Display options
Cite
Bertelsmann H, de Carvalho Gomes H, Mund M, et al. The risk of malformation following assisted reproduction. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2008;105(1):11-7doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2008.0011.
Bertelsmann, H., de Carvalho Gomes, H., Mund, M., Bauer, S., & Matthias, K. (2008). The risk of malformation following assisted reproduction. Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 105(1), 11-7. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2008.0011
Bertelsmann, Hilke, et al. "The risk of malformation following assisted reproduction." Deutsches Arzteblatt international vol. 105,1 (2008): 11-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2008.0011
Bertelsmann H, de Carvalho Gomes H, Mund M, Bauer S, Matthias K. The risk of malformation following assisted reproduction. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2008 Jan;105(1):11-7. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2008.0011. Epub 2008 Jan 07. PMID: 19578448; PMCID: PMC2701594.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2008 Jan;105(1):11-7. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2008.0011. Epub 2008 Jan 07.

The risk of malformation following assisted reproduction.

Deutsches Arzteblatt international

Hilke Bertelsmann, Helena de Carvalho Gomes, Monika Mund, Susanne Bauer, Katja Matthias

Affiliations

  1. Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss, Auf dem Seidenberg 3a, Siegburg, Germany. [email protected]

PMID: 19578448 PMCID: PMC2701594 DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2008.0011

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Intracytoplasmatic sperm injection (ICSI) is currently the most frequently used human reproductive technology in Germany. ICSI was introduced as routine, insurance-funded medical care in 2002 by the Federal Joint Committee. A re-evaluation of published literature on malformation rates in children born of ICSI pregnancies within a period of three years formed part of the committee's decision. The analysis investigated whether ICSI increases the risk of malformation in the offspring, compared to in vitro fertilization (IVF) and natural conception.

METHODS: Systematic literature review.

RESULTS: 929 studies were identified. Three meta-analyses, 15 studies investigating malformations, and 12 studies analyzing imprinting disorders were included. The risk of malformation was not significantly different in nine studies comparing ICSI versus IVF. Two meta-analyses and three of eight cohort studies and retrospective analysis showed significantly more severe malformations after assisted reproduction than after natural conception. The remaining five studies displayed no significant results. Current evidence does not show a higher risk of major malformations in the offspring resulting from the use of ICSI compared to IVF. However, there is evidence that both techniques increase the risk for major malformations considerably, compared to natural conception, and further research is needed. The validity of the results is low since the studies were heterogeneous and the cohorts used in the studies had limited comparability.

Keywords: assisted reproduction; congenital malformation; in vitro fertilization; intracytoplasmic sperm injection; literature review

References

  1. Am J Hum Genet. 2003 May;72(5):1338-41 - PubMed
  2. Reprod Biomed Online. 2002 Sep-Oct;5(2):171-8 - PubMed
  3. Hum Reprod. 2005 Apr;20(4):950-4 - PubMed
  4. Hum Reprod. 1999 Jul;14(7):1896-902 - PubMed
  5. N Engl J Med. 2002 Mar 7;346(10):725-30 - PubMed
  6. Lancet. 1998 May 23;351(9115):1529-34 - PubMed
  7. Lancet. 2003 Jan 25;361(9354):309-10 - PubMed
  8. Hum Reprod. 2005 Feb;20(2):328-38 - PubMed
  9. Am J Hum Genet. 2004 Sep;75(3):526-8 - PubMed
  10. J Pediatr. 2005 Apr;146(4):565-7 - PubMed
  11. Am J Hum Genet. 2002 Jul;71(1):162-4 - PubMed
  12. Hum Reprod. 2002 Mar;17(3):671-94 - PubMed
  13. Fertil Steril. 2005 Nov;84(5):1308-15 - PubMed
  14. Fertil Steril. 2005 Feb;83(2):349-54 - PubMed
  15. Am J Hum Genet. 2003 Jan;72(1):156-60 - PubMed
  16. Fertil Steril. 2003 Mar;79(3):512-6 - PubMed
  17. Lancet. 2001 Jun 30;357(9274):2080-4 - PubMed
  18. Fertil Steril. 2003 Dec;80(6):1388-97 - PubMed
  19. Int J Epidemiol. 2005 Jun;34(3):696-701 - PubMed
  20. Fertil Steril. 2004 Jun;81(6):1604-16 - PubMed
  21. Semin Reprod Med. 2000;18(2):161-9 - PubMed
  22. Int J Androl. 1999 Jun;22(3):148-54 - PubMed
  23. Hum Reprod. 2005 Feb;20(2):413-9 - PubMed
  24. Reprod Biomed Online. 2004 Jul;9(1):91-101 - PubMed
  25. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1999 May;16(5):227-32 - PubMed
  26. Mol Hum Reprod. 2000 Nov;6(11):1049-53 - PubMed
  27. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2004 Dec;21(12):437-43 - PubMed
  28. Am J Hum Genet. 2003 Jan;72(1):218-9 - PubMed
  29. Hum Reprod. 2002 Oct;17(10):2487-94 - PubMed
  30. Hum Reprod. 2003 Dec;18(12):2508-11 - PubMed
  31. Twin Res. 2004 Jun;7(3):223-7 - PubMed
  32. J Med Genet. 2005 Apr;42(4):289-91 - PubMed

Publication Types