Inactivated Covid-19 vaccine did not undermine live birth and neonatal outcomes of women with frozen-thawed embryo transfer

Author:

Cao Mingzhu12ORCID,Wu Yixuan12,Lin Yanshan12,Xu Zijin12,Liang Zhu12,Huang Qing12,Li Sichen12,Liu Hanyan12ORCID,An Chunyan12,Luo Yiqun12,Liu Haiying12ORCID,Liu Jianqiao12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center for Reproductive Medicine, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Major Obstetric Diseases, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University , Guangzhou, China

2. Key Laboratory for Reproductive Medicine of Guangdong Province, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University , Guangzhou, China

Abstract

Abstract STUDY QUESTION Does inoculation with inactivated vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) before frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) affect live birth and neonatal outcomes? SUMMARY ANSWER Inactivated Covid-19 vaccines did not undermine live birth and neonatal outcomes of women planning for FET. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Accumulating reports are now available indicating the safe use of mRNA vaccines against Covid-19 in pregnant and lactating women, and a few reports indicate that they are not associated with adverse effects on ovarian stimulation or early pregnancy outcomes following IVF. Evidence about the safety of inactivated Covid-19 vaccines is very limited. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This is a retrospective cohort analysis from Reproductive Medical Center of a tertiary teaching hospital. Clinical records and vaccination record of 2574 couples with embryos transferred between 1 March 2021 and 30 September 2021 were screened for eligibility of this study. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Clinical and vaccination data of infertile couples planning for FET were screened for eligibility of the study. The reproductive and neonatal outcomes of FET women inoculated with inactivated Covid-19 vaccines or not were compared. The primary outcomes were live birth rate per embryo transfer cycle and newborns’ birth height and weight. Secondary outcomes included rates of ongoing pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, biochemical pregnancy and spontaneous miscarriage. Multivariate logistical regression and propensity score matching (PSM) analyses were performed to minimize the influence of confounding factors. Subgroup analyses, including single dose versus double dose of the vaccines and the time intervals between the first vaccination and embryo transfer, were also performed. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Vaccinated women have comparable live birth rates (43.6% versus 45.0% before PSM, P = 0.590; and 42.9% versus 43.9% after PSM, P = 0.688), ongoing pregnancy rates (48.2% versus 48.1% before PSM, P = 0.980; and 52.2% versus 52.7% after PSM, P = 0.875) and clinical pregnancy rate (55.0% versus 54.8% before PSM, P = 0.928; and 54.7% versus 54.2% after PSM, P = 0.868) when compared with unvaccinated counterparts. The newborns’ birth length (50.0 ± 1.6 versus 49.0 ± 2.9 cm before PSM, P = 0.116; and 49.9 ± 1.7 versus 49.3 ± 2.6 cm after PSM, P = 0.141) and birth weight (3111.2 ± 349.9 versus 3030.3 ± 588.5 g before PSM, P = 0.544; and 3053.8 ± 372.5 versus 3039.2 ± 496.8 g after PSM, P = 0.347) were all similar between the two groups. Neither single dose nor double dose of vaccines, as well as different intervals between vaccination and embryo transfer showed any significant impacts on reproductive and neonatal outcomes. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION The main findings might be limited by retrospective design. Besides, inoculations of triple dose of Covid-19 vaccines were not available by the time of data collection, thus the results cannot reflect the safe use of triple dose of inactivated Covid-19 vaccines. Finally, history of Covid-19 infection was based on patients’ self-report rather than objective laboratory tests. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Eligible individuals of inactivated vaccines against Covid-19 should not postpone vaccination plan because of their embryo transfer schedule, or vice versa. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This study was supported by the Medical Key Discipline of Guangzhou (2021–2023). All authors had nothing to disclose. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.

Funder

Medical Key Discipline of Guangzhou

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Obstetrics and Gynecology,Rehabilitation,Reproductive Medicine

Reference34 articles.

1. In vitro fertilization and early pregnancy outcomes after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination;Aharon;Obstet Gynecol,2022

2. The effect of coronavirus disease 2019 immunity on frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles outcome;Aizer;Fertil Steril,2022

3. Vaccines—safety in pregnancy;Arora;Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol,2021

4. Coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination and infertility treatment outcomes;Avraham;Fertil Steril,2022

5. Attitudes toward COVID-19 illness and COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women: a cross-sectional multicenter study during August-December 2020;Battarbee;Am J Perinatol,2021

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3