切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华产科急救电子杂志

中华产科急救电子杂志 ›› 2020, Vol. 09 ›› Issue (02) : 106 -110. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3259.2020.02.010

所属专题： 文献；

论著

体外受精－胚胎移植术后子痫前期患者临床特点分析
陈晨1, 赵先兰1,†()   
  1. 1. 450000　郑州大学第一附属医院产科
  • 收稿日期:2019-08-09 出版日期:2020-05-18
  • 通信作者: 赵先兰
  • 基金资助:
    河南省医学科技攻关项目(152102310062)

Analysis of clinical characteristics of preeclampsia patients after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer

Chen Chen1, Xianlan Zhao1,†()   

  1. 1. Department of Obstetrics, First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450000, China
  • Received:2019-08-09 Published:2020-05-18
  • Corresponding author: Xianlan Zhao
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Zhao Xianlan,
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

陈晨, 赵先兰. 体外受精－胚胎移植术后子痫前期患者临床特点分析[J]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2020, 09(02): 106-110.

Chen Chen, Xianlan Zhao. Analysis of clinical characteristics of preeclampsia patients after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetric Emergency(Electronic Edition), 2020, 09(02): 106-110.

目的

探讨体外受精与胚胎移植(in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer, IVF-ET)术后单胎妊娠与子痫前期的关系及临床特点。

方法

回顾性分析2012年6月至2018年12月郑州大学第一附属医院产科收治的通过IVF-ET受孕的单胎子痫前期患者58例(IVF-ET组)，同期自然受孕的单胎子痫前期患者100例(自然受孕组)的临床资料。比较两组孕妇的临床特点和妊娠结局。

结果

IVF-ET组患者的平均住院日(8.74±4.98) d较自然受孕组(7.26±3.07) d长，t＝－2.314，P<0.05；发病时间(28.6±5.63)周和诊断孕周(32.0±6.07)周均早于自然受孕组(28.6±5.63)周和(33.9±4.28)周，t＝4.02和2.04，P<0.05；IVF-ET组尿蛋白(＋＋＋)的发生率34.5%、胸腹水发生率48.3%、胎儿宫内生长受限发生率41.4%均高于自然受孕组20%，29%和26%，P<0.05。

结论

IVF-ET术后单胎子痫前期患者以严重尿蛋白和胸腹水为主要临床症状，胎儿不良结局主要为胎儿宫内生长受限。

关键词: 生殖技术，辅助, 子痫前期, 妊娠结局
Objective

To investigate the association and clinical characteristics between singleton pregnancy after in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) and preeclampsia.

Methods

From June 2012 to December 2018, 58 patients (IVF-ET group) with single pregnancy and 100 patients (natural pregnancy group) with single pregnancy were analyzed retrospectively. The clnical features and pregnancy outcomes were compared between the two groups.

Results

The average length of stay in hospital in IVF-ET group was (8.74±4.98) days, longer than that in natural pregnancy group (7.26±3.07), t=-2.314, P<0.05. The onset time of IVF-ET group was (28.6±5.63) weeks and the diagnosis week (32.0±6.07) weeks earlier than that of natural pregnancy group (28.6±5.63) weeks and (33.9±4.28) weeks, t=4.02 and 2.04, P<0.05. The incidence of urinary protein (+ + + ) in IVF-ET group was 34.5%, the incidence of hydrothorax and ascites was 48.3%, and the incidence of fetal intrauterine growth restriction was 41.4%, which was higher than that 20%, 29% and 26% in natural pregnancy group, respectively (P<0.05).

Conclusions

The main clinical symptons of preeclampsia patients with singleton pregnancy after IVF-ET were severe urinary protein, hydrothorax and ascites, and the main fetal adverse outcome was fetal growth restriction.

