Fetal neurosonography and infant neurobehavior following conception by assisted reproductive technology with fresh or frozen embryo transfer.
ART
IVF
cortical folding
fetal brain
in-vitro fertilization
mode of conception
neurodevelopment
neurosonography
prenatal imaging
Journal
Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology
ISSN: 1469-0705
Titre abrégé: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9108340
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2022
11 2022
Historique:
revised:
30
03
2022
received:
21
12
2021
accepted:
14
04
2022
pubmed:
26
4
2022
medline:
4
11
2022
entrez:
25
4
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We aimed to explore fetal cortical brain development by neurosonography in fetuses conceived by assisted reproductive technology (ART), including frozen and fresh embryo transfer (ET), compared with those conceived spontaneously (SC), and to investigate its association with infant neurobehavior at 12 months of age. This was a prospective cohort study of 210 singleton pregnancies, including 70 SC pregnancies, 70 conceived by in-vitro fertilization (IVF) following frozen ET and 70 conceived by IVF after fresh ET. Fetal neurosonography was performed at 32 ± 2 gestational weeks to assess cortical development. Sulci depths were measured offline and normalized by biparietal diameter (BPD). Ages and Stages Questionnaires (ASQ) were completed postnatally, at 12 ± 1 months of corrected age. Neurosonographic findings were adjusted by regression analysis for maternal age, ethnicity, parity, fetal sex and fetal-weight centile and gestational age at scan, and ASQ scores were adjusted for maternal age, ethnicity, parity, educational level and employment status, gestational age at birth, breastfeeding, infant sex and infant age at the ASQ evaluation. Overall, in comparison to the SC fetuses, fetuses conceived by ART showed statistically significant differences in cortical development, with reduced parieto-occipital sulci depth adjusted for BPD (mean ± SD: fresh ET, 12.5 ± 2.5 vs frozen ET, 13.4 ± 2.6 vs SC, 13.4 ± 2.6, P < 0.001), cingulate sulci depth adjusted for BPD (median (interquartile range (IQR)): fresh ET, 5.8 (4.2-7.4) vs frozen ET, 5.8 (4.1-7.5) vs SC, 6.5 (4.8-7.8), P = 0.001) and calcarine sulci depth adjusted for BPD (median (IQR): fresh ET, 13.5 (10.1-16.1) vs frozen ET, 14.5 (12.1-15.8) vs SC, 16.4 (14.3-17.9), P < 0.001), together with lower Sylvian fissure grading score. Changes in cortical development were more pronounced in the fresh ET than in the frozen ET group. ART infants showed lower ASQ scores as compared to SC infants, particularly in the fresh ET group (mean ± SD global ASQ Z-score: fresh ET, -0.3 ± 0.4 vs frozen ET, -0.2 ± 0.4 vs SC, 0 ± 0.4, P < 0.001). Fetuses conceived by ART show a distinctive pattern of cortical development and suboptimal infant neurodevelopment, with more pronounced changes in those conceived following fresh ET. These findings support the existence of in-utero brain reorganization associated with ART and warrant follow-up studies to assess its long-term persistence. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35468238
doi: 10.1002/uog.24920
pmc: PMC9828610
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
646-656Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Références
JAMA. 2013 Jul 3;310(1):75-84
pubmed: 23821091
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Aug;221(2):126.e1-126.e18
pubmed: 30910545
Epigenomics. 2018 Mar 1;10(3):321-333
pubmed: 29381081
Endocr Rev. 2014 Dec;35(6):961-91
pubmed: 25211453
BJOG. 2019 Jan;126(2):261-269
pubmed: 30276983
Theriogenology. 2007 Jan 1;67(1):73-80
pubmed: 17055564
Hum Reprod Update. 2019 Mar 1;25(2):137-158
