Assisted reproductive technology and perinatal outcomes: conventional versus discordant-sibling design

Fertility and Sterility

Volumn 106, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 710-716.e2

  Dhalwani, Nafeesa N ^a,b,c   Boulet, Sheree L ^a   Kissin, Dmitry M ^a   Zhang, Yujia ^a   McKane, Patricia ^d   Bailey, Marie A ^e   Hood, Maria Elena ^f   Tata, Laila J ^b  

^a CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^c LEICESTER GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^d MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES   (United States)

^e FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH   (United States)

^f MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Assisted reproductive technology; discordant sibling design; low birth weight; preterm birth; small for gestational age

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ADVERSE OUTCOME; APGAR SCORE; ARTICLE; BIRTH WEIGHT; CESAREAN SECTION; CLINICAL OUTCOME; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; FEMALE; FEMALE INFERTILITY; FLORIDA; GAMETE INTRAFALLOPIAN TRANSFER; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMAN; INFERTILITY THERAPY; LIVE BIRTH; LOW BIRTH WEIGHT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE INFERTILITY; MASSACHUSETTS; MICHIGAN; PERINATAL PERIOD; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PREMATURE LABOR; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIBLING; SMALL FOR DATE INFANT; YOUNG ADULT; ZYGOTE INTRAFALLOPIAN TRANSFER; ADVERSE EFFECTS; CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FERTILITY; INFERTILITY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NEWBORN; ODDS RATIO; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PREGNANCY; PREMATURE BIRTH; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; APGAR SCORE; BIRTH WEIGHT; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; FERTILITY; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMANS; INFANT, LOW BIRTH WEIGHT; INFANT, NEWBORN; INFANT, SMALL FOR GESTATIONAL AGE; INFERTILITY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; ODDS RATIO; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PREMATURE BIRTH; REPRODUCTIVE TECHNIQUES, ASSISTED; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; SIBLINGS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84976522576     PISSN: 00150282     EISSN: 15565653     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.04.038     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. 1 Dhalwani, N., Fiaschi, L., West, J., Tata, L., Occurrence of fertility problems presenting to primary care: population-level estimates of clinical burden and socioeconomic inequalities across the UK. Hum Reprod 28 (2013), 960–968.
2. 2 Sunderam, S., Kissin, D.M., Crawford, S.B., Folger, S.G., Jamieson, D.J., Barfield, W.D., et al. Assisted reproductive technology surveillance—United States, 2011. MMWR Surveill Summ 63 (2014), 1–28.
3. 3 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. Fertility Treatment in 2013—trends and figures, 2014, Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, London.
4. 4 Boulet, S.L., Schieve, L.A., Nannini, A., Ferre, C., Devine, O., Cohen, B., et al. Perinatal outcomes of twin births conceived using assisted reproduction technology: a population-based study. Hum Reprod 23 (2008), 1941–1948.
5. 5 Schieve, L.A., Cohen, B., Nannini, A., Ferre, C., Reynolds, M.A., Zhang, Z., et al. A population-based study of maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with assisted reproductive technology in Massachusetts. Matern Child Health J 11 (2007), 517–525.
6. 6 Tepper, N.K., Farr, S.L., Cohen, B.B., Nannini, A., Zhang, Z., Anderson, J.E., et al. Singleton preterm birth: risk factors and association with assisted reproductive technology. Matern Child Health J 16 (2012), 807–813.
7. 7 Grigorescu, V., Zhang, Y., Kissin, D.M., Sauber-Schatz, E., Sunderam, M., Kirby, R.S., et al. Maternal characteristics and pregnancy outcomes after assisted reproductive technology by infertility diagnosis: ovulatory dysfunction versus tubal obstruction. Fertil Steril 101 (2014), 1019–1025.
