2018
DOI: 10.1111/aogs.13347
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Trends over time in congenital malformations in live‐born children conceived after assisted reproductive technology

Abstract: When comparing children conceived after assisted reproductive technology and spontaneously conceived, the relative risk of being born with a major congenital malformation did not change during the study period.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
41
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
1
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In our retrospective study, the rates of stillbirths and neonatal deaths were not significantly different between the two groups and within the range reported in the literatures. Notably, birth defects were a problem, and the major congenital malformations in newborns conceived by ART were not significantly different from those of newborns who were spontaneously conceived (Henningsen et al, 2018). However, there were significant differences in some birth defects, especially congenital heart defects, among newborns conceived by ART compared with those spontaneously conceived (Giorgione et al, 2018; Hoorsan et al, 2017; Iwashima, Ishikawa, & Itoh, 2017; Patil et al, 2018).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our retrospective study, the rates of stillbirths and neonatal deaths were not significantly different between the two groups and within the range reported in the literatures. Notably, birth defects were a problem, and the major congenital malformations in newborns conceived by ART were not significantly different from those of newborns who were spontaneously conceived (Henningsen et al, 2018). However, there were significant differences in some birth defects, especially congenital heart defects, among newborns conceived by ART compared with those spontaneously conceived (Giorgione et al, 2018; Hoorsan et al, 2017; Iwashima, Ishikawa, & Itoh, 2017; Patil et al, 2018).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…No difference was reported between ART twins and SC twins. During the time period 1988-2007, the RR of a major birth defect between ARTchildren and SC-children remained unchanged with the most common birth defect being cardiovascular defects (Henningsen et al 2018).…”
Section: Birth Defectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A Nordic cohort study from the CoNARTaS comparing ART singletons (n ¼ 62,379) with singletons born after spontaneous conception (n ¼ 362,215) observed an increased risk for major birth defects (3.4% versus 2.9%; aOR 1.14, 95% CI 1.08-1.20) (53). Increased rates of birth defects occurred in different organ systems: central nervous system; eye; ear, face, and neck; heart; gastrointestinal system; urinary system; and the musculo-skeletal system, with congenital heart defects being the most common defects.…”
Section: Art Versus General Populationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another study from the CoNARTaS group assessed the risk of major birth defects and the risk over time between 1988 and 2007 in ART singletons compared with spontaneously conceived singletons (53). The rate of children born with a major birth defect increased in both groups over time, but the difference in risk of a major birth defect between ART children and spontaneously conceived children remained unchanged.…”
Section: Trends Over Timementioning
confidence: 99%