Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24004836›Full record

ArticleReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2013

Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in IVF versus ICSI-conceived pregnancies at a tertiary care center--a pilot study.

Kazem Nouri, Johannes Ott, Lucia Stoegbauer, Detlef Pietrowski, Sophie Frantal, Katharina Walch

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kazem NouriDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. katharina.walch@meduniwien.ac.at.
Johannes Ott
Lucia Stoegbauer
Detlef Pietrowski
Sophie Frantal
Katharina Walch
Medical University of Vienna · ATStatistics Austria · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough most pregnancies after IVF result in normal healthy outcomes, an increased risk for a number of obstetric and neonatal complications, compared to naturally conceived pregnancies, has been reported. While there are many studies that compare pregnancies after assisted reproductive techniques with spontaneously conceived pregnancies, fewer data are available that evaluate the differences between IVF and ICSI-conceived pregnancies. The aim of our present study was, therefore, to compare obstetric and perinatal outcomes in pregnancies conceived after in vitro fertilization (IVF) versus intracytoplasmatic sperm injection (ICSI).

methodsThree-hundred thirty four women who had become pregnant after an IVF or ICSI procedure resulted in a total of 530 children referred between 2003 und 2009 to the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the Medical University of Vienna, a tertiary care center, and were included in this retrospective cohort study. We assessed maternal and fetal parameters in both groups (IVF and ICSI). The main study outcomes were preterm delivery, the need for neonatal intensive care, and congenital malformations. Moreover, we compared the course of pregnancy between both groups and the occurrence of complications that led to maternal hospitalization during pregnancy.

resultsThere were 80 children conceived via ICSI and 450 children conceived via IVF.Mean gestational age was significantly lower in the ICSI group (p = 0.001). After ICSI, the birth weight (p = 0.008) and the mean APGAR values after 1 minute and after 10 minutes were lower compared to that of the IVF group (p = 0.016 and p = 0.047, respectively). Moreover, ICSI-conceived children had to be hospitalized more often at a neonatal intensive care unit (p = 0.004). There was no difference in pH of the umbilical artery or in major congenital malformations between the two groups. Pregnancy complications (i.e., premature rupture of membranes, cervical insufficiency, and premature uterine contractions) and the need for maternal hospitalization during pregnancy were found significantly more often after IVF (p = 0.0016 and p = 0.0095, respectively), compared to the ICSI group.

conclusionsWhen comparing IVF versus ICSI-conceived pregnancies at a tertiary care center, we found the course of pregnancy to be more complicated after IVF, whereas the primary fetal outcome seemed to be better in this group than after ICSI treatment.

Indexed as

Pregnancy OutcomeTertiary Care CentersAdultBirth WeightCongenital AbnormalitiesFemaleFertilization in VitroGestational AgeHumansHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationInfant, NewbornIntensive Care, NeonatalPilot ProjectsPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsSperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic

Identifiers

PMID24004836
PMCPMC3844416
OpenAlexW2101442434

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.