A systematic review and meta-analysis on the association between ICSI and chromosome abnormalities.

ICSI IVF/ICSI outcome assisted reproduction birth defects chromosomal disorders chromosome aberrations chromosome abnormalities chromosome anomalies congenital anomalies

Journal

Human reproduction update
ISSN: 1460-2369
Titre abrégé: Hum Reprod Update
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9507614

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
20 08 2021
Historique:
received: 30 06 2020
revised: 22 01 2021
pubmed: 7 5 2021
medline: 3 3 2022
entrez: 6 5 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

In the decade following the introduction of ICSI, a higher prevalence of de novo chromosome abnormalities, in particular sex chromosome and autosomal structural abnormalities, as well as inherited abnormalities was described in children conceived by ICSI compared to both naturally conceived (NC) children and children conceived by standard IVF. The explanation for the observed increase in prevalence is not clear and has been suggested to reflect parental factors (e.g. age or sperm quality) or to be a result of the ICSI procedure itself. Over the years, the procedure, as well as the patient group, and indications for ICSI treatment have changed. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the prevalence of chromosome abnormalities in ICSI pregnancies and children and to examine any potentially increased risk compared to standard IVF and NC. Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Libraries and Web of Science up to October 2020 were searched. Primary outcome measures were overall chromosome abnormalities and de novo abnormalities (including sex chromosome abnormalities and autosomal abnormalities). The secondary outcome was inherited abnormalities. We followed the PRISMA guidelines and relevant meta-analyses were performed. The search included 4648 articles, out of which 27 met the inclusion criteria, and 19 were included in quantitative synthesis (meta-analyses). The prevalence of chromosome abnormalities varied considerably between studies, possibly explained by large differences in sample size and patient demographics. Only five studies were eligible for pooled analyses on adjusted data. All studies had a critical risk of bias. Results from pooled adjusted data showed no evidence of an increased risk of overall chromosome abnormalities when comparing ICSI to either standard IVF (aOR 0.75 (95% CI 0.41-1.38)) or NC (aOR 1.29 (95% CI 0.69-2.43)). In contrast, meta-analyses on unadjusted data showed an increased risk of overall chromosome abnormalities in ICSI compared to both standard IVF (OR 1.42 (95% CI 1.09-1.85)) and NC (OR 2.46 (95% CI 1.52-3.99)) and an increased risk of de novo abnormalities in ICSI compared to NC (OR 2.62 (95% CI 2.07-3.31)). Yet, based on a very low certainty of evidence, the conclusion remains, that no indication of an increased risk of chromosome abnormalities in ICSI offspring could be found. If an increased risk of chromosome abnormalities in selected ICSI offspring should exist, the absolute risk continues to be small. This review provides an extensive overview of the existing evidence on the relationship between ICSI and chromosome abnormalities in the offspring. We highlight the need for well-designed large, prospective, controlled studies with systematic cytogenetic testing. Existing data are limited and, in many cases, marred by critical levels of bias.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
In the decade following the introduction of ICSI, a higher prevalence of de novo chromosome abnormalities, in particular sex chromosome and autosomal structural abnormalities, as well as inherited abnormalities was described in children conceived by ICSI compared to both naturally conceived (NC) children and children conceived by standard IVF. The explanation for the observed increase in prevalence is not clear and has been suggested to reflect parental factors (e.g. age or sperm quality) or to be a result of the ICSI procedure itself. Over the years, the procedure, as well as the patient group, and indications for ICSI treatment have changed.
OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE
The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the prevalence of chromosome abnormalities in ICSI pregnancies and children and to examine any potentially increased risk compared to standard IVF and NC.
SEARCH METHODS
Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Libraries and Web of Science up to October 2020 were searched. Primary outcome measures were overall chromosome abnormalities and de novo abnormalities (including sex chromosome abnormalities and autosomal abnormalities). The secondary outcome was inherited abnormalities. We followed the PRISMA guidelines and relevant meta-analyses were performed.
OUTCOMES
The search included 4648 articles, out of which 27 met the inclusion criteria, and 19 were included in quantitative synthesis (meta-analyses). The prevalence of chromosome abnormalities varied considerably between studies, possibly explained by large differences in sample size and patient demographics. Only five studies were eligible for pooled analyses on adjusted data. All studies had a critical risk of bias. Results from pooled adjusted data showed no evidence of an increased risk of overall chromosome abnormalities when comparing ICSI to either standard IVF (aOR 0.75 (95% CI 0.41-1.38)) or NC (aOR 1.29 (95% CI 0.69-2.43)). In contrast, meta-analyses on unadjusted data showed an increased risk of overall chromosome abnormalities in ICSI compared to both standard IVF (OR 1.42 (95% CI 1.09-1.85)) and NC (OR 2.46 (95% CI 1.52-3.99)) and an increased risk of de novo abnormalities in ICSI compared to NC (OR 2.62 (95% CI 2.07-3.31)). Yet, based on a very low certainty of evidence, the conclusion remains, that no indication of an increased risk of chromosome abnormalities in ICSI offspring could be found. If an increased risk of chromosome abnormalities in selected ICSI offspring should exist, the absolute risk continues to be small.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS
This review provides an extensive overview of the existing evidence on the relationship between ICSI and chromosome abnormalities in the offspring. We highlight the need for well-designed large, prospective, controlled studies with systematic cytogenetic testing. Existing data are limited and, in many cases, marred by critical levels of bias.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33956940
pii: 6270964
doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmab005
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Meta-Analysis Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

801-847

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Auteurs

Sine Berntsen (S)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The Fertility Clinic, Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Hvidovre, Denmark.

Hannele Laivuori (H)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tampere University Hospital, Elämänaukio, Tampere , Finland.
Faculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.
Medical and Clinical Genetics, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland, Helsinki Institute of Life Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.

Nina la Cour Freiesleben (N)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The Fertility Clinic, Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Hvidovre, Denmark.

Anne Loft (A)

Fertility Clinic, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Viveca Söderström-Anttila (V)

Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.

Nan B Oldereid (N)

Livio IVF-klinikken Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Liv Bente Romundstad (LB)

Spiren Fertility Clinic, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Centre for Fertility and Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.

Åsa Magnusson (Å)

Department of Gynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Max Petzold (M)

School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Christina Bergh (C)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, Reproductive Medicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Anja Pinborg (A)

Fertility Clinic, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH