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

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3259.2020.02.010

Abstract

Abstract:

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

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.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhckjjdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3259.2020.02.010

https://zhckjjdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2020/V09/I02/106

Figures/Tables 3

References 26

[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.

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

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

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(%)]
组别	例数	胸腹水[例(%)]	(＋)	(＋＋)	(＋＋＋)及以上	血小板减少[例(%)]	HELLP[例(%)]
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(%)]
组别	例数	肺动脉高压[例(%)]	贫血[例(%)]	肝损伤[例(%)]	早产[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

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(%)]
组别	例数	胸腹水[例(%)]	(＋)	(＋＋)	(＋＋＋)及以上	血小板减少[例(%)]	HELLP[例(%)]
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(%)]
组别	例数	肺动脉高压[例(%)]	贫血[例(%)]	肝损伤[例(%)]	早产[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

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

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export