Effects of different frozen embryo transfer regimens on abnormalities of fetal weight: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Rosalik Kendal1,Carson Samantha2,Pilgrim Justin2,Luizzi Jacqueline3,Levy Gary2,Heitmann Ryan4,Pier Bruce1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, WA, USA

2. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, HI, USA

3. Department of Education and Research, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, WA, USA

4. Center for Reproductive Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA

Abstract

Abstract BACKGROUND Reported increases in maternal and perinatal morbidity (including macrosomia, large for gestational age (LGA), cesarean section, hemorrhage and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy) following frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles may be associated with the lack of a corpus luteum seen in programmed FET. Given the growing number of studies comparing outcomes between natural FET and programmed FET cycles, a meta-analysis would prove useful to detect the presence of abnormalities in fetal birth weight in patients undergoing natural and programmed FET cycles. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE The aim of this study was to provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of natural versus programmed methods of endometrial preparation for FET cycles on fetal weight and the risks of LGA and macrosomia. SEARCH METHODS A literature search using MEDLINE, SCOPUS, EMBASE and clinicaltrials.gov was conducted for published research comparing neonatal outcomes in natural FET and programmed FET cycles. Primary outcomes of interest were fetal weight, macrosomia and LGA. Studies were included if the following criteria were met: study contained cohorts of NFET and programmed FET with outcome data of birth weight, large for gestational data and/or macrosomia. The data are presented as average weight and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) with fixed- or random-effects meta-analysis between cohorts of NFET and programmed FET cycles. Bias was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for the 14 included studies. Multiple subgroup analyses were performed to assess for effect of the true natural cycle (defined as no ovulation trigger medication use) and the day of embryo transfer on fetal weight parameters compared with programmed cycle FET. OUTCOMES A total of 879 studies were identified, with 15 meeting inclusion the criteria. The studies varied with respect to country of origin, definition of natural cycle FET and type of progesterone supplementation used. The included studies had similar gestational ages at the time of birth. Programmed FET cycles resulted in a higher fetal weight compared with natural FET cycles (mean difference 47.38 gp = 0.04). Programmed FET cycles were also at higher risk for macrosomia (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.06–1.26) and LGA (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.02–1.19) compared with natural FET cycles. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that programmed FET cycles resulted in a higher fetal weight compared with true natural FET (mean difference 62.18 gp = 0.0001) cycles. Cleavage stage embryo transfers had an increased risk of LGA (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.00–1.62) and an increased risk of macrosomia (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.08–1.44) in programmed FET cycles compared with natural FET cycles. Blastocyst transfer in programmed FET cycles resulted in no difference in risk of macrosomia but an increased risk of LGA (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.06–1.21) compared with natural FET cycles. WIDER IMPLICATIONS Programmed endometrial preparation for FET cycles had a significant effect, causing increased fetal birth weight and increased risks of LGA and macrosomia. The numbers of studies in the subgroup analyses were too low to determine reliable results. Further prospective randomized trials are needed to determine whether the changes seen in the observational trials are indeed accurate.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Obstetrics and Gynecology,Reproductive Medicine

Reference45 articles.

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