Effect of intravenous anesthetic drugs on fertilization rate in oocyte retrieval.
Fertilization rate
Intravenous anesthetic drugs
Oocyte retrieval
Propensity score matching (PSM)
Journal
BMC anesthesiology
ISSN: 1471-2253
Titre abrégé: BMC Anesthesiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968535
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Apr 2024
29 Apr 2024
Historique:
received:
12
12
2023
accepted:
15
04
2024
medline:
30
4
2024
pubmed:
30
4
2024
entrez:
29
4
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of intravenous anesthetic drugs on fertilization rate in subjects receiving oocyte retrieval by assisted reproduction technology (ART). A retrospective cohort study was designed. The clinical information of subjects who received oocyte retrieval procedure was collected. The subjects were divided into two groups based on the type of anesthesia used: the no-anesthesia group and the intravenous anesthesia group. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed and multiple linear regression analyses were conducted. Fertilization rate was compared between the two groups before and after PSM. A total of 765 subjects were divided into two groups: the no-anesthesia group (n = 482) and the intravenous anesthesia group (n = 283). According to propensity scores, 258 pairs of subjects were well matched, and the baseline data between the two groups were not significantly different (P > 0.05). Fertilization rate was 77% in the intravenous anesthesia group, and 76% in the no-anesthesia group, without significant between-group difference (P = 0.685). Before matching, Poisson regression analysis showed no effect of intravenous anesthetic drugs on fertilization rate (RR = 0.859, 95%CI: 0.59 to 1.25, P = 0.422). After matching, no difference was found either (RR = 0.935, 95%CI: 0.67 to 1.29, P = 0.618). Intravenous anesthetic drugs may exert no effects on fertilization rate in subjects receiving ART.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of intravenous anesthetic drugs on fertilization rate in subjects receiving oocyte retrieval by assisted reproduction technology (ART).
METHODS
METHODS
A retrospective cohort study was designed. The clinical information of subjects who received oocyte retrieval procedure was collected. The subjects were divided into two groups based on the type of anesthesia used: the no-anesthesia group and the intravenous anesthesia group. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed and multiple linear regression analyses were conducted. Fertilization rate was compared between the two groups before and after PSM.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 765 subjects were divided into two groups: the no-anesthesia group (n = 482) and the intravenous anesthesia group (n = 283). According to propensity scores, 258 pairs of subjects were well matched, and the baseline data between the two groups were not significantly different (P > 0.05). Fertilization rate was 77% in the intravenous anesthesia group, and 76% in the no-anesthesia group, without significant between-group difference (P = 0.685). Before matching, Poisson regression analysis showed no effect of intravenous anesthetic drugs on fertilization rate (RR = 0.859, 95%CI: 0.59 to 1.25, P = 0.422). After matching, no difference was found either (RR = 0.935, 95%CI: 0.67 to 1.29, P = 0.618).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Intravenous anesthetic drugs may exert no effects on fertilization rate in subjects receiving ART.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38684945
doi: 10.1186/s12871-024-02542-5
pii: 10.1186/s12871-024-02542-5
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anesthetics, Intravenous
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
163Subventions
Organisme : National Natural Science Foundation of China
ID : 82101291
Organisme : Nantong Municipal Science and Technology Bureau
ID : JC12022003
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Buisman ETