Effects of different frozen embryo transfer regimens on abnormalities of fetal weight: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Reported increases in maternal and perinatal morbidity (including macrosomia, large for gestational age (LGA), cesarean section, hemorrhage and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy) following frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles may be associated with the lack of a corpus luteum seen in programmed FET. Given the growing number of studies comparing outcomes between natural FET and programmed FET cycles, a meta-analysis would prove useful to detect the presence of abnormalities in fetal birth weight in patients undergoing natural and programmed FET cycles. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: The aim of this study was to provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of natural versus programmed methods of endometrial preparation for FET cycles on fetal weight and the risks of LGA and macrosomia. SEARCH METHODS: A literature search using MEDLINE, SCOPUS, EMBASE and clinicaltrials.gov was conducted for published research comparing neonatal outcomes in natural FET and programmed FET cycles. Primary outcomes of interest were fetal weight, macrosomia and LGA. Studies were included if the following criteria were met: study contained cohorts of NFET and programmed FET with outcome data of birth weight, large for gestational data and/or macrosomia. The data are presented as average weight and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) with fixed- or random-effects meta-analysis between cohorts of NFET and programmed FET cycles. Bias was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for the 14 included studies. Multiple subgroup analyses were performed to assess for effect of the true natural cycle (defined as no ovulation trigger medication use) and the day of embryo transfer on fetal weight parameters compared with programmed cycle FET. OUTCOMES: A total of 879 studies were identified, with 15 meeting inclusion the criteria. The studies varied with respect to country of origin, definition of natural cycle FET and type of progesterone supplementation used. The included studies had similar gestational ages at the time of birth. Programmed FET cycles resulted in a higher fetal weight compared with natural FET cycles (mean difference 47.38 gp = 0.04). Programmed FET cycles were also at higher risk for macrosomia (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.06-1.26) and LGA (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.02-1.19) compared with natural FET cycles. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that programmed FET cycles resulted in a higher fetal weight compared with true natural FET (mean difference 62.18 gp = 0.0001) cycles. Cleavage stage embryo transfers had an increased risk of LGA (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.00-1.62) and an increased risk of macrosomia (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.08-1.44) in programmed FET cycles compared with natural FET cycles. Blastocyst transfer in programmed FET cycles resulted in no difference in risk of macrosomia but an increased risk of LGA (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.06-1.21) compared with natural FET cycles. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: Programmed endometrial preparation for FET cycles had a significant effect, causing increased fetal birth weight and increased risks of LGA and macrosomia. The numbers of studies in the subgroup analyses were too low to determine reliable results. Further prospective randomized trials are needed to determine whether the changes seen in the observational trials are indeed accurate.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,010 | 0,025 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,019 | 0,043 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».