ReviewExpert review of cardiovascular therapy
Assisted reproductive technology: what are the cardiovascular risks for women?
Review in Expert review of cardiovascular therapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pregnancy as a Window for Hypertension and Cardiovascular Prevention in Women: A Life-Course Perspective Based on the 2025 ESC Guidelines.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2026Review
- Assisted Reproductive Technology and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Menopause Hormone Therapy in Women With Cardiovascular Risk Factors or Established Ischemic Heart Disease: A Joint FIGO and WHF Position Paper.Global heart · 2026Review
- Review
- The risk of perinatal and cardiometabolic complications in pregnancies conceived by medically assisted reproduction.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionInfertility affects 15% of women of reproductive age in the United States. The use of assisted reproductive technology (ART) has been rising globally, as well as a growing recognition of reproductive factors that increase risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). AREAS COVERED: Women with infertility who use ART are more likely to have established CVD risk factors, such as obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension, and diabetes. They are also more likely to experience adverse pregnancy outcomes, which are associated with both peripartum and long-term cardiovascular complications. ART may lead to increased cardiometabolic demands due to ovarian stimulation, pregnancy itself, and higher rates of multifetal gestation. Preeclampsia risk appears greater with frozen rather than fresh embryo transfers. EXPERT OPINION: The use of ART and its association with long term CVD has not been well-studied. Future prospective and mechanistic studies investigating the association of ART and CVD risk may help determine causality. Nevertheless, CVD risk screening is critical pre-pregnancy and during pregnancy to reduce pregnancy complications that elevate future CVD risk. This also offers a window of opportunity to connect patients to longitudinal care for early management of cardiometabolic risk profile and initiation of preventive lifestyle and pharmacotherapy interventions tailored toward patient-specific risk factors.
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.