COVID-19 infection after oocyte retrieval did not have detrimental effects on embryo implantation for frozen embryo transfer
COVID-19 infection after oocyte retrieval did not have detrimental effects on embryo implantation for frozen embryo transfer
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/jmv.29054
复制
发表时间：
2023-08-01
影响因子：
12.7
通讯作者：
Zhu，Qianqian
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Guo，Haiyan;Yin，Mingru;Zhu，Qianqian
在2019冠状病毒病（COVID-19）感染前冷冻胚胎准备进行更新生育治疗的患者无需担心COVID-19感染对卵母细胞质量和胚胎发育的潜在影响。然而，由于担心COVID-19感染对子宫内膜容受性和胚胎植入的不利影响，许多妇女仍然不愿意接受冷冻胚胎移植（FET）。目的是探讨取卵后COVID-19感染是否与接受FET的中国女性队列中不良妊娠结局风险增加相关。在300名接受FET的不孕妇女中进行了一项回顾性队列研究，这些妇女在COVID-19感染前冷冻了胚胎。女性被分为非感染组、FET前感染组和FET后感染组。进行多变量logistic回归，以评估COVID-19感染与临床妊娠结局（包括生化妊娠、临床妊娠和早期流产）的相关性。FET前感染组（29.14%）和FET后感染组（30.38%）的植入率均未显著低于非感染组（31.03%）。生化妊娠率（54.55%vs.52.27%，p = 0.750; 43.14%vs.52.27%，p = 0.209）三组间差异无统计学意义。临床妊娠率从非感染组的45.45%下降到感染组的38.27%，但无统计学意义。FET前感染组和FET后感染组的早期流产率与非感染组相似（3.64%vs.5.68%，p = 0.496; 6.86%vs.5.68%，p = 0.739）。校正潜在混杂因素后，FET前后感染患者的生化妊娠率、临床妊娠率和早期流产率与未感染患者相比无显著差异。这项研究表明，在取卵后感染COVID-19，感染前冷冻的胚胎不会对子宫内膜胚胎着床的容受性造成任何不利影响。
Patients preparing for their renewal fertility treatments with embryos frozen before coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) infection do not need to be concerned about the potential impact of COVID‐19 infection on oocyte quality and embryonic development. However, many women are still hesitant to undergo frozen embryo transfer (FET) due to fear of the detrimental effect of COVID‐19 infection on endometrial receptivity and embryo implantation. The objective was to explore whether COVID‐19 infection after oocyte retrieval is related to an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in a cohort of Chinese women undergoing FET. A retrospective cohort study was conducted among 300 infertile women undergoing FET with embryos frozen before COVID‐19 infection. Women were categorized into noninfection, infection before FET, or infection after FET groups. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess the association of COVID‐19 infection with clinical pregnancy outcomes, including biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, and early miscarriage. The implantation rates for patients in the group with infection before FET (29.14%) and the group with infection after FET (30.38%) were not significantly lower than those in the noninfection group (31.03%). The rate of biochemical pregnancy (54.55% vs. 52.27%,p= 0.750; 43.14% vs. 52.27%,p= 0.209) was not significantly different among the three groups. Although the clinical pregnancy rate showed a declining trend from 45.45% in the noninfection group to 38.27% in the group with infection after FET, this result was not statistically significant. The early miscarriage rate was similar in the group with infection before FET and the group with infection after FET compared with that in the noninfection group (3.64% vs. 5.68%,p= 0.496; 6.86% vs. 5.68%,p= 0.739). After adjusting for potential confounders, the biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, and early miscarriage rate were not significantly different for patients with infection before or after FET compared with patients without infection. This research indicated that COVID‐19 infection after oocyte retrieval with embryos frozen before infection did not cause any detrimental effect on endometrial receptivity for embryo implantation.