Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy

Original Paper

Contribution of Method of Conception on Pregnancy Outcome after the 11–13 Weeks Scan

Chaveeva P.a · Carbone I.F.a · Syngelaki A.a · Akolekar R.a · Nicolaides K.H.a–c

Author affiliations

aHarris Birthright Research Centre for Fetal Medicine, King’s College Hospital, London, bDepartment of Fetal Medicine, Medway Maritime Hospital, Gillingham, and cDepartment of Fetal Medicine, University College Hospital, London, UK

Keywords: Birth weightCaesarean sectionOvulation inductionIn vitro fertilizationFirst-trimester screeningMiscarriageStillbirthPre-eclampsiaGestational diabetes mellitusPreterm delivery

Related Articles for ""
Fetal Diagn Ther 2011;30:9–22
https://doi.org/10.1159/000323921

Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.




Forgot your password
Sign up to MyKarger

Buy

  • FullText & PDF
  • Unlimited re-access via MyKarger
  • Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more
CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *

Select

KAB

Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!


If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.

Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.

Learn more

Rent/Cloud

  • Rent for 48h to view
  • Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
  • Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
  • Printing and saving restrictions apply
Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00

Select

Subscribe

  • Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years
  • Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger
  • Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more

Subcription rates

Select
* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Original Paper

Received: November 22, 2010
Accepted: December 22, 2010
Published online: February 24, 2011
Issue release date: August 2011

Number of Print Pages: 14
Number of Figures: 9
Number of Tables: 7

ISSN: 1015-3837 (Print)
eISSN: 1421-9964 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/FDT

Abstract

Objective: To examine the effect of method of conception on adverse pregnancy outcome after the 11–13 weeks scan. Methods: Prospective screening study for adverse obstetric outcomes in women with singleton pregnancies and live fetus with no obvious defects at 11+0–13+6 weeks. The method of conception was recorded as spontaneous, in vitro fertilization (IVF) and assisted by ovulation induction (OI) drugs without IVF. Regression analysis was performed to examine the association between the method of conception and pregnancy outcome after adjustment for maternal characteristics. Results: In the study population of 41,577 pregnancies, conception was spontaneous in 40,261 (96.9%), by IVF in 634 (1.5%) and by OI in 682 (1.6%). In the pregnancies conceived by assisted reproductive technology, compared to spontaneous conceptions, there was a higher risk of stillbirth, pre-eclampsia, gestational hypertension, gestational diabetes mellitus, delivery of small for gestational age neonates and caesarean section. However, multiple regression analysis showed that after taking into account maternal characteristics, the only significant contributions of IVF were for pre-eclampsia and elective caesarean section and the contributions of OI were for miscarriage, spontaneous early preterm delivery and small for gestational age. Conclusions: Conception by IVF and OI is associated with increased risk for adverse pregnancy outcome.

