Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34557597›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction open2021

Lifestyle intervention prior to IVF does not improve embryo utilization rate and cumulative live birth rate in women with obesity: a nested cohort study.

Zheng Wang, Henk Groen, Koen C Van Zomeren, Astrid E P Cantineau, Anne Van Oers, Aafke P A Van Montfoort, Walter K H Kuchenbecker, Marie J Pelinck, Frank J M Broekmans, Nicole F Klijn and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

14 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

Zheng WangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1592-6765
Henk GroenDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Koen C Van ZomerenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Astrid E P CantineauDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Anne Van OersDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Aafke P A Van MontfoortDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, GROW School for Oncology and Development Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7318-3990
Walter K H KuchenbeckerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, The Netherlands.
Marie J PelinckDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Treant Zorggroep, Emmen, The Netherlands.
Frank J M BroekmansDivision Women and Baby, Department of Reproductive Medicine and Gynecology, Utrecht University, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Nicole F KlijnDepartment of Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine, University of Leiden, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7236-1273
Eugenie M KaaijkDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis (OLVG), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ben W J MolDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
Annemieke HoekDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Jannie Van Echten-ArendsDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3521-6074
University Medical Center Groningen · NLIsala · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NLMaastricht University · NLMonash University · AUOLVG · NLTreant Zorggroep · NLUtrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

study questionDoes lifestyle intervention consisting of an energy-restricted diet, enhancement of physical activity and motivational counseling prior to IVF improve embryo utilization rate (EUR) and cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) in women with obesity? SUMMARY ANSWER: A 6-month lifestyle intervention preceding IVF improved neither EUR nor CLBR in women with obesity in the first IVF treatment cycle where at least one oocyte was retrieved. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the efficacy of a low caloric liquid formula diet (LCD) preceding IVF in women with obesity was unable to demonstrate an effect of LCD on embryo quality and live birth rate: in this study, only one fresh embryo transfer (ET) or, in case of freeze-all strategy, the first transfer with frozen-thawed embryos was reported. We hypothesized that any effect on embryo quality of a lifestyle intervention in women with obesity undergoing IVF treatment is better revealed by EUR and CLBR after transfer of all fresh and frozen-thawed embryos. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: This is a nested cohort study within an RCT, the LIFEstyle study. The original study examined whether a 6-month lifestyle intervention prior to infertility treatment in women with obesity improved live birth rate, compared to prompt infertility treatment within 24 months after randomization. In the original study between 2009 and 2012, 577 (three women withdrew informed consent) women with obesity and infertility were assigned to a lifestyle intervention followed by infertility treatment (n = 289) or to prompt infertility treatment (n = 285). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING

methodsOnly participants from the LIFEstyle study who received IVF treatment were eligible for the current analysis. In total, 137 participants (n = 58 in the intervention group and n = 79 in the control group) started the first cycle. In 25 participants, the first cycle was cancelled prior to oocyte retrieval mostly due to poor response. Sixteen participants started a second or third consecutive cycle. The first cycle with successful oocyte retrieval was used for this analysis, resulting in analysis of 51 participants in the intervention group and 72 participants in the control group. Considering differences in embryo scoring methods and ET day strategy between IVF centers, we used EUR as a proxy for embryo quality. EUR was defined as the proportion of inseminated/injected oocytes per cycle that was transferred or cryopreserved as an embryo. Analysis was performed per cycle and per oocyte/embryo. CLBR was defined as the percentage of participants with at least one live birth from the first fresh and subsequent frozen-thawed ET(s). In addition, we calculated the MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The overall mean age was 31.6 years and the mean BMI was 35.4 ± 3.2 kg/m LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: This study is a nested cohort study within an RCT, and no power calculation was performed. The randomization was not stratified for indicated treatment, and although we corrected our analyses for baseline differences, there may be residual confounding. The limited absolute weight loss and the short duration of the lifestyle intervention might be insufficient to affect EUR and CLBR. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE

findingsOur data do not support the hypothesis of a beneficial short-term effect of lifestyle intervention on EUR and CLBR after IVF in women with obesity, although more studies are needed as there may be a potential clinically relevant effect on EUR. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The study was supported by a grant from ZonMw, the Dutch Organization for Health Research and Development (50-50110-96-518). A.H. has received an unrestricted educational grant from Ferring pharmaceuticals BV, The Netherlands. B.W.J.M. is supported by an NHMRC Investigator grant (GNT1176437). B.W.J.M. reports consultancy for Guerbet, has been a member of the ObsEva advisory board and holds Stock options for ObsEva. B.W.J.M. has received research funding from Guerbet, Ferring and Merck. F.J.M.B. reports personal fees from membership of the external advisory board for Merck Serono and a research support grant from Merck Serono, outside the submitted work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The LIFEstyle RCT was registered at the Dutch trial registry (NTR 1530). https://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=1530.

Indexed as

cumulative live birth rateembryo qualityembryo utilization ratelifestyle interventionobesity

Identifiers

PMID34557597
PMCPMC8452483
OpenAlexW3199724069

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.