Key words: Reproductive technique, assisted, Preeclampsia, Pregnancy outcome
表1 两组患者一般情况比较(±s)
组别 例数 年龄(岁) 孕次(次) 产次(次) 住院日(d)
IVF-ET组 58 32.98±6.00 1.24±1.07 0.35±1.95 8.74±4.98
自然受孕组 100 32.73±6.49 1.49±1.83 0.43±1.36 7.26±3.07
t值 ? 0.242 0.329 1.87 －2.314
P值 ? 0.809 0.847 0.063 0.022
表2 两组患者子痫前期发病特点和并发症的比较
组别 例数 发病孕周[周，(±s)] 诊断孕周[周，(±s)] 终止妊娠孕周[周，(±s)] 最高收缩压[mm Hg，(±s)] 最高舒张压[mm Hg，(±s)]
IVF-ET组 58 28.6±5.63 32.0±6.07 34.3±4.18 159.47±9.99 99.40±9.85
自然受孕组 100 32.3±5.62 33.9±4.28 34.6±4.22 162.2±16.91 102.03±14.99
t值 ? 4.02 2.04 0.428 1.315 1.33
P值 ? 0.00 0.044 0.669 0.19 0.186
组别 例数 胸腹水[例(%)] 尿蛋白[例(%)] 血小板减少[例(%)] HELLP[例(%)]
(＋) (＋＋) (＋＋＋)及以上
IVF-ET组 58 28(48.3) 9(15.5) 14(24.1) 20(34.5) 10(17.2) 1(1.7)
自然受孕组 100 29(29.0) 40(40.0) 14(14.0) 20(20.0) 14(14.0) 3(3.0)
χ2值 ? －2.424 －1.985 －0.545 －0.491
P值 ? 0.015 0.047 0.585 0.624
组别 例数 肺动脉高压[例(%)] 贫血[例(%)] 肝损伤[例(%)] 早产[例(%)] 本次住院结局[例(%)]
剖宫产 引产 未分娩
IVF-ET组 58 4(6.9) 40(69) 4(6.9) 25(53.2) 47(81) 1(1.7) 10(17.2)
自然受孕组 100 2(2.0) 58(58) 3(3.0) 40(50.0) 80(80) 7(7.0) 13(13.0)
χ2值 ? －1.547 －1.365 －1.144 －0.346 －0.008
P值 ? 0.122 0.172 0.253 0.729 0.994
表3 IVF-ET组和自然受孕组胎儿宫内情况与新生儿结局[例(%)]
组别 例数 胎儿窘迫 羊水少 生长受限 新生儿窒息 死胎
IVF-ET组 58 15(25.9) 17(29.3) 24(41.4) 8(17.0) 0(1)
自然受孕组 100 19(19.0) 25(25.0) 26(26.0) 6(7.5) 1(1)
χ2值 ? －1.008 －0.589 －1.997 －1.648 －0.762
P值 ? 0.313 0.556 0.046 0.099 0.446
[1]
彭靖，卢大儒. 试管婴儿技术的发展与探讨[J]. 自然杂志，2010, 32(6): 338-340.
[2]
Sun LM, Walker MC, Cao HL. Assisted reproductive technology and placenta-mediated adverse pregnancy outcomes[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2009, 114(4): 818-824.
[3]
Runte M, Färber C, Lich C, et al. Comprehensive methylation analysis in typical and atypical PWS and AS patients with normal biparental chromosomes 15[J]. European Journal of Humangenetics, 2001, 9(7): 519-526.
[4]
Raunig JM, Yamauchi Y, Ward MA, et al. Assisted reproduction technologies alter steroid delivery to the mouse fetus during pregnancy[J]. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol, 2011，126(1－2): 26-34.
[5]
Chen XK, Wen SW, Bottomley J, et al. In vitro fertilization is associated with an increased risk for preeclampsia[J]. Hypertensions Pregnancy, 2009, 28(1): 1-12.
[6]
Luke B, Gopal D, Cabral H, et al. Pregnancy, birth, and infant outcomes by maternal fertility status: the Massachusetts Outcomes Study of Assisted Reproductive Technology[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2017, 217(3): 327.e1-327.e14.
[7]
Stern JE, Luke B, Tobias M, et al. Adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes associated with underlying diagnosis with and without assisted reproductive technology treatment[J]. Fertil Steril, 2015，103(6): 1438-1445.
[8]
Luke B. Pregnancy and birth outcomes in couples with infertility with and without assisted reproductive technology: with an emphasis on US population-based studies[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2017, 217(3): 270-281.
[9]
Qin J, Liu X, Sheng X, et al. Assisted reproductive technology and the risk of pregnancy-related complications and adverse pregnancy outcomes in singleton pregnancies: a meta-analysis of cohort studies[J]. Fertil Steril, 2016, 105(1): 73-85.e76.
[10]
Jackson RA, Gibson KA, Wu YW, et al. Perinatal outcomes in singletons following in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2004, 103(3): 551-563.
[11]
Pandey S, Shetty A, Hamilton M, et al. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies resulting from IVF/ICSI: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Hum Reprod Update, 2012, 18(5): 485-503.
[12]
Watanabe N, Fujiwara T, Suzuki T, et al. Is in vitro fertilization associated with preeclampsia? A propensity score matched study[J]. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 2014, 14: 69.
[13]
Sibai BM. Subfertility/infertility and assisted reproductive conception are independent risk factors for pre-eclampsia[J]. BJOG, 2015, 122(7): 923.
[14]
Calhoun KC, Barnhart KT, Elovitz MA, et al. Evaluating the Association between Assisted Conception and the Severity of Preeclampsia[J]. ISRN Obstet Gynecol, 2011, 2011: 928592.
[15]
Tandberg A, Klungsøyr K, Romundstad LB, et al. Pre-eclampsia and assisted reproductive technologies: consequences of advanced maternal age, interbirth intervals, new partner and smoking habits[J]. BJOG, 2015, 122(7): 915-922.