© 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel

References

  1. Nicolaides KH: Screening for fetal aneuploidies at 11–13 weeks. Prenat Diagn 2011;31: 7–15.
    External Resources
  2. Nicolaides KH: Turning the pyramid of antenatal care. Fetal Diagn Ther 2011 (in press).
  3. Jackson RA, Gibson KA, Wu YW, Croughan MS: Perinatal outcomes in singletons following in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2004;103:551–563.
    External Resources
  4. Helmerhorst FM, Perquin DA, Donker D, Keirse MJ: Perinatal outcome of singletons and twins after assisted conception: a systematic review of controlled studies. BMJ 2004;31;328:261.
    External Resources
  5. McDonald SD, Han Z, Mulla S, Murphy KE, Beyene J, Ohlsson A, on behalf of the Knowledge Synthesis Group: Preterm birth and low birth weight among in vitro fertilization singletons: a systematic review and meta-analyses. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2009;146:138–148.
    External Resources
  6. Robinson HP, Fleming JE: A critical evaluation of sonar crown-rump length measurements. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1975;182:702–710.
  7. Snijders RJ, Noble P, Sebire NJ, Souka AP, Nicolaides KH: UK multicentre project on assessment of risk of trisomy-21 by maternal age and fetal nuchal-translucency thickness at 10–14 weeks of gestation. Fetal Medicine Foundation First Trimester Screening Group. Lancet 1998;352:343–346.
    External Resources
  8. Syngelaki A, Chelemen T, Dagklis T, Allan L, Nicolaides KH: Challenges in the diagnosis of fetal non-chromosomal abnormalities at 11–13 weeks. Prenat Diagn 2011;31:90–102.
    External Resources
  9. Brown MA, Lindheimer MD, de Swiet M, Van Assche A, Moutquin JM: The classification and diagnosis of the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: statement from the International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy (ISSHP). Hypertens Pregnancy 2001;20:IX–XIV.
  10. World Health Organisation: Definition and diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and intermediate hyperglycaemia. Report of a WHO/IDF Consultation 2006;1–46 (www.who.int).
  11. Poon LC, Karagiannis G, Staboulidou I, Shafiei A, Nicolaides KH: Reference range of birth weight with gestation and first-trimester prediction of small-for-gestation neonates. Prenat Diagn 2011;31:58–65.
    External Resources
  12. Shevell T, Malone FD, Vidaver J, Porter FT, Luthy DA, Comstock CH, Hankins GD, Eddleman K, Dolan S, Dugoff L, Craigo S, Timor IE, Carr SR, Wolfe HM, Bianchi DW, D’Alton ME: Assisted reproductive technology and pregnancy outcome. Obstet Gynecol 2005;106:1039–1045.
    External Resources
  13. Sun LM, Walker MC, Cao HL, Yang Q, Duan T, Kingdom JCP: Assisted reproductive technology and placenta-mediated adverse pregnancy outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114:818–824.
    External Resources
  14. Wisborg K, Ingerslev HJ, Henriksen TB: IVF and stillbirth: a prospective follow-up study. Hum Reprod 2010;25:1312–1316.
    External Resources
  15. Ombelet W, Martens G, De Sutter P, Gerris J, Bosmans E, Ruyssinck G, Defoort P, Molenberghs G, Gyselaers W: Perinatal outcomes of 12,021 singleton and 3,108 twin births after non-IVF assisted reproduction: a cohort study. Hum Reprod 2006;21:1025–1032.
    External Resources
  16. Tanbo T, Dale PO, Lunde O, Moe N, Abyholm T: Obstetric outcome in singleton pregnancies after IVF-ET/GIFT. Obstet Gynecol 1995;86:188–192.
    External Resources
  17. Zadori J, Kozinszky Z, Orvos H, Katona M, Pal A, Kovacs L: Dilemma of increased obstetric risk in pregnancies following IVF-ET. J Assist Reprod Genet 2003;20:216–221.
    External Resources
  18. Kallen B, Finnstrom O, Nygren KG, Otterblad OP: In vitro fertilization in Sweden: maternal characteristics. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2005;84:1185–1191.
    External Resources
  19. Chen XK, Wen SW, Bottomley J, Smith GN, Leader A, Walker MC: In vitro fertilization is associated with an increased risk for preeclampsia.Hypertens Pregnancy 2009;28:1–12.
    External Resources
  20. Olivennes F, Rufat P, Andre B, Pourade A, Quiros MC, Frydman R: The increased risk of complication observed in singleton pregnancies resulting from in vitro fertilization (IVF) does not seem to be related to the IVF method itself. Hum Reprod 1993;8:1297–1300.
    External Resources
  21. Reubinoff BE, Samueloff A, Ben-Haim M, Friedler S, Schenker JG, Lewin A: Is the obstetric outcome of in vitro fertilized singleton gestations different from natural ones? A controlled study. Fertil Steril 1997;67:1077–1083.
    External Resources
  22. Maman E, Lunenfeld E, Levy A, Vardi H, Potashnik G: Obstetric outcome of singleton pregnancies conceived by in vitro fertilization and ovulation induction compared with those conceived spontaneously. Fertil Steril 1998;70:240–245.
    External Resources
  23. Ochsenkühn R, Strowitzki T, Gurtner M, Strauss A, Schulze A, Hepp H, Hillemanns P: Pregnancy complications, obstetric risks, and neonatal outcome in singleton and twin pregnancies after GIFT and IVF. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2003;268:256–261.
    External Resources
  24. Poikkeus P, Gissler M, Unkila-Kallio L, Hyden-Granskog C, Tiitinen A: Obstetric and neonatal outcome after single embryo transfer. Hum Reprod 2007;22:1073–1079.
