ArticleHuman reproduction open2021
Health of 2-year-old children born after vitrified oocyte donation in comparison with peers born after fresh oocyte donation.
Article in Human reproduction open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors associated with intention to undergo elective oocyte cryopreservation among unmarried nurses in South Korea: a cross-sectional study.Women's health nursing (Seoul, Korea) · 2026Article
- Lycopene improves the developmental competence of vitrified-thawed oocytes by reestablishing redox balance and modulating Rock1 expression.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Fertility preservation in pediatric healthcare: a review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Review
- Effects of oocyte vitrification on gene expression in the liver and kidney tissues of adult offspring.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
study questionDoes oocyte vitrification adversely affect the health of 2-year-old children compared with peers born after use of fresh oocytes in a donation programme? SUMMARY ANSWER: The growth and health of 2-year-old children born after oocyte vitrification are similar to those of peers born after use of fresh oocytes. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Although oocyte vitrification is a well-established procedure in ART, the evidence on its safety for offspring is limited. Currently, no disadvantageous effects of oocyte vitrification have been shown in terms of obstetric and neonatal outcome. However, no data beyond the neonatal period are available to date. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: A combined retrospective and prospective observational study was performed in a tertiary reproductive centre. The retrospective data were available in our extensive database of children born after ART. Donor cycles with an oocyte retrieval between January 2010 and March 2017 and a fresh embryo transfer resulting in the livebirth of a singleton were selected from the established oocyte donation programme. Fresh or vitrified oocytes were used in the donor cycles and all pregnancies in oocyte recipients were achieved after ICSI. Only children residing in Belgium were eligible for follow-up. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING
methodsBiometric and health parameters of 72 children born after oocyte vitrification were compared with those of 41 children born after use of a fresh oocyte. Data were collected by means of questionnaires and physical examinations at the age of 21-30 months. The primary outcome measures were anthropometry and health at 2 years of age. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Length, weight, BMI, head circumference, left arm circumference and waist circumference at the age of 2 years were comparable between the vitrification and fresh group, also after adjustment for treatment, and maternal and neonatal characteristics (all LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: Although the current study is the largest series describing health parameters beyond the neonatal period, the small numbers still preclude definite conclusions. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
findingsThis study provides the first evidence indicating that oocyte vitrification does not adversely affect the growth and health of offspring beyond the neonatal period. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This study was supported by Methusalem grants and by grants from Wetenschappelijk Fonds Willy Gepts, all issued by the Vrije Universiteit Brussel. All co-authors declared no conflict of interest in relation to this work. Both the Centre for Reproductive Medicine and the Centre for Medical Genetics from the UZ Brussel have received several educational grants from IBSA, Ferring, MSD and Merck for either research on oocyte vitrification or for establishing the database for follow-up research and organizing the data collection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.