pubmed: 30753453
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Dec;36(6):693-9
pubmed: 20503244
Neuropsychologia. 2003;41(8):919-31
pubmed: 12667528
PLoS One. 2019 May 23;14(5):e0217538
pubmed: 31120993
Exp Brain Res. 2021 Aug;239(8):2345-2355
pubmed: 34185100
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Dec;36(6):700-8
pubmed: 20521241
Early Hum Dev. 2019 Feb;129:38-44
pubmed: 30639464
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2019 Sep;40(9):1567-1574
pubmed: 31467239
Br J Psychol. 2019 May;110(2):372-380
pubmed: 29745430
Sci Rep. 2017 Apr 07;7:46207
pubmed: 28387368
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Jul;32(1):44-9
pubmed: 18570210
Neuron. 2008 Feb 7;57(3):463-73
pubmed: 18255038
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Apr;57(4):661-671
pubmed: 33734522
Int J Neurosci. 2020 Jun;130(6):533-540
pubmed: 31516045
Hum Reprod. 2015 Feb;30(2):454-65
pubmed: 25518976
Fertil Steril. 2013 Sep;100(3):844-53
pubmed: 23810272
Hum Reprod. 2017 Feb;32(2):447-456
pubmed: 28057876
Hum Reprod. 2021 Feb 18;36(3):596-604
pubmed: 33454773
Ups J Med Sci. 2020 May;125(2):152-157
pubmed: 32101068
Hum Reprod Open. 2021 Aug 05;2021(3):hoab026
pubmed: 34377841
Rev Neurol. 2014 Feb 24;58 Suppl 1:S3-16
pubmed: 25252664
Hum Reprod Update. 2008 May-Jun;14(3):219-31
pubmed: 18367619
BJOG. 2019 Jan;126(2):291-298
pubmed: 29673050
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020 Aug;37(8):1931-1938
pubmed: 32519010
Br Med J. 1973 Oct 6;4(5883):28-31
pubmed: 4755210
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2010 Jan;1184:68-86
pubmed: 20146691
Fertil Steril. 2005 Sep;84(3):605-10
pubmed: 16169392
Prenat Diagn. 2018 Apr;38(5):365-375
pubmed: 29458235
JAMA. 2013 Nov 27;310(20):2191-4
pubmed: 24141714
Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Feb;129(2):265-272
pubmed: 28079770
BJOG. 2005 Oct;112(10):1376-83
pubmed: 16167940
Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2011 May;15(3):247-53
pubmed: 21288748
Fertil Steril. 2010 Sep;94(4):1320-1327
pubmed: 19647236
Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Jun;135(6):e237-e260
pubmed: 32443079
BJOG. 2019 Jan;126(2):145-148
pubmed: 30120870
Hum Reprod Update. 2018 Jan 1;24(1):35-58
pubmed: 29155965
Cell. 2011 Jul 8;146(1):18-36
pubmed: 21729779
Diabetes. 1979 Dec;28(12):1039-57
pubmed: 510803
Hum Reprod Update. 2013 May-Jun;19(3):244-50
pubmed: 23449643
J Perinat Med. 2015 Jan;43(1):103-9
pubmed: 24846955
Fertil Steril. 2017 Nov;108(5):784-790
pubmed: 28974308
Behav Brain Res. 2016 Sep 15;311:255-266
pubmed: 27235714
Fertil Steril. 2000 Jun;73(6):1155-8
pubmed: 10856474
Transl Pediatr. 2021 Aug;10(8):2182-2196
pubmed: 34584890
Hum Reprod. 2010 Aug;25(8):2115-23
pubmed: 20554642
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2008 Jan;136(1):20-4
pubmed: 17287065
Fertil Steril. 2022 May;117(5):1026-1037
pubmed: 35216828
Hum Reprod. 2021 Mar 18;36(4):1083-1092
pubmed: 33416878
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Aug;209(2):126.e1-8
pubmed: 23583839
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Jul;58(1):42-47
pubmed: 33438307
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Jun;59(6):737-746
pubmed: 35015926
Hum Reprod. 2021 Sep 18;36(10):2697-2708
pubmed: 34323946
Hum Reprod. 2020 Oct 1;35(10):2336-2347
pubmed: 32866965
Brain. 2014 Jan;137(Pt 1):12-32
pubmed: 23869106
Hum Reprod. 2017 Jul 1;32(7):1489-1507
pubmed: 28472417
Fetal Diagn Ther. 2020 Jul 13;:1-7
pubmed: 32659781
Reprod Sci. 2016 Jun;23(6):785-94
pubmed: 26614264
Prog Brain Res. 2012;195:123-63
pubmed: 22230626
BMJ. 2011 Jul 26;343:d4473
pubmed: 21791498
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jun;53(6):715-723
pubmed: 31169958