanping |
author_sort | Wang, Ningling |
collection | PubMed |
description | Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) is a new ovarian stimulation regimen for in vitro fertilization (IVF), with the advantages of an oral administration route and more control over preovulatory luteinizing hormone (LH) levels. Assessing the safety of this novel regimen is an important premise for its routine practice. We conducted a large retrospective cohort study for infants born between August 2014 and April 2017 from IVF and embryo transfer cycles after either PPOS and the conventional gonadotropin-releasing hormone-agonist (GnRH-a) short protocol at our center. Around 1589 live-born infants were finally enrolled, corresponding to 1258 frozen-thawed (FET) cycles, which led to 855 live-born infants from PPOS (659 FET cycles) and 734 live-born infants from the short protocol (599 FET cycles). Birth characteristics regarding gestational age, birth weight and length, infant sex, and early neonatal death were comparable between the 2 groups. The incidence of live-birth defects in the PPOS group (1.52%) was similar to that in the short protocol group (1.63%) and was not statistically significant. For birth defects, the risk significantly increased for multiple births, and the adjusted odds ratio was 3.14 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.25–7.88). No associations were found between congenital birth defects and maternal age, body mass index (BMI), the duration of infertility, method of insemination, infant sex, embryo stage at transfer, the number of embryos transferred or ovarian stimulation regimen. Our study shows that the neonatal outcomes and risk of congenital malformations were similar between the PPOS and conventional GnRH-a short protocol. However, multiple pregnancy led to a higher likelihood of birth defects. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6112954 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer Health |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61129542018-09-07 Comparison of neonatal outcomes and live-birth defects after progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: A large retrospective cohort study Wang, Ningling Lin, Jiaying Zhu, Qianqian Fan, Yong Wang, Yun Fu, Yonglun Kuang, Yanping Medicine (Baltimore) Research Article Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) is a new ovarian stimulation regimen for in vitro fertilization (IVF), with the advantages of an oral administration route and more control over preovulatory luteinizing hormone (LH) levels. Assessing the safety of this novel regimen is an important premise for its routine practice. We conducted a large retrospective cohort study for infants born between August 2014 and April 2017 from IVF and embryo transfer cycles after either PPOS and the conventional gonadotropin-releasing hormone-agonist (GnRH-a) short protocol at our center. Around 1589 live-born infants were finally enrolled, corresponding to 1258 frozen-thawed (FET) cycles, which led to 855 live-born infants from PPOS (659 FET cycles) and 734 live-born infants from the short protocol (599 FET cycles). Birth characteristics regarding gestational age, birth weight and length, infant sex, and early neonatal death were comparable between the 2 groups. The incidence of live-birth defects in the PPOS group (1.52%) was similar to that in the short protocol group (1.63%) and was not statistically significant. For birth defects, the risk significantly increased for multiple births, and the adjusted odds ratio was 3.14 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.25–7.88). No associations were found between congenital birth defects and maternal age, body mass index (BMI), the duration of infertility, method of insemination, infant sex, embryo stage at transfer, the number of embryos transferred or ovarian stimulation regimen. Our study shows that the neonatal outcomes and risk of congenital malformations were similar between the PPOS and conventional GnRH-a short protocol. However, multiple pregnancy led to a higher likelihood of birth defects. Wolters Kluwer Health 2018-08-24 /pmc/articles/PMC6112954/ /pubmed/30142796 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000011906 Text en Copyright © 2018 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
spellingShingle | Research Article Wang, Ningling Lin, Jiaying Zhu, Qianqian Fan, Yong Wang, Yun Fu, Yonglun Kuang, Yanping Comparison of neonatal outcomes and live-birth defects after progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: A large retrospective cohort study |
title | Comparison of neonatal outcomes and live-birth defects after progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: A large retrospective cohort study |
title_full | Comparison of neonatal outcomes and live-birth defects after progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: A large retrospective cohort study |
title_fullStr | Comparison of neonatal outcomes and live-birth defects after progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: A large retrospective cohort study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of neonatal outcomes and live-birth defects after progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: A large retrospective cohort study |
title_short | Comparison of neonatal outcomes and live-birth defects after progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: A large retrospective cohort study |
title_sort | comparison of neonatal outcomes and live-birth defects after progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a large retrospective cohort study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6112954/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30142796 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000011906 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wangningling comparisonofneonataloutcomesandlivebirthdefectsafterprogestinprimedovarianstimulationversusconventionalovarianstimulationforinvitrofertilizationalargeretrospectivecohortstudy AT linjiaying comparisonofneonataloutcomesandlivebirthdefectsafterprogestinprimedovarianstimulationversusconventionalovarianstimulationforinvitrofertilizationalargeretrospectivecohortstudy AT zhuqianqian comparisonofneonataloutcomesandlivebirthdefectsafterprogestinprimedovarianstimulationversusconventionalovarianstimulationforinvitrofertilizationalargeretrospectivecohortstudy AT fanyong comparisonofneonataloutcomesandlivebirthdefectsafterprogestinprimedovarianstimulationversusconventionalovarianstimulationforinvitrofertilizationalargeretrospectivecohortstudy AT wangyun comparisonofneonataloutcomesandlivebirthdefectsafterprogestinprimedovarianstimulationversusconventionalovarianstimulationforinvitrofertilizationalargeretrospectivecohortstudy AT fuyonglun comparisonofneonataloutcomesandlivebirthdefectsafterprogestinprimedovarianstimulationversusconventionalovarianstimulationforinvitrofertilizationalargeretrospectivecohortstudy AT kuangyanping comparisonofneonataloutcomesandlivebirthdefectsafterprogestinprimedovarianstimulationversusconventionalovarianstimulationforinvitrofertilizationalargeretrospectivecohortstudy |