    External Resources
  25. Nuojua-Huttunen S, Gissler M, Martikainen H, Tuomivaara L: Obstetric and perinatal outcome of pregnancies after intrauterine insemination. Hum Reprod 1999;14:2110–2115.
    External Resources
  26. Kozinszky Z, Zadori J, Orvos H, Katona M, Pal A, Kovacs L: Obstetric and neonatal risk of pregnancies after assisted reproductive technology: a matched control study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2003;82:850–856.
    External Resources
  27. Westergaard HB, Tranberg Johansen AM, Erb K, Nyboe AA: Danish National In Vitro Fertilization Registry 1994 and 1995: a controlled study of births, malformations and cytogenetic findings. Hum Reprod 1999;14:1896–1902.
    External Resources
  28. Bergh T, Ericson A, Hillensjo T, Nygren KG, Wennerholm UB: Deliveries and children born after in vitro fertilization in Sweden 1982–1995: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 1999;354:1579–1585.
    External Resources
  29. Dhont M, De Sutter P, Ruyssinck G, Martens G, Bekaert A: Perinatal outcome of pregnancies after assisted reproduction: a case-control study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;181:688–695.
    External Resources
  30. Perri T, Chen R, Yoeli R, Merlob B, Orvieto R, Shalev Y, Ben-Rafael Z, Bar-Hava I: Are singleton-assisted reproductive technology pregnancies at risk of prematurity? J Assist Reprod Genet 2001;18:245–249.
    External Resources
  31. Koivurova S, Hartikainen AL, Gissler M, Hemminki E, Sovio U, Jarvelin MR: Neonatal outcome and congenital malformations in children born after in vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 2002;17:1391–1398.
    External Resources
  32. Buckett WM, Chian RC, Holzer H, Dean N, Usher R, Tan SL: Obstetric outcomes and congenital abnormalities after in vitro maturation, in vitro fertilization, and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Obstet Gynecol 2007;110:885–891.
    External Resources
  33. Wisborg K, Ingerslev HJ, Henriksen TB: In vitro fertilization and preterm delivery, low birth weight, and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit: a prospective follow-up study. Fertil Steril 2010;94:2102–2106.
    External Resources
  34. Koudstaal J, Braat DD, Bruinse HW, Naaktgeboren N, Vermeiden JP, Visser GH: Obstetric outcome of singleton pregnancies after IVF: a matched control study in four Dutch university hospitals. Hum Reprod 2000;15:1819–1825.
    External Resources
  35. Fujii M, Matsuoka R, Bergel E, Van der Poel S, Okai T: Perinatal risk in singleton pregnancies after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2010;94:2113–2117.
    External Resources
  36. Zhu JL, Obel C, Hammer Bech B, Olsen J, Basso O: Infertility, infertility treatment, and fetal growth restriction. Obstet Gynecol 2007;110:1326–1334.
    External Resources
  37. Gissler M, Silverio MM, Hemminki E: In-vitro fertilization pregnancies and perinatal health in Finland 1991–1993. Hum Reprod 1995;10:1856–1861.
    External Resources
  38. Verlaenen H, Cammu H, Derde MP, Amy JJ: Singleton pregnancy after in vitro fertilization: expectations and outcome. Obstet Gynecol 1995;86:906–910.
    External Resources
  39. Wennerholm UB, Hamberger L, Nilsson L, Wennergren M, Wikland M, Bergh C: Obstetric and perinatal outcome of children conceived from cryopreserved embryos. Hum Reprod 1997;12:1819–1825.
    External Resources
  40. Isaksson R, Gissler M, Tiitinen A: Obstetric outcome among women with unexplained infertility after IVF: a matched case-control study. Hum Reprod 2002;17:1755–1761.
    External Resources
  41. DerSimonian R, Laird N: Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clinical Trials 1986;7:177–188.
    External Resources
  42. Brosens I, Robertson WB, Dixon HG: The physiological response of the vessels of the placental bed to normal pregnancy. J Pathol Bacteriol 1967;93:569–579.
    External Resources
  43. Khong TY, De Wolf F, Robertson WB, Brosens I: Inadequate maternal vascular response to placentation in pregnancies complicated by pre-eclampsia and by small-for-gestational age infants. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1986;93:1049–1059.
    External Resources
  44. Pijnenborg R, Anthony J, Davey DA, Rees A, Tiltman A, Vercruysse L, van Assche A: Placental bed spiral arteries in the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1991;98:648–655.
    External Resources
  45. Pijnenborg R: The placental bed. Hypertens Pregnancy 1996;15:7–23.
    External Resources
  46. Boomsma CM, Eijkemans MJC, Hughes EG, Visser GHA, Fauser BC, Macklon NS: A meta-analysis of pregnancy outcomes in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Hum Reprod Update 2006;12:673–683.
    External Resources

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Original Paper

Received: November 22, 2010
Accepted: December 22, 2010
Published online: February 24, 2011
Issue release date: August 2011

Number of Print Pages: 14
Number of Figures: 9
Number of Tables: 7

ISSN: 1015-3837 (Print)
eISSN: 1421-9964 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/FDT

Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

Article Tools
Article Details

2011, Vol.30, No. 1

August 2011

Article

TAP Icon This Article is Part of
Recommend This
TOP