Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Fertil Steril ; 121(5): 742-751, 2024 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38492930

RESUMEN

The last few decades have witnessed a rise in the global uptake of in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment. To ensure optimal use of this technology, it is important for patients and clinicians to have access to tools that can provide accurate estimates of treatment success and understand the contribution of key clinical and laboratory parameters that influence the chance of conception after IVF treatment. The focus of this review was to identify key predictors of IVF treatment success and assess their impact in terms of live birth rates. We have identified 11 predictors that consistently feature in currently available prediction models, including age, duration of infertility, ethnicity, body mass index, antral follicle count, previous pregnancy history, cause of infertility, sperm parameters, number of oocytes collected, morphology of transferred embryos, and day of embryo transfer.


Asunto(s)
Fertilización In Vitro , Índice de Embarazo , Humanos , Fertilización In Vitro/métodos , Fertilización In Vitro/tendencias , Femenino , Embarazo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Masculino , Infertilidad/terapia , Infertilidad/diagnóstico , Infertilidad/fisiopatología , Nacimiento Vivo , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Transferencia de Embrión/métodos , Transferencia de Embrión/tendencias , Factores de Riesgo
2.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol ; 274: 117-127, 2022 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35640440

RESUMEN

Worldwide reports have produced conflicting data on perinatal outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. This systematic review and meta-analysis addressed the effect of mitigation measures against COVID-19 on preterm birth, stillbirth, low birth weight, and NICU admission during the first nine months of the pandemic. A search was performed using MEDLINE, Embase and SCOPUS for manuscripts published up until 24th May 2021. Studies that reported perinatal outcomes (preterm birth, stillbirth, low birth weight, NICU admission) during the COVID-19 pandemic with a pre-pandemic control period were included. Risk of bias assessment was performed using ROBINS-I tool. RevMan5 was used to perform meta-analysis with random-effects models. A score of the stringency of mitigation measures was calculated from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker. Thirty-eight studies of moderate to serious risk of bias were included, with varied methodology, analysis and regional mitigation measures, using stringency index scores. There was no overall effect on preterm birth at less than 37 weeks (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.92-1.00). However, there was a reduction in preterm birth at less than 37 weeks (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81-0.98) and 34 weeks (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.37-0.83) for iatrogenic births and in singleton pregnancies. There was also a significant reduction in preterm births at less than 34 weeks in studies with above median stringency index scores (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.58-0.88). There was no effect on risk of stillbirth (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.90-1.19) or birth weight. NICU admission rates were significantly reduced in studies with above median stringency index scores (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78-0.97). The reduction in preterm births in regions with high mitigation measures against SARS-CoV-2 infection is likely driven by a reduction in iatrogenic births. Variability in study design and cohort characteristics need to be considered for future studies to allow further investigation of population level health measures of perinatal outcomes.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Nacimiento Prematuro , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Femenino , Humanos , Enfermedad Iatrogénica/epidemiología , Recién Nacido , Pandemias/prevención & control , Embarazo , Nacimiento Prematuro/epidemiología , Nacimiento Prematuro/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Mortinato/epidemiología
3.
Hum Reprod ; 32(11): 2287-2297, 2017 11 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29040570

RESUMEN

STUDY QUESTION: In women undergoing IVF/ICSI who miscarry in their first complete cycle, what is the chance of a live birth in subsequent complete cycles, and how does this compare with those whose first complete cycle ends with live birth or without a pregnancy? SUMMARY ANSWER: After two further complete cycles of IVF/ICSI, women who had miscarried or had a live birth in their first complete cycle had a higher chance of live birth (40.9 and 49.0%, respectively) than those who had no pregnancies (30.1%). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) after one or more complete cycles of IVF have been reported previously, as have some of the risk factors associated with miscarriage, both in general populations and in those undergoing IVF. Chances of cumulative live birth after a number of complete IVF cycles involving replacement of fresh followed by frozen embryos after an initial miscarriage in a population undergoing IVF treatment have not been reported previously. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: National population-based cohort study of 112 549 women who started their first IVF treatment between 1999 and 2008. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Data from the UK Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) register on IVF/ICSI treatments, using autologous gametes were analysed. CLBRs were estimated in women who (i) had miscarriage (and no live birth), (ii) at least one live birth or (iii) no pregnancy in their first complete cycle of IVF/ICSI (including fresh and frozen embryo transfers following a single oocyte retrieval episode). A multivariable analysis was performed to assess the effect of first complete cycle outcome on subsequent CLBRs after adjusting for confounding factors such as female age, duration of infertility and cause of infertility. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In their first complete cycle, 9321 (8.3%) women had at least one miscarriage (and no live birth); 33 152 (29.5%) had at least one live birth and 70 076 (62.3%) had no pregnancies. After two further complete cycles, conservative CLBRs (which assume that women who discontinued treatment subsequently never had a live birth) were 40.9, 49.0 and 30.1%, while optimal CLBRs (which assume that women who discontinue have the same chance of live birth as those treated) were 49.5, 57.9 and 38.4% in the miscarriage, live birth and no pregnancy groups respectively. Odds of cumulative live birth for women who miscarried in their first complete cycle were 42% higher than those who had no pregnancy [odds ratio (95% CI) = 1.42 (1.34, 1.50)], and twice as high for live birth versus no pregnancy [2.04 (1.89, 2.20)]. Negative predictors for live birth in all women included tubal infertility [0.88 (0.82, 0.94)] and increasing age [18-40 years = 0.94 (0.94, 0.95); >40 years = 0.63 (0.59, 0.66) per year]. LIMITATIONS AND REASON FOR CAUTION: CLBRs could not be estimated for treatments occurring after September 2008 due to potentially incomplete data following regulatory changes regarding consent for data use in research. Additionally, covariates not included in the HFEA database (including BMI, smoking, previous history of miscarriage and gestational age at miscarriage) could not be adjusted for in our analysis. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Miscarriage following IVF can be devastating for couples who are uncertain about their ultimate prognosis. Our findings will provide reassurance to these couples as they consider their options for continuing treatment. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): N.J.C. received an Aberdeen Summer Research Scholarship funded by the Institute of Applied Health Sciences (University of Aberdeen), through the Aberdeen Clinical Academic Training Scheme. This work was supported by a Chief Scientist Office Postdoctoral Training Fellowship in Health Services Research and Health of the Public Research (Ref PDF/12/06). The views expressed here are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Chief Scientist Office or the University of Aberdeen. The funders did not have any role in the study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; nor in the decision to submit the paper for publication. None of the authors has any conflicts of interest to declare.


Asunto(s)
Aborto Espontáneo/epidemiología , Tasa de Natalidad , Fertilización In Vitro/estadística & datos numéricos , Nacimiento Vivo/epidemiología , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Infertilidad , Paridad , Embarazo , Resultado del Embarazo , Índice de Embarazo , Prevalencia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adulto Joven
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA