We have located links that may give you full text access.
Endometrial preparation methods for frozen-thawed embryo transfer are associated with altered risks of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, placenta accreta, and gestational diabetes mellitus.
Human Reproduction 2019 August 2
STUDY QUESTION: What were the risks with regard to the pregnancy outcomes of patients who conceived by frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) during a hormone replacement cycle (HRC-FET)?
SUMMARY ANSWER: The patients who conceived by HRC-FET had increased risks of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) and placenta accreta and a reduced risk of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in comparison to those who conceived by FET during a natural ovulatory cycle (NC-FET).
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Previous studies have shown that pregnancy and live-birth rates after HRC-FET and NC-FET are comparable. Little has been clarified regarding the association between endometrium preparation and other pregnancy outcomes.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A retrospective cohort study of patients who conceived after HRC-FET and those who conceived after NC-FET was performed based on the Japanese assisted reproductive technology registry in 2014.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The pregnancy outcomes were compared between NC-FET (n = 29 760) and HRC-FET (n = 75 474) cycles. Multiple logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate the potential confounding factors.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The pregnancy rate (32.1% vs 36.1%) and the live birth rate among pregnancies (67.1% vs 71.9%) in HRC-FET cycles were significantly lower than those in NC-FET cycles. A multiple logistic regression analysis showed that pregnancies after HRC-FET had increased odds of HDPs [adjusted odds ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.14-1.80] and placenta accreta (adjusted odds ratio, 6.91; 95% CI, 2.87-16.66) and decreased odds for GDM (adjusted odds ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.40-0.68) in comparison to pregnancies after NC-FET.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Our study was retrospective in nature, and some cases were excluded due to missing data. The implication of bias and residual confounding factors such as body mass index, alcohol consumption, and smoking habits should be considered in other observational studies.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Pregnancies following HRC-FET are associated with higher risks of HDPs and placenta accreta and a lower risk of GDM. The association between the endometrium preparation method and obstetrical complication merits further attention.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No funding was obtained for this work. The authors declare no conflicts of interest in association with the present study.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.
SUMMARY ANSWER: The patients who conceived by HRC-FET had increased risks of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) and placenta accreta and a reduced risk of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in comparison to those who conceived by FET during a natural ovulatory cycle (NC-FET).
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Previous studies have shown that pregnancy and live-birth rates after HRC-FET and NC-FET are comparable. Little has been clarified regarding the association between endometrium preparation and other pregnancy outcomes.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A retrospective cohort study of patients who conceived after HRC-FET and those who conceived after NC-FET was performed based on the Japanese assisted reproductive technology registry in 2014.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The pregnancy outcomes were compared between NC-FET (n = 29 760) and HRC-FET (n = 75 474) cycles. Multiple logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate the potential confounding factors.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The pregnancy rate (32.1% vs 36.1%) and the live birth rate among pregnancies (67.1% vs 71.9%) in HRC-FET cycles were significantly lower than those in NC-FET cycles. A multiple logistic regression analysis showed that pregnancies after HRC-FET had increased odds of HDPs [adjusted odds ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.14-1.80] and placenta accreta (adjusted odds ratio, 6.91; 95% CI, 2.87-16.66) and decreased odds for GDM (adjusted odds ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.40-0.68) in comparison to pregnancies after NC-FET.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Our study was retrospective in nature, and some cases were excluded due to missing data. The implication of bias and residual confounding factors such as body mass index, alcohol consumption, and smoking habits should be considered in other observational studies.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Pregnancies following HRC-FET are associated with higher risks of HDPs and placenta accreta and a lower risk of GDM. The association between the endometrium preparation method and obstetrical complication merits further attention.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No funding was obtained for this work. The authors declare no conflicts of interest in association with the present study.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app