Advertisement

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

, Volume 36, Issue 9, pp 1917–1926 | Cite as

Risk of ischemic placental disease is increased following in vitro fertilization with oocyte donation: a retrospective cohort study

  • Anna M. ModestEmail author
  • Katherine M. Johnson
  • S. Ananth Karumanchi
  • Nina Resetkova
  • Brett C. Young
  • Matthew P. Fox
  • Lauren A. Wise
  • Michele R. Hacker
Assisted Reproduction Technologies
  • 75 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Assess the risk of ischemic placental disease (IPD) among in vitro fertilization (IVF; donor and autologous) pregnancies compared with non-IVF pregnancies.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of deliveries from 2000 to 2015 at a tertiary hospital. The exposures, donor, and autologous IVF, were compared with non-IVF pregnancies and donor IVF pregnancies were also compared with autologous IVF pregnancies. The outcome was IPD (preeclampsia, placental abruption, small for gestational age (SGA), or intrauterine fetal demise due to placental insufficiency). We defined SGA as birthweight < 10th percentiles for gestational age and sex. A secondary analysis restricted SGA to < 3rd percentile.

Results

Of 69,084 deliveries in this cohort, 262 resulted from donor IVF and 3,501 from autologous IVF. Compared with non-IVF pregnancies, IPD was more common among donor IVF pregnancies (risk ratio (RR) = 2.9; 95% CI 2.5–3.4) and autologous IVF pregnancies (RR = 2.0; 95% CI 1.9–2.1), adjusted for age and parity. IVF pregnancies were more likely to be complicated by preeclampsia (donor RR = 3.8; 95% CI 2.8–5.0 and autologous RR = 2.2; 95% CI 2.0–2.5, adjusted for age, parity, and marital status), placental abruption (donor RR = 3.8; 95% CI 2.1–6.7 and autologous RR = 2.5; 95% CI 2.1–3.1, adjusted for age), and SGA (donor RR = 2.7; 95% CI 2.1–3.4 and autologous RR = 2.0; 95% CI 1.9–2.2, adjusted for age and parity). Results were similar when restricting SGA to < 3rd percentile.

Conclusion

Pregnancies conceived using donor IVF and autologous IVF were at higher risk of IPD and its associated conditions than non-IVF pregnancies and associations were consistently stronger for donor IVF pregnancies.

Keywords

Autologous oocyte Donor oocyte Ischemic placental disease Placental abruption Preeclampsia Small for gestational age 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge Laura Dodge and JoAnn Jordan for their assistance with obtaining data for this study. We would also like to acknowledge Stacey Missmer and Olga Basso for their review of this study.

Study funding

AMM was supported by NIH T32 HD052458—Boston University Reproductive, Perinatal and Pediatric Epidemiology Training Program.