[16]
Romy G, Rachel B, Willemsen SP, et al. Blood pressure tracking during pregnancy and the risk of gestational hypertensive disorders: the Generation R Study[J]. Eur Heart J, 2011, 32(24): 3088-3097.
[17]
Pijnenborg R, Vercruysse L, Hanssens M. The uterine spiral arteries in human pregnancy: facts and controversies[J]. Placenta, 2006, 27 (9－10): 939-958.
[18]
Oh SY, Choi SJ, Kim KH, et al. Autophagy-related proteins, LC3 and Beclin－1, in placentas from pregnancies complicated by preeclampsia[J]. Reprod Sci, 2008, 15(9): 912-920.
[19]
Burton GJ, Yung HW, Cindrovadavies T, et al. Placental Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress and Oxidative Stress in the Pathophysiology of Unexplained Intrauterine Growth Restriction and Early Onset Preeclampsia[J]. Placenta, 2009, 30 Suppl A: S43-S48.
[20]
Stefan V, Alberto G, Dietmar S, et al. An automated method for the determination of the sFlt-1/PIGF ratio in the assessment of preeclampsia[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2010, 202(2): 161.e161-161.e111.
[21]
Vermey BG, Buchanan A, Chambers GM, et al. Are singleton pregnancies after assisted reproduction technology (ART) associated with a higher risk of placental anomalies compared with non-ART singleton pregnancies? A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. BJOG, 2019, 126(2): 209-218.
[22]
Thomopoulos C, Tsioufis C, Michalopoulou H, et al. Assisted reproductive technology and pregnancy-related hypertensive complications: a systematic review[J]. Journal of Human Hypertension, 2013, 27(3): 148-157.
[23]
Mikat B, Zeller A, Scherag A, et al. βhCG and PAPP-A in First Trimester: Predictive Factors for Preeclampsia？[J]. Hypertensions Pregnancy, 2012, 31(2): 261-267.
[24]
Zhu L, Zhang Y, Liu Y, et al. Maternal and Live-birth Outcomes of Pregnancies following Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Retrospective Cohort Study[J]. Sci Rep, 2016, 6: 35141.
[25]
Enrrico B, Wingka L, Xiaowei L, et al. Impaired placental nutrient transport in mice generated by in vitro fertilization[J]. Endocrinology, 2012, 153(7): 3457-3467.
[26]
De WE, Vrooman LA, Fischer E, et al. The cumulative effect of assisted reproduction procedures on placental development and epigenetic perturbations in a mouse model[J]. Hum Mol Genet, 2015, 24(24): 6975-6985.
[1] 庄蕙嘉, 岳志成, 钟坤岑, 朱慧莉. 乳腺癌患者生育力保存的研究进展[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 238-242.
[2] 杨皓媛, 龚杰, 邹青伟, 阮航. 哮喘孕妇的母婴不良妊娠结局研究现状[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 522-529.
[3] 陈甜甜, 王晓东, 余海燕. 双胎妊娠合并Gitelman综合征孕妇的妊娠结局及文献复习[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 559-568.
[4] 居晓庆, 金蕴洁, 王晓燕. 剖宫产术后瘢痕子宫患者再次妊娠阴道分娩发生子宫破裂的影响因素分析[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 575-581.
[5] 顾娟, 孙擎擎, 胡方方, 曹义娟, 祁玉娟. 子宫内膜容受性检测改善胚胎反复种植失败患者妊娠结局的临床应用[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 582-587.
[6] 周梦玲, 薛志伟, 周淑. 妊娠合并子宫肌瘤的孕期变化及其与不良妊娠结局的关系[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 611-615.
[7] 陈莉, 雷雪芹, 段炼, 曾悦, 何国琳. 影响2次剖宫产术后阴道试产产妇试产成功因素及妊娠结局分析[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(03): 287-294.
[8] 陈樱, 陈艳莉. 高龄孕妇心率变异性原因及围产结局分析[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(03): 295-301.
[9] 冯丹艳, 曹晓辉, 史玉霞. 血清脂联素与胎盘亮氨酸氨肽酶对妊娠期糖尿病患者妊娠结局的影响[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(03): 302-308.
[10] 韦先梅, 韩毓, 蒋英彩. 敲减circSERPINE2通过靶向调控miR-34a-5p表达抑制滋养层细胞增殖、迁移和侵袭[J]. 中华细胞与干细胞杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(04): 193-201.
[11] 任国华, 杜晓晓, 洪善玲, 邵帅. 妊娠期高血压并发急性肾损伤患者血清白细胞介素-22、硫化氢及护骨素水平的变化与意义[J]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 150-155.
[12] 张郁妍, 胡滨, 张伟红, 徐楣, 朱慧, 羊馨玥, 刘海玲. 妊娠中期心血管超声参数与肝功能的相关性及对不良妊娠结局的预测价值[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 499-504.
[13] 王欣, 刘琳, 闻哲嘉, 刘春玲, 张弘, 吕芳. 妊娠前应激暴露对小鼠后续妊娠的影响[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 431-437.
[14] 吴晓翔, 杨波, 李景漩, 张凤玲, 郭桂辉, 郑少培. 脐动脉超声检查联合NLR、sFlt-1/PLGF对妊娠高血压综合征患者不良妊娠结局的预测价值[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 266-271.
[15] 张丽姿, 陈敦金. 胎盘植入性疾病的不良结局及远期影响[J]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 155-158.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号