Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37178338›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2023

Birth size after embryo cryopreservation: larger by all measures?

E Landsverk, K Westvik-Johari, L B Romundstad, S Opdahl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2023. 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
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Review
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

4 authors.

E LandsverkDepartment of Public Health and Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-9517-8789
K Westvik-JohariDepartment of Public Health and Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-6931-5559
L B RomundstadCentre for Fertility and Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
S OpdahlDepartment of Public Health and Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-6593-8433

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

study questionAre the changes in birthweight after frozen and fresh embryo transfer associated with corresponding changes in other measures of foetal growth and placental efficiency? SUMMARY ANSWER: Although placental efficiency was reduced for both frozen and fresh embryo transfer, children born after frozen embryo transfer (frozen-ET) had symmetrically increased size at birth, whereas children born after fresh embryo transfer (fresh-ET) were asymmetrically smaller at birth, compared to naturally conceived children. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In pregnancies following frozen-ET, the risk of being born large, as measured by birthweight, is higher than after natural and fresh-ET conceptions. It is not known whether this is a result of symmetrically increased growth and increased placental efficiency. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A Norwegian nationwide registry-based cohort study of 3093 singletons born after frozen-ET, 15 510 singletons born after fresh-ET and 1 125 366 singletons born after natural conception from 1988 to 2015 was performed. We identified 6334 sibships with at least two different conception methods. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,

methodsData were collected from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway and the Norwegian National Education Database. Main outcome measures were birth length, birthweight, head circumference, ponderal index (birthweight relative to birth length in kg/m3), placental weight, birthweight:placental weight ratio, gestational age, and birthweight z-score. We estimated mean differences between children born after frozen-ET and fresh-ET compared to natural conception, at the population level and within sibships. Adjustments were made for birth year, maternal age, parity, and education. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Estimates at the population level and within sibships were consistent for all outcomes, for both fresh and frozen-ET compared to natural conception. Within sibships, children born after frozen-ET had longer mean length (Δ = 0.42 cm, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.55) and head circumference (Δ = 0.32 cm, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.41) at birth, but a similar ponderal index (Δ = 0.11 kg/m3, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.26), compared to naturally conceived. Children born after fresh-ET had a shorter length (Δ = -0.22 cm, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.15) and head circumference (Δ = -0.15 cm, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.10), and lower ponderal index (Δ = -0.15 kg/m3, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.07) at birth compared to natural conception within sibships. Furthermore, mean placental weight was larger after both frozen-ET (Δ = 37 g, 95% CI 28 to 45) and fresh-ET (Δ = 7 g, 95% CI 2 to 13) compared to natural conception within sibships, whereas mean birthweight:placental weight ratio was reduced for both frozen-ET (Δ = -0.11, 95% CI -0.17 to -0.05) and fresh-ET (Δ = -0.13, 95% CI -0.16 to -0.09). A range of sensitivity analyses all gave similar conclusions as the main models, including restriction to full siblings, restriction to single embryo transfer, and adjustment for maternal BMI, height, and smoking. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Additional adjustment for maternal BMI, height, and smoking was possible only for a small sample of the study population (15%). Data on causes and duration of infertility, as well as treatment details, were limited. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE

findingsThe increased birthweight observed in singletons after frozen-ET is associated with a symmetrically increased birth size and large placentas, also after controlling for maternal factors through sibship analyses. Identifying the responsible treatment factors and the long-term health outcomes are particularly important considering the increase in elective freezing of all embryos. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was partly supported by the Central Norway Regional Health Authorities (project number 46045000), the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (project number 81850092) and the Research Council of Norway through its Centres of Excellence funding scheme (project number 262700). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Indexed as

CryopreservationPlacentaBirth WeightChildCohort StudiesEmbryo TransferFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPregnancyRetrospective Studiesassisted reproductionbirth sizebirthweight:placental weight ratiofresh embryo transferfrozen embryo transferhead circumference at birthplacental weightponderal indexregistry-based studysibship study

Identifiers

PMID37178338
PMCPMC10320486

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.