Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28444613›Full record

ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2017

No difference in congenital anomalies prevalence irrespective of insemination methods and freezing procedure: cohort study over fourteen years of an ART population in the south of France.

Any Beltran Anzola, Vanessa Pauly, Debbie Montjean, Line Meddeb, Cendrine Geoffroy-Siraudin, Roland Sambuc, Pierre Boyer, Marie-José Gervoise-Boyer

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Any Beltran AnzolaDépartement de Santé Publique et Maladies Chroniques, Unité de recherche EA 3279, Faculté de médecine, Aix-Marseille Université, 27 Boulevard Jean Moulin, 13005, Marseille, France. beltran_any@yahoo.com.
Vanessa PaulyDépartement de Santé Publique et Maladies Chroniques, Unité de recherche EA 3279, Faculté de médecine, Aix-Marseille Université, 27 Boulevard Jean Moulin, 13005, Marseille, France.
Debbie MontjeanService de Médecine et Biologie de la Reproduction, Hôpital Saint Joseph, 26 Boulevard du Louvain, 13008, Marseille, France.
Line MeddebAssistance Publique Hôpitaux de Marseille - Service des Maladies Infectieuses, Hôpital de la Conception, 147 Boulevard Baille, 13005, Marseille, France.
Cendrine Geoffroy-SiraudinService de Médecine et Biologie de la Reproduction, Hôpital Saint Joseph, 26 Boulevard du Louvain, 13008, Marseille, France.
Roland SambucDépartement de Santé Publique et Maladies Chroniques, Unité de recherche EA 3279, Faculté de médecine, Aix-Marseille Université, 27 Boulevard Jean Moulin, 13005, Marseille, France.
Pierre BoyerService de Médecine et Biologie de la Reproduction, Hôpital Saint Joseph, 26 Boulevard du Louvain, 13008, Marseille, France.
Marie-José Gervoise-BoyerService de Médecine et Biologie de la Reproduction, Hôpital Saint Joseph, 26 Boulevard du Louvain, 13008, Marseille, France.
Hôpital Saint Joseph · FRAix-Marseille Université · FRAssistance Publique Hôpitaux de Marseille · FRHôpital de la Conception · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeA retrospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate and compare the prevalence of congenital anomalies in babies and fetuses conceived after four procedures of assisted reproduction technologies (ART).

methodsThe prevalence of congenital anomalies was compared retrospectively between 2750 babies and fetuses conceived between 2001 and 2014 in vitro fertilization with standard insemination (IVF), IVF with intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), IVF with frozen embryo transfer (FET-IVF), and ICSI with frozen embryo transfer (FET-ICSI). Congenital anomalies were described according to European Surveillance of Congenital Anomalies (EUROCAT) classification. The parental backgrounds, biologic parameters, obstetric parameters, and perinatal outcomes were compared between babies and fetuses with and without congenital anomalies. Data were analyzed by the generalized estimating equation.

resultsBetween 2001 and 2014, a total of 2477 evolutionary pregnancies were notified. Among these pregnancies, 2379 were included in the analysis. One hundred thirty-four babies and fetuses had a congenital anomaly (4.9%). The major prevalences found among the recorded anomalies were congenital heart defects, chromosomal anomalies, and urinary defects. However, the risk of congenital anomalies in babies and fetuses conceived after FET was not increased compared with babies and fetuses conceived after fresh embryo transfer, even when adjusted for confounding factors (p = 0.40).

conclusionsThere is no increased risk of congenital anomalies in babies and fetuses conceived by fresh versus frozen embryo transfer after in vitro fertilization with and without micromanipulation. Indeed, distribution of congenital anomalies found in our population is consistent with the high prevalence of congenital heart defects, chromosomal anomalies, and urinary defects that have been found by other authors in children conceived by infertile couples when compared to children conceived spontaneously.

Indexed as

Congenital AbnormalitiesCryopreservationEmbryo TransferFranceHumansPrevalenceReproductive Techniques, AssistedRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentCongenital anomaliesFrozen embryo transferIntra cytoplasmic sperm injectionIn vitro fertilizationPerinatal outcomes

Identifiers

PMID28444613
PMCPMC5476536
OpenAlexW2598671903

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.