ArticleReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2025
Congenital anomalies after first-trimester dydrogesterone therapy during in vitro fertilization.
Article in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 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
Abstract
backgroundCongenital anomalies are a critical public health concern and warrant prioritization in research. However, the teratogenic potential of dydrogesterone (DYG) remains uncertain and a subject of ongoing debate.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included patients undergoing embryo transfer between January 2010 and December 2018. It analyzed 124,815 embryo transfer cycles (80,103 [64.2%] fresh; 44,712 [35.8%] frozen), resulting in 52,175 live births. Newborns were stratified by maternal luteal phase support (DYG-exposed vs. unexposed). Patients with known congenital malformation risk factors were excluded. Congenital anomaly incidence was compared between groups. Stratified analysis and multivariate logistic regression models adjusting for confounders were employed.
resultsThe total congenital anomaly rate was significantly lower in DYG-exposed newborns compared to unexposed groups (6.05‰ vs. 7.90‰, P = 0.020), with particularly notable differences in musculoskeletal malformations (0.63‰ vs. 1.33‰, P = 0.025). No significant differences were observed in other congenital anomaly categories. After stratifying by fresh or frozen cycles, DYG-exposed and unexposed groups showed no significant differences in birth defects during fresh cycles. In frozen cycles, musculoskeletal anomalies were significantly lower in the DYG group both before (0.60‰ vs. 2.37‰, P = 0.020) and after adjustment (P = 0.009, OR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.05–0.66). Other anomaly categories remained unaffected. However, this specific association did not remain significant after rigorous correction for multiple testing with the application of both the Bonferroni and False Discovery Rate (FDR) methods. Multivariate analysis adjusted for confounders revealed no increased risk of congenital anomalies associated with DYG exposure.
conclusionsFirst-trimester dydrogesterone therapy was not associated with an increased risk of congenital anomalies. Due to the limitations of this cohort study, further follow-up and in-depth data analysis are planned for future studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.