8. 8 Bower, C., Hansen, M., Assisted reproductive technologies and birth outcomes: overview of recent systematic reviews. Reprod Fertil Devel 17 (2005), 329–333.
9. 9 Marino, J.L., Moore, V.M., Willson, K.J., Rumbold, A., Whitrow, M.J., Giles, L.C., et al. Perinatal outcomes by mode of assisted conception and subfertility in an Australian data linkage cohort. PloS One, 9, 2014, e80398.
10. 10 Romundstad, L.B., Romundstad, P.R., Sunde, A., von Düring, V., Skjærven, R., Gunnell, D., et al. Effects of technology or maternal factors on perinatal outcome after assisted fertilisation: a population-based cohort study. Lancet 372 (2008), 737–743.
11. 11 Henningsen, A.K., Pinborg, A., Lidegaard, O., Vestergaard, C., Forman, J.L., Andersen, A.N., Perinatal outcome of singleton siblings born after assisted reproductive technology and spontaneous conception: Danish national sibling-cohort study. Fertil Steril 95 (2011), 959–963.
12. 12 Mneimneh, A., Boulet, S., Sunderam, S., Zhang, Y., Jamieson, D., Crawford, S., et al. States Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (SMART) Collaborative: data collection, linkage, dissemination, and use. J Womens Health 22 (2013), 571–577.
13. 13 Zhang, Y., Cohen, B., Macaluso, M., Zhang, Z., Durant, T., Nannini, A., Probabilistic linkage of assisted reproductive technology information with vital records, Massachusetts 1997–2000. Matern Child Health J 16 (2012), 1703–1708.
14. 14 Alexander, G., Himes, J., Kaufman, R., Mor, J., Kogan, M., A United States national reference for fetal growth. Obstet Gynecol 87 (1996), 163–168.
15. 15 World Health Organization. Health statistics and health information systems. http://www.who.int/healthinfo/statistics/indlowbirthweight/en/.
16. 16 World Health Organization. Preterm birth 2012. Available at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs363/en/. Last accessed May 6, 2016.
17. 17 Clayton, P., Cianfarani, S., Czernichow, P., Johannsson, G., Rapaport, R., Rogol, A., Management of the child born small for gestational age through to adulthood: a consensus statement of the International Societies of Pediatric Endocrinology and the Growth Hormone Research Society. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 92 (2007), 804–810.
18. 18 American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Fetus and Newborn; American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and Committee on Obstetric Practice. The Apgar score. Pediatrics 117 (2006), 1444–1447.
19. 19 Delbaere, I., Vansteelandt, S., De Bacquer, D., Verstraelen, H., Gerris, J., De Sutter, P., et al. Should we adjust for gestational age when analysing birth weights? The use of z-scores revisited. Hum Reprod 22 (2007), 2080–2083.
20. 20 Zollinger, T.W., Przybylski, M.J., Gamache, R.E., Reliability of Indiana birth certificate data compared to medical records. Ann Epidemiol 16 (2006), 1–10.
21. 21 Gardosi, J., Madurasinghe, V., Williams, M., Malik, A., Francis, A., Maternal and fetal risk factors for stillbirth: population based study. Br Med J, 346, 2013, f108.
22. 22 Boulet, S.L., Crawford, S., Zhang, Y., Sunderam, S., Cohen, B., Bernson, D., et al. Embryo transfer practices and perinatal outcomes by insurance mandate status. Fertil Steril 104 (2015), 403–409.e1.
23. 23 Joshi, N., Kissin, D., Anderson, J.E., Session, D., Macaluso, M., Jamieson, D.J., Trends and correlates of good perinatal outcomes in assisted reproductive technology. Obstet Gynecol 120 (2012), 843–851.
24. 24 Steinberg, M.L., Boulet, S., Kissin, D., Warner, L., Jamieson, D.J., Elective single embryo transfer trends and predictors of a good perinatal outcome—United States, 1999 to 2010. Fertil Steril 99 (2013), 1937–1943.
25. 25 Pinborg, A., Wennerholm, U.B., Romundstad, L.B., Loft, A., Aittomaki, K., Soderstrom-Anttila, V., et al. Why do singletons conceived after assisted reproduction technology have adverse perinatal outcome? Systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 19 (2013), 87–104.
26. 26 Gibbons, W.E., Cedars, M., Ness, R.B., Society for Assisted Reproductive Technologies Writing Group. Toward understanding obstetrical outcome in advanced assisted reproduction: varying sperm, oocyte, and uterine source and diagnosis. Fertil Steril 95 (2011), 1645–1649.e1.