Outcomes of IVF treatments in women with antiphospholipid antibodies or antiphospholipid syndrome

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q1 HEMATOLOGY
Michal Mia Shalamov , Lichay Kaufman , Michal J. Simchen , Nancy Agmon-Levin , Mudi Misgav , Raoul Orvieto , Ronit Machtinger
{"title":"Outcomes of IVF treatments in women with antiphospholipid antibodies or antiphospholipid syndrome","authors":"Michal Mia Shalamov ,&nbsp;Lichay Kaufman ,&nbsp;Michal J. Simchen ,&nbsp;Nancy Agmon-Levin ,&nbsp;Mudi Misgav ,&nbsp;Raoul Orvieto ,&nbsp;Ronit Machtinger","doi":"10.1016/j.thromres.2024.109144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Ovulation induction for in vitro fertilization (IVF) may increase intravascular thromboses among patients with antiphospholipid autoantibodies (aPLs) or antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) due to the high estrogen levels. While natural or modified natural IVF treatment cycles (MNC) are sometimes used instead of stimulated cycles with empiric anticoagulant treatment among these infertile patients, their efficacy is unclear.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>A retrospective cohort study including all IVF cycles of patients diagnosed with aPLs or APS in a tertiary, university-affiliated hospital between 2012 and 2022. The outcomes of stimulated cycles with anticoagulants and MNC and natural IVF cycle attempts were compared.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>121 oocyte retrievals from 38 women were analyzed: 93 stimulated and 28 MNC or natural IVF cycles. The rates of cycle cancellation (0 % vs. 17.9 %, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001) and cycles in which no oocytes were retrieved (0 % vs. 43.5 %, p &lt; 0.001) were significantly lower following stimulated cycles vs. natural and MNC. In parallel, positive β-hCG (31.9 % vs. 10.9 %, <em>p</em> = 0.03), clinical pregnancy rate (23.6 % and 3.6 %, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001) and live birth rates (18.1 % vs. 3.6 %, <em>p</em> = 0.01) were significantly higher following stimulated cycles. No thrombotic events or bleeding occurred in any cycle.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Ovarian stimulation for IVF is more effective for successful pregnancy and delivery than natural cycles and MNC and can be safely undertaken in aPLs or APS women undergoing IVF. Rates of complication from hormonal treatment are not increased when treated with LMWH during ovarian stimulation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":23064,"journal":{"name":"Thrombosis research","volume":"243 ","pages":"Article 109144"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thrombosis research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049384824002767","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Ovulation induction for in vitro fertilization (IVF) may increase intravascular thromboses among patients with antiphospholipid autoantibodies (aPLs) or antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) due to the high estrogen levels. While natural or modified natural IVF treatment cycles (MNC) are sometimes used instead of stimulated cycles with empiric anticoagulant treatment among these infertile patients, their efficacy is unclear.

Materials and methods

A retrospective cohort study including all IVF cycles of patients diagnosed with aPLs or APS in a tertiary, university-affiliated hospital between 2012 and 2022. The outcomes of stimulated cycles with anticoagulants and MNC and natural IVF cycle attempts were compared.

Results

121 oocyte retrievals from 38 women were analyzed: 93 stimulated and 28 MNC or natural IVF cycles. The rates of cycle cancellation (0 % vs. 17.9 %, p < 0.001) and cycles in which no oocytes were retrieved (0 % vs. 43.5 %, p < 0.001) were significantly lower following stimulated cycles vs. natural and MNC. In parallel, positive β-hCG (31.9 % vs. 10.9 %, p = 0.03), clinical pregnancy rate (23.6 % and 3.6 %, p < 0.001) and live birth rates (18.1 % vs. 3.6 %, p = 0.01) were significantly higher following stimulated cycles. No thrombotic events or bleeding occurred in any cycle.

Conclusion

Ovarian stimulation for IVF is more effective for successful pregnancy and delivery than natural cycles and MNC and can be safely undertaken in aPLs or APS women undergoing IVF. Rates of complication from hormonal treatment are not increased when treated with LMWH during ovarian stimulation.

抗磷脂抗体或抗磷脂综合征妇女接受试管婴儿治疗的结果
背景体外受精(IVF)促排卵可能会增加抗磷脂自身抗体(aPL)或抗磷脂综合征(APS)患者的血管内血栓形成,因为雌激素水平较高。材料和方法一项回顾性队列研究,包括一家大学附属三级医院在2012年至2022年期间确诊的aPLs或APS患者的所有IVF周期。结果 分析了 38 名女性的 121 次卵母细胞取回:93 次刺激周期和 28 次 MNC 或自然 IVF 周期。周期取消率(0% vs. 17.9%,p <0.001)和未取到卵母细胞的周期率(0% vs. 43.5%,p <0.001)明显低于刺激周期和自然周期及 MNC 周期。同时,β-hCG 阳性率(31.9% 对 10.9%,p = 0.03)、临床妊娠率(23.6% 和 3.6%,p < 0.001)和活产率(18.1% 对 3.6%,p = 0.01)在促排卵周期后明显升高。结论与自然周期和 MNC 相比,卵巢刺激试管受精对成功怀孕和分娩更有效,可安全地用于接受试管受精的 aPLs 或 APS 妇女。在卵巢刺激过程中使用 LMWH 并不会增加激素治疗的并发症发生率。
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
Thrombosis research
Thrombosis research 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
14.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
364
审稿时长
31 days
期刊介绍: Thrombosis Research is an international journal dedicated to the swift dissemination of new information on thrombosis, hemostasis, and vascular biology, aimed at advancing both science and clinical care. The journal publishes peer-reviewed original research, reviews, editorials, opinions, and critiques, covering both basic and clinical studies. Priority is given to research that promises novel approaches in the diagnosis, therapy, prognosis, and prevention of thrombotic and hemorrhagic diseases.
×
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