Impact of prior coronavirus disease 2019 infection in females on assisted reproductive outcomes: A systematic review with meta-analysis

Yiqi Liu, Shen Chen, Mengyi Chen, Chutian Xing, Danjie Su, Lu Fan, Dingfei Xu, Lifeng Tian, Leizhen Xia, Ke Zhang, Qiongfang Wu, Zheng Fang, Jialyu Huang
{"title":"Impact of prior coronavirus disease 2019 infection in females on assisted reproductive outcomes: A systematic review with meta-analysis","authors":"Yiqi Liu,&nbsp;Shen Chen,&nbsp;Mengyi Chen,&nbsp;Chutian Xing,&nbsp;Danjie Su,&nbsp;Lu Fan,&nbsp;Dingfei Xu,&nbsp;Lifeng Tian,&nbsp;Leizhen Xia,&nbsp;Ke Zhang,&nbsp;Qiongfang Wu,&nbsp;Zheng Fang,&nbsp;Jialyu Huang","doi":"10.1002/ctd2.251","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>To investigate the relationship between prior coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection in females and subsequent treatment outcomes of assisted reproductive technology (ART).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A systematic literature review was carried out up to 16 December 2022, in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Random-effect models were adopted to estimate the pooled effects as mean differences (MDs) or odds ratios (ORs). I2 statistic and Egger's test were applied to assess heterogeneity and publication bias, respectively.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>After screening 1480 records, 15 cohort studies totalling 1905 cycles were included in this meta-analysis. In a comparison of previously COVID-19-infected versus uninfected women, no significant differences were observed in the primary outcomes of the retrieved oocytes number (MD = 0.06; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.75–0.88; I2 = 0) and clinical pregnancy rate (OR = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.74–1.24; I2 = 0). Pooled analyses of other predefined outcomes, which encompassed four cycle characteristics, six laboratory indicators and four pregnancy results, also showed no adverse effects of prior COVID-19 infection. Most outcomes remained consistent after further sensitivity and subgroup analyses, and no significant publication bias was observed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Our work provides the first systematic evidence that COVID-19 infection history in females may have no measurable detrimental impact on the subsequent ART cycle. More data are needed to assess the live birth outcome and the optimal time interval from infection to assisted reproduction.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":72605,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and translational discovery","volume":"3 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ctd2.251","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and translational discovery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ctd2.251","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

To investigate the relationship between prior coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection in females and subsequent treatment outcomes of assisted reproductive technology (ART).

Methods

A systematic literature review was carried out up to 16 December 2022, in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Random-effect models were adopted to estimate the pooled effects as mean differences (MDs) or odds ratios (ORs). I2 statistic and Egger's test were applied to assess heterogeneity and publication bias, respectively.

Results

After screening 1480 records, 15 cohort studies totalling 1905 cycles were included in this meta-analysis. In a comparison of previously COVID-19-infected versus uninfected women, no significant differences were observed in the primary outcomes of the retrieved oocytes number (MD = 0.06; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.75–0.88; I2 = 0) and clinical pregnancy rate (OR = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.74–1.24; I2 = 0). Pooled analyses of other predefined outcomes, which encompassed four cycle characteristics, six laboratory indicators and four pregnancy results, also showed no adverse effects of prior COVID-19 infection. Most outcomes remained consistent after further sensitivity and subgroup analyses, and no significant publication bias was observed.

Conclusions

Our work provides the first systematic evidence that COVID-19 infection history in females may have no measurable detrimental impact on the subsequent ART cycle. More data are needed to assess the live birth outcome and the optimal time interval from infection to assisted reproduction.

Abstract Image

女性感染2019冠状病毒病对辅助生殖结果的影响:一项系统综述和荟萃分析
目的探讨女性既往冠状病毒病2019 (COVID-19)感染与辅助生殖技术(ART)治疗效果的关系。方法系统回顾截至2022年12月16日的PubMed、Web of Science、EMBASE和Cochrane Library的文献。采用随机效应模型以平均差异(md)或优势比(ORs)估计合并效应。采用I2统计量和Egger’s检验分别评估异质性和发表偏倚。结果在筛选1480份记录后,15项队列研究共纳入了1905个周期的meta分析。在之前感染covid -19的妇女与未感染的妇女的比较中,在检索到的卵母细胞数量的主要结局中未观察到显着差异(MD = 0.06;95%置信区间[CI]: -0.75-0.88;I2 = 0)和临床妊娠率(OR = 0.96;95% ci: 0.74-1.24;I2 = 0)。对其他预定义结局(包括4个周期特征、6项实验室指标和4项妊娠结果)的汇总分析也显示,既往感染COVID-19没有不良影响。在进一步的敏感性和亚组分析后,大多数结果保持一致,未观察到明显的发表偏倚。我们的工作提供了第一个系统证据,证明女性COVID-19感染史可能对随后的ART周期没有可测量的有害影响。需要更多的数据来评估活产结果和从感染到辅助生殖的最佳时间间隔。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信