Gestational carriers: A viable alternative for women with medical contraindications to pregnancy.

Raymond M Anchan, Stacey A Missmer, Katharine F Correia, Elizabeth S Ginsburg
{"title":"Gestational carriers: A viable alternative for women with medical contraindications to pregnancy.","authors":"Raymond M Anchan,&nbsp;Stacey A Missmer,&nbsp;Katharine F Correia,&nbsp;Elizabeth S Ginsburg","doi":"10.4236/ojog.2013.35A2005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Compare the efficacy of surrogate or gestational carrier (GC) cycles to that of autologous <i>in vitro</i> fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injections (ICSI) in patients with gynecologic or medical co-morbidities contraindicative to pregnancy.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Infertility patients from a single university hospital-based program from 1998-2009.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>128 GC cycles from 80 intended parents were identified and compared with 15,311 IVF or ICSI cycles.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The peak estradiol (E2), number of oocytes retrieved, cycle cancellation, ongoing pregnancy, and live-birth were compared between GCs and autologous IVF carriers. Indications for GC use were also identified. Multiple cycles contributed by the same patient were accounted for using multivariable generalized estimating equations and two-sided Wald p-values.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Uterine factors (67%) was the most common indication for using a GC, followed by non-gynecologic medical conditions including coagulopathies (13%), end stage renal disease (10%), cardiovascular disease (5%) and cancer (5%). Adjusting for age, ovulation induction in GC cycles had similar peak E2 levels and number of oocytes retrieved relative to IVF cycles (p = 0.23 and 0.43, respectively). Clinical pregnancy (49% vs. 42%, p = 0.28) and live-birth rates (31% vs. 32%, p = 0.74) were also comparable. A sub-analysis of GC cycles in those women with uterine factor indications, demonstrated significantly higher clinical pregnancy rates (OR = 2.0; CI = 1.2 - 3.5) with 60% greater odds of live-birth relative to IVF/ICSI cycles, however this odds was not statistically significant for differences in live-birth (CI = 0.9 - 2.9). Conclusions: GCs are a viable alternative to start families for patients with medical co-morbidities precluding pregnancy.</p>","PeriodicalId":19676,"journal":{"name":"Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology","volume":"3 5B","pages":"24-31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/40/05/nihms-657822.PMC4315940.pdf","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/ojog.2013.35A2005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Objective: Compare the efficacy of surrogate or gestational carrier (GC) cycles to that of autologous in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injections (ICSI) in patients with gynecologic or medical co-morbidities contraindicative to pregnancy.

Design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Infertility patients from a single university hospital-based program from 1998-2009.

Interventions: 128 GC cycles from 80 intended parents were identified and compared with 15,311 IVF or ICSI cycles.

Main outcome measures: The peak estradiol (E2), number of oocytes retrieved, cycle cancellation, ongoing pregnancy, and live-birth were compared between GCs and autologous IVF carriers. Indications for GC use were also identified. Multiple cycles contributed by the same patient were accounted for using multivariable generalized estimating equations and two-sided Wald p-values.

Results: Uterine factors (67%) was the most common indication for using a GC, followed by non-gynecologic medical conditions including coagulopathies (13%), end stage renal disease (10%), cardiovascular disease (5%) and cancer (5%). Adjusting for age, ovulation induction in GC cycles had similar peak E2 levels and number of oocytes retrieved relative to IVF cycles (p = 0.23 and 0.43, respectively). Clinical pregnancy (49% vs. 42%, p = 0.28) and live-birth rates (31% vs. 32%, p = 0.74) were also comparable. A sub-analysis of GC cycles in those women with uterine factor indications, demonstrated significantly higher clinical pregnancy rates (OR = 2.0; CI = 1.2 - 3.5) with 60% greater odds of live-birth relative to IVF/ICSI cycles, however this odds was not statistically significant for differences in live-birth (CI = 0.9 - 2.9). Conclusions: GCs are a viable alternative to start families for patients with medical co-morbidities precluding pregnancy.

妊娠载体:一个可行的替代妇女的医疗禁忌症怀孕。
目的:比较代孕或妊娠载体(GC)周期与自体体外受精(IVF)/胞浆内单精子注射(ICSI)在妇科或医学合并症禁忌症患者中的疗效。设计:回顾性队列研究。研究背景:1998-2009年来自单一大学医院项目的不孕症患者。干预措施:从80名准父母中确定128个GC周期,并将15311个IVF或ICSI周期进行比较。主要观察指标:比较GCs和自体体外受精携带者的雌二醇峰值(E2)、卵母细胞数量、周期取消、持续妊娠和活产。还确定了GC使用的适应症。使用多变量广义估计方程和双侧Wald p值对同一患者贡献的多个周期进行解释。结果:子宫因素(67%)是使用GC最常见的适应症,其次是非妇科疾病,包括凝血功能障碍(13%)、终末期肾病(10%)、心血管疾病(5%)和癌症(5%)。调整年龄后,GC周期的促排卵与IVF周期的E2峰值水平和卵母细胞数量相似(p分别= 0.23和0.43)。临床妊娠率(49%对42%,p = 0.28)和活产率(31%对32%,p = 0.74)也具有可比性。有子宫因子适应症的妇女GC周期亚分析显示,临床妊娠率明显较高(OR = 2.0;CI = 1.2 - 3.5),活产的几率比IVF/ICSI周期高60%,但活产的几率差异无统计学意义(CI = 0.9 - 2.9)。结论:GCs是一种可行的替代方案,开始家庭的医疗合并症排除妊娠的患者。
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
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