Background Unsubstantiated concerns have been raised on the potential correlation between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination and infertility, leading to vaccine hesitancy in reproductive-aged population. Herein, we aim to evaluate the impact of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on embryo ploidy, which is a critical indicator for embryo quality and pregnancy chance. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study of 133 patients who underwent preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) cycles with next-generation sequencing technology from June 1st 2021 to March 17th 2022 at a tertiary-care medical center in China. Women fully vaccinated with two doses of Sinopharm or Sinovac inactivated vaccines (n = 66) were compared with unvaccinated women (n = 67). The primary outcome was the euploidy rate per cycle. Multivariate linear and logistic regression analyses were performed to adjust for potential confounders. Results The euploidy rate was similar between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups (23.2 ± 24.6% vs. 22.6 ± 25.9%, P = 0.768), with an adjusted β of 0.01 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.08–0.10). After frozen-thawed single euploid blastocyst transfer, the two groups were also comparable in clinical pregnancy rate (75.0% vs. 60.0%, P = 0.289), with an adjusted odds ratio of 6.21 (95% CI: 0.76–50.88). No significant associations were observed between vaccination and cycle characteristics or other laboratory and pregnancy outcomes. Conclusions Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccination had no detrimental impact on embryo ploidy during in vitro fertilization treatment. Our finding provides further reassurance for vaccinated women who are planning to conceive. Future prospective cohort studies with larger datasets and longer follow-up are needed to confirm the conclusion.
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) vaccination on semen parameters through systematic review and meta‐analysis. PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were comprehensively searched by June 2022. Studies were considered eligible if they compared semen parameters before and after COVID‐19 vaccination or between vaccinated and unvaccinated men, with no restrictions on vaccine types or doses. The effect size was calculated as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random‐effects model. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the sources of heterogeneity measured by the I2 statistic, with publication bias evaluated by Egger's test. Twelve cohort studies involving 914 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In a comparison of vaccinated versus unvaccinated group, the pooled data revealed no significant differences in semen volume (MD = 0.18 ml, 95% CI −0.02 to 0.38), sperm concentration (MD = 1.16 million/ml, 95% CI −1.34 to 3.66), total sperm motility (MD = −0.14%, 95% CI −2.84 to 2.56), progressive sperm motility (MD = −1.06%, 95% CI −2.88 to 0.77), total sperm count (MD = 5.92 million, 95% CI −10.22 to 22.05), total motile sperm count (MD = 2.18 million, 95% CI −1.28 to 5.63), total progressively motile sperm count (MD = −3.87 million, 95% CI −13.16 to 5.43), and sperm morphology (MD = 0.07%, 95% CI −0.84 to 0.97). The results also remained similar across messenger ribonucleic acid, viral‐vector, and inactivated COVID‐19 vaccines. Sensitivity analysis identified two individual studies that contributed to heterogeneity, while the effect size was not materially altered. No obvious publication bias was detected among included studies. Our finding suggested that COVID‐19 vaccination had no detrimental impact on semen quality, which could be potentially helpful to reduce male vaccine hesitancy and increase vaccination coverage.
PurposeTo explore the impact of inactivated COVID-19 vaccination on ovarian reserve as assessed by serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) concentration.MethodsA total of 3160 women were included in this single-center retrospective cohort study between June 2021 and October 2022. Vaccination information were collected from official immunization records available in personal mobile apps. Serum AMH was qualified by electrochemiluminescence immunoassay and compared with previous measurement data within three years. Women were categorized to the vaccinated group if they received two doses of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines (Sinopharm or Sinovac) between AMH tests (n = 488), and to the control group if not vaccinated (n = 2672). Propensity score matching and multivariate linear regression were performed to control for potential confounders. The main outcome measures were the numeric AMH change and percentage AMH change between the two tests.ResultsThere were 474 women left in each group after matching all baseline characteristics. The mean interval from the first to second AMH measurement was 508.0 ± 250.2 and 507.5 ± 253.6 days for vaccinated and unvaccinated women, respectively (P = 0.680). Both groups had a significant AMH decrease in the second test compared with the first test (P = 0.001). However, the second AMH level remained comparable between groups (3.26 ± 2.80 vs. 3.24 ± 2.61 ng/mL, P = 0.757). Similarly, no significant differences were observed in numerical (-0.14 ± 1.32 vs. -0.20 ± 1.56 ng/mL, P = 0.945) and percentage (2.33 ± 58.65 vs. 0.35 ± 48.42%, P = 0.777) AMH changes. The results were consistent in sub-analyses for women aged <35 and ≥35 years. There were also no significant differences when vaccinated women were divided according to the time interval after vaccination: ≤30, 31–60, 61–90, and ≥91 days.ConclusionOur study provides the first evidence that inactivated COVID-19 vaccination has no measurable detrimental effect on ovarian reserve, regardless of female age and vaccination interval. This reassuring finding adds to the safety evidence of COVID-19 vaccine in fertility, and should be useful to promote vaccine acceptance. Multicenter prospective cohort studies are needed to validate our conclusion.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.