28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The correlation between raised body mass index and assisted reproductive treatment outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Public funding for fertility services within the United Kingdom is limited, and therefore, strict guidance exists regarding who can be offered treatment under the National Health Service (NHS). Body mass index (BMI) is a universal criteria adopted by both the public and private sector.

          This study addresses an important aspect of the impact of a raised BMI on fertility treatment outcomes. We standardise the analysis of the data by only including studies incorporating the WHO BMI criteria; the current reference point for clinicians and clinical commissioning groups in ascertaining which group of patients should receive treatment. This study is an update of the previous systematic review performed in 2010, with the inclusion of a larger number of cycles from central databases such as the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART).

          Methods

          An electronic literature search was conducted through the Cochrane, Medline and Embase libraries. Data extraction for each outcome measure was pooled and expressed as an odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Where clinical heterogeneity was evident, the random effects model was used to calculate the risk ratio and a fixed effects model was used for the remaining studies. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

          Results

          A total of 49 studies have been identified and included in this systematic review. Overweight and obese (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m 2) women have a statistically significant lower live birth rate (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.74–0.89, p < 0.00001) following Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) when comparisons are drawn to women with a normal BMI. An increase is also demonstrated in the number of miscarriages experienced by women with a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m 2 (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.28–1.81, p < 0.00001).

          Conclusion

          Although this review concludes that a clear impact of BMI on ART outcomes is demonstrated, there remains questions as to the pathophysiology underlying these differences. This review supports the government’s stringent criteria regarding BMI categories under which NHS funding is made available for ART, through a clear description of poor reproductive outcomes in women with a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m 2.

          Related collections

          Most cited references49

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Effect of Body Mass Index on pregnancy outcomes in nulliparous women delivering singleton babies

          Background The increasing prevalence of obesity in young women is a major public health concern. These trends have a major impact on pregnancy outcomes in these women, which have been documented by several researchers. In a population based cohort study, using routinely collected data, this paper examines the effect of increasing Body Mass Index (BMI) on pregnancy outcomes in nulliparous women delivering singleton babies. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study, based on all nulliparous women delivering singleton babies in Aberdeen between 1976 and 2005. Women were categorized into five groups – underweight (BMI 35 Kg/m2). Obstetric and perinatal outcomes were compared by univariate and multivariate analyses. Results In comparison with women of BMI 20 – 24.9, morbidly obese women faced the highest risk of pre-eclampsia {OR 7.2 (95% CI 4.7, 11.2)} and underweight women the lowest {OR 0.6 (95% CI 0.5, 0.7)}. Induced labour was highest in the morbidly obese {OR 1.8 (95% CI 1.3, 2.5)} and lowest in underweight women {OR 0.8 (95% CI 0.8, 0.9)}. Emergency Caesarean section rates were highest in the morbidly obese {OR 2.8 (95% CI 2.0, 3.9)}, and comparable in women with normal and low BMI. Obese women were more likely to have postpartum haemorrhage {OR 1.5 (95% CI 1.3, 1.7)} and preterm delivery ( 4,000 g was in the morbidly obese {OR 2.1 (95% CI 1.3, 3.2)} and the lowest in underweight women {OR 0.5 (95% CI 0.4, 0.6)}. Conclusion Increasing BMI is associated with increased incidence of pre-eclampsia, gestational hypertension, macrosomia, induction of labour and caesarean delivery; while underweight women had better pregnancy outcomes than women with normal BMI.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effect of body mass index on IVF treatment outcome: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

            There is conflicting evidence regarding the effect of raised body mass index (BMI) on the outcome of assisted reproductive technology. In particular, there is insufficient evidence to describe the effect of BMI on live birth rates. We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies to evaluate the effect of raised BMI on treatment outcome following IVF/ICSI treatment. Subgroup analysis on overweight and obese patients was performed. Literature searches were conducted on MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Web of Science from 1966 to 2010. Thirty-three studies including 47,967 treatment cycles were included. Results indicated that women who were overweight or obese (BMI ≥ 25) had significantly lower clinical pregnancy (RR=0.90, P<0.0001) and live birth rates (RR=0.84, P=0.0002) and significantly higher miscarriage rate (RR=1.31, P < 0.0001) compared to women with a BMI < 25 following treatment. A subgroup analysis of overweight women (BMI ≥ 25-29.9) revealed lower clinical pregnancy (RR=0.91, P=0.0003) and live birth rates (RR=0.91, P=0.01) and higher miscarriage rate (RR=1.24, P < 0.00001) compared to women with normal weight (BMI < 25). In conclusion, raised BMI is associated with adverse pregnancy outcome in women undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment, including lower live birth rates. This effect is present in overweight as well as obese women. Copyright © 2011 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Female obesity impairs in vitro fertilization outcome without affecting embryo quality.

              To compare embryo quality and reproductive outcome in our IVF program according to the women's body mass index (BMI). Retrospective study. University-affiliated infertility clinic, between January 2001 and April 2007. Women undergoing a total of 6,500 IVF-intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. Six thousand five hundred IVF-ICSI cycles were included and divided into four groups: lean ( or =30 kg/m(2); n = 419; 6.4%). Comparison of embryo quality and reproductive outcome (implantation, pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth rates) among BMI groups. No difference in insemination procedure, fertilization rate, day of ET, mean number of transferred and cryopreserved embryos, percentage of blastocyst transfers, or embryo quality on day 2 and 3 was found among groups. However, implantation, pregnancy, and live birth rates were poorer in obese women. In fact, pregnancy and live birth rates were reduced progressively with each unit of BMI (kilograms per square meter) with a significant odds ratio of 0.984 (95% confidence interval 0.972-0.997) and 0.981 (95% confidence interval 0.967-0.995), respectively. In addition, the cumulative pregnancy rate after four IVF cycles was reduced as BMI increased. Female obesity impairs IVF outcome, but embryo quality is not affected, pointing to an alteration in the uterine environment. Copyright 2010 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                prasannaraj@doctors.org.uk
                monica.mittal@nhs.net
                enda.mcveigh@obs-gyn.ox.ac.uk
                lee.lim@ouh.nhs.net
                Journal
                Reprod Health
                Reprod Health
                Reproductive Health
                BioMed Central (London )
                1742-4755
                27 February 2018
                27 February 2018
                2018
                : 15
                : 34
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2306 7492, GRID grid.8348.7, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, , John Radcliffe Hospital, ; Headley Way, Headington, Oxford, OX3 9DU UK
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2306 7492, GRID grid.8348.7, Nuffield Department of Women’s and Reproductive Health, University of Oxford, , Level 3, Women’s Centre, John Radcliffe Hospital, ; Oxford, OX3 9DU UK
                Article
                481
                10.1186/s12978-018-0481-z
                5830337
                29486787
                4c9ef3f7-5029-42ef-bf1b-f2f0d48ed3a6
                © The Author(s). 2018

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 1 May 2017
                : 18 February 2018
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                body mass index (bmi),assisted reproductive technology (art),overweight,obese

                Comments

                Comment on this article