ArticleMaternal health, neonatology and perinatology2025
Maternal and neonatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies conceived using donor oocytes: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Maternal health, neonatology and perinatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to determine whether donor oocyte versus autologous oocyte use is associated with adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes in singleton live births conceived using assisted reproductive technology.
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of singleton live births conceived using assisted reproductive technology and delivered within a tertiary-care university health system between January 2014 and August 2019. Multiple gestations and cases with missing data were excluded. Adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared between live births conceived using donor versus autologous oocytes utilizing multivariate backwards-stepwise logistic regression to adjust for potential confounders. Data are presented as adjusted odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) with p <.05 considered statistically significant.
resultsAmong 1,015 singleton gestations, 97 (9.6%) were conceived using donor and 918 (90.4%) using autologous oocytes. Women using donor oocytes were older (42.5y vs. 35.4y, p <.001), more likely to have pre-gestational diabetes (5.2% vs. 0.7%, p =.001), more likely to utilize fresh embryo transfers, (29.9% vs. 18.9%, p =.01) and less likely to utilize PGT-A (25.8% vs. 51.3%, p <.001). A greater odds of a 5-minute APGAR score < 7 was noted among the donor oocyte group (4.1% vs. 0.9%, OR 4.64 [95% CI 1.30-14.45]). There were no other significant differences in maternal or neonatal outcomes between the two groups.
conclusionsIn singleton gestations conceived using assisted reproductive technology, donor oocyte use does not appear to be associated with an increased risk of adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes. This may be reassuring for patients hoping to achieve a live birth through use of donor oocytes.
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.