Supplementary material

10815_2019_1545_MOESM1_ESM.docx (57 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 56 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Ananth C V, Smulian JC, Vintzileos AM. Ischemic placental disease: maternal versus fetal clinical presentations by gestational age. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2015 Dec 13];23:887–93. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19895356
  2. 2.
    Ananth C V., Vintzileos AM. Ischemic placental disease: epidemiology and risk factors. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2017 Jul 23];159:77–82. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21839575
  3. 3.
    Parker SE, Werler MM. Epidemiology of ischemic placental disease: a focus on preterm gestations. Semin Perinatol [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2017 Jul 23];38:133–8. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0146000514000147
  4. 4.
    Lee MS, Cantonwine D, Little SE, McElrath TF, Parry SI, Lim K-H, et al. Angiogenic markers in pregnancies conceived through in vitro fertilization. Am J Obstet Gynecol [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2015 Dec 13];213:212.e1–8. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25797229
  5. 5.
    Martínez-Varea A, Pellicer B, Perales-Marín A, Pellicer A. Relationship between maternal immunological response during pregnancy and onset of preeclampsia. J Immunol Res [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2015 Dec 13];2014:210241. Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=4060291&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract
  6. 6.
    Klatsky PC, Delaney SS, Caughey AB, Tran ND, Schattman GL, Rosenwaks Z. The role of embryonic origin in preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2017 Oct 17];116:1387–92. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21099607
  7. 7.
    Kroener L, Wang E, Pisarska M. Predisposing factors to abnormal first trimester placentation and the impact on fetal outcomes. Semin Reprod Med [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2017 Jul 18];34:027–35. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26696276
  8. 8.
    Krieg SA, Henne MB, Westphal LM. Obstetric outcomes in donor oocyte pregnancies compared with advanced maternal age in in vitro fertilization pregnancies. Fertil Steril [Internet]. 2008 [cited 2017 Oct 17];90:65–70. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17727845
  9. 9.
    Spiel M, Salahuddin S, Pernicone E, Zsengeller Z, Wang A, Modest AM, et al. Placental soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase expression in small for gestational age infants and risk for adverse outcomes. Placenta [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2017 Jul 19];52:10–6. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0143400417301546
  10. 10.
    Watanabe N, Fujiwara T, Suzuki T, Jwa SC, Taniguchi K, Yamanobe Y, et al. Is in vitro fertilization associated with preeclampsia? A propensity score matched study. 2014 [cited 2017 Jul 18];14:69. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24524652
  11. 11.
    Zhu L, Zhang Y, Liu Y, Zhang R, Wu Y, Huang Y, et al. Maternal and live-birth outcomes of pregnancies following assisted reproductive technology: a retrospective cohort study. Sci Rep [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2017 Aug 12];6:35141. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27762324
  12. 12.
    Källén B, Finnström O, Nygren KG, Otterblad Olausson P, Wennerholm U-B. In vitro fertilization in Sweden: obstetric characteristics, maternal morbidity and mortality. BJOG [Internet]. 2005 [cited 2017 Aug 12];112:1529–1535. Available from:  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00745.x
  13. 13.
    Jackson RA, Gibson KA, Wu YW, Croughan MS. Perinatal outcomes in singletons following in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol [Internet]. 2004 [cited 2017 Aug 12];103:551–563. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14990421
  14. 14.
    Jeve Y, Potdar N, Opoku A, Khare M. Donor oocyte conception and pregnancy complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG An Int J Obstet Gynaecol [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2017 Oct 17];123:1471–1480. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26854328
  15. 15.
    Sabban H, Zakhari A, Patenaude V, Tulandi T, Abenhaim HA. Obstetrical and perinatal morbidity and mortality among in-vitro fertilization pregnancies: a population-based study. Arch Gynecol Obstet [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2017 Aug 12];296:107–13. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28547098
  16. 16.
    Storgaard M, Loft A, Bergh C, Wennerholm U, Söderström-Anttila V, Romundstad L, et al. Obstetric and neonatal complications in pregnancies conceived after oocyte donation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG An Int J Obstet Gynaecol [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2017 Oct 17];124:561–572. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27592694
  17. 17.
    Romundstad LB, Romundstad PR, Sunde A, von Düring V, Skjærven R, Gunnell D, et al. Effects of technology or maternal factors on perinatal outcome after assisted fertilization: a population-based cohort study. Lancet [Internet. 2008 [cited 2017 Jul 23;372:737–43 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18674812.
  18. 18.
    Pinborg A, Wennerholm UB, Romundstad LB, Loft A, Aittomaki K, Soderstrom-Anttila V, et al. Why do singletons conceived after assisted reproduction technology have adverse perinatal outcome? Systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update [Internet. 2013 [cited 2017 Oct 17;19:87–104 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23154145.
  19. 19.
    Elenis E, Sydsjö G, Skalkidou A, Lampic C, Svanberg AS. Neonatal outcomes in pregnancies resulting from oocyte donation: a cohort study in Sweden. BMC Pediatr [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2017 Oct 17];16:170. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27769207
  20. 20.
    Tarlatzi TB, Imbert R, Alvaro Mercadal B, Demeestere I, Venetis CA, Englert Y, et al. Does oocyte donation compared with autologous oocyte IVF pregnancies have a higher risk of preeclampsia? Reprod Biomed Online [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2017 Oct 17];34:11–18. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27793549
  21. 21.
    van der Hoorn M-LP, van Egmond A, Swings GMJS, van Beelen E, van der Keur C, Tirado-González I, et al. Differential immunoregulation in successful oocyte donation pregnancies compared with naturally conceived pregnancies. J Reprod Immunol [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2017 Oct 17];101–102:96–103. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24029471
  22. 22.
    Oken E, Kleinman KP, Rich-Edwards J, Gillman MW. A nearly continuous measure of birth weight for gestational age using a United States national reference. BMC Pediatr [Internet]. 2003 [cited 2017 Jun 12];3:6. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12848901
  23. 23.
    Lash T, Fox M, Fink A. Applying quantitative bias analysis to epidemiologic data. New York, NY: Springer Science + Business Media; 2010.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    SART: Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology [Internet]. [cited 2018 Sep 17]. Available from: https://www.sart.org/
  25. 25.
    Rothman K, Greenland S, Lash T. Modern Epidemiology. Third Edit. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rank N, Moral B. ART national summary report 2014 [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2017 May 5]. p. 115–45. Available from: https://www.sartcorsonline.com/rptCSR_PublicMultYear.aspx?ClinicPKID=0#help
  27. 27.
    Johnson KM, Hacker MR, Resetkova N, O’Brien B, Modest AM. Risk of ischemic placental disease in fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles. Fertil Steril [Internet. 2019 [cited 2019 Jun 24;111:714–21 Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0015028218322441.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School330 Brookline Avenue, KS 3, BostonUSA
  2. 2.Department of EpidemiologyBoston University School of Public HealthBostonUSA
  3. 3.Center for Vascular Biology ResearchBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA
  4. 4.Department of MedicineCedars-Sinai Medical CenterLos AngelesUSA
  5. 5.Boston IVFWalthamUSA
  6. 6.Department of Global HealthBoston University School of Public Health715 Albany Street, BostonUSA
  7. 7.Department of EpidemiologyHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public HealthBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations