Congenital anomalies and other perinatal outcomes in ICSI vs. naturally conceived pregnancies: a comparative study.
BACKGROUND
Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) procedures have become accepted worldwide and their effect on society is well-known. However, the full extent of the possible complications of these procedures on maternal and neonatal outcome is still unclear.


METHODS
This is a retrospective case controlled study from January 2003 to December 2007 which compared 253 women that had conceived using assisted reproduction (ICSI) and delivered 327 children at our center (study group) with a matched group of 349 women who naturally conceived and delivered 354 children at Abha General Hospital (control group) during the same period. The obstetrical and neonatal characteristics of the women and their children were assessed to determine any significant differences between the groups.


RESULTS
The number of gestations per pregnancy (1.34 +/- 0.57 vs. 1.01 +/- 0.12) and number of children born per woman (1.28 +/- 0.49 vs. 1.01 +/- 0.12) was significantly higher in the ICSI group (p < 0.001). In addition, the gestational age at delivery (37.23 +/- 2.68 vs. 38.56 +/- 1.89) was significantly shorter in the ICSI group (p < 0.001) and this led to an increased number of obstetrical interventions, as well as the incidence of cesarean deliveries. Examination of the new-born children revealed similar incidence of congenital anomalies in both groups.


CONCLUSIONS
ICSI conceived pregnancies were characterized by an increased number of gestations and live-born, and there was no increase in congenital malformations compared to naturally conceived pregnancies.
Al-Fifi
Suliman
S
Depatment of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Al-Binali
Ali
A
Al-Shahrani
Mesfer
M
Shafiq
Hajra
H
Bahar
Mohamad
M
Almushait
Mona
M
Sobandi
Lukanle
L
Eskandar
Mamdoh
M
D016022:Case-Control Studies; D000013:Congenital Abnormalities / Q000453:epidemiology* / Q000209:etiology; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007231:Infant, Newborn; D011247:Pregnancy; D011256:Pregnancy Outcome; D027724:Reproductive Techniques, Assisted / Q000009:adverse effects; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D020554:Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic / Q000009:adverse effects*
Reprod Biomed Online. 2007 Jul;15(1):38-44
17623533
Ir J Med Sci. 2008 Sep;177(3):233-41
18521653
BJOG. 2005 May;112(5):632-7
15842289
N Engl J Med. 2006 Mar 16;354(11):1139-46
16540614
Fertil Steril. 2006 Dec;86(6):1634-41
17074345
Hum Reprod. 2005 Feb;20(2):328-38
15567881
Lancet. 2008 Aug 30;372(9640):737-43
18674812
Hum Reprod. 2003 Nov;18(11):2478-84
14585905
Lancet. 1978 Aug 12;2(8085):366
79723
N Engl J Med. 2004 Dec 2;351(23):2392-402
15575055
Hum Reprod Update. 2007 Nov-Dec;13(6):515-26
17630396
Croat Med J. 2005 Oct;46(5):751-8
16158467
BJOG. 2007 Aug;114(8):977-83
17578474
Lancet. 1999 May 22;353(9166):1746-9
10347987
Fertil Steril. 2003 Mar;79(3):512-6
12620432
Fertil Steril. 2008 Oct;90(4):1187-90
18439602
N Engl J Med. 2002 Mar 7;346(10):725-30
11882727
Reprod Biomed Online. 2005 Aug;11(2):244-53
16168226
Fertil Steril. 2009 Jun;91(6):2426-31
18439598
Hum Reprod. 1998 Apr;13(4):781-2
9619521
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2008;87(9):888-92
18720030
Fertil Steril. 2001 Aug;76(2):249-53
11476768
Lancet. 1992 Jul 4;340(8810):17-8
1351601
Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Apr;89(4):594-9
9083319