Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41507984›Full record

ReviewReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2026

Maternal, pregnancy, and neonatal outcomes associated with surrogacy: a scoping review.

Drieda Zaçe, Tina Pasciuto, Giacomo Corrado, Cornelia Maria Pia Cavallo, Sofia Thiella, Maria Luisa Di Pietro

Abstract readScoping ReviewReview
In one paragraph

Review in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Drieda Zaçe *Centre for Research and Studies On Procreative Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, L.Go A. Gemelli 8, Rome, 00168, Italy.
Tina Pasciuto *Section of Hygiene, University Department of Life Sciences and Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Giacomo CorradoDepartment of Women's, Children's and Public Health Sciences, UOC Oncology Gynecology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, L.Go A. Gemelli 8, Rome, 00168, Italy. giacomo.corrado@policlinicogemelli.it.
Cornelia Maria Pia CavalloCentre for Research and Studies On Procreative Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, L.Go A. Gemelli 8, Rome, 00168, Italy. corneliamaria.cavallo01@icatt.it.
Sofia ThiellaCentre for Research and Studies On Procreative Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, L.Go A. Gemelli 8, Rome, 00168, Italy.
Maria Luisa Di PietroCentre for Research and Studies On Procreative Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, L.Go A. Gemelli 8, Rome, 00168, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurrogacy is considered to be a method that allows infertile couples to have a child with the assistance of a third party, known as the surrogate mother. Two forms exist: traditional surrogacy, in which the surrogate provides the oocyte and is thus genetically related to the newborn, and gestational surrogacy, in which no genetic link is present. Over recent decades, the use of surrogacy has markedly increased, highlighting the need to evaluate its potential benefits and risks. This scoping review aims to summarize maternal, pregnancy, and neonatal outcomes reported in gestational surrogacy studies and to assess how these outcomes vary according to clinical protocols, including oocyte source and embryo transfer type.

methodsThe review considered surrogate mothers and newborns as the population, clinical outcomes as the concept, and surrogacy arrangements as the context. Peer-reviewed studies reporting maternal, pregnancy, or neonatal outcomes were included regardless of design, sample size, or geographical setting. Studies limited to ethical, legal, or psychosocial aspects were excluded. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Two reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data, and charted outcomes such as pregnancy and live birth rates, miscarriage rates, and maternal complications. Disagreements were resolved by consensus.

resultsFrom 2,077 articles identified, 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. Pregnancy rate ranged from 24.0% to 61.1%, while live birth rate from 15.8% to 55.5%. No major differences emerged between autologous and donor oocytes, nor between single and double embryo transfer. Miscarriage rates ranged from 3.0% to 17.6%, with minimal variation between fresh and frozen cycles for both autologous (10.5% and 9.8%) and donor oocytes (8.4% and 9.6%), and between fresh and frozen embryos transfers (10.9% and 12.3%). Gestational diabetes ranges from 0% to 27.8%, hypertensive disorder from 0% to 21.2%, and placenta previa from 0% to 4.9%. Preeclampsia showed substantial variability, ranging from 1.2% to 17.1%.

conclusionThis scoping review suggests that heterogeneous clinical protocols in gestational surrogacy may adversely affect maternal and neonatal health. Further research- particularly prospective, multicenter studies- is needed to better understand and characterize these outcomes.

Indexed as

Gestational CarriersPregnancy OutcomeSurrogacyEmbryo TransferFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPregnancyPregnancy RateReproductive Techniques, AssistedGestational surrogacyNeonatal outcomesPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID41507984
PMCPMC12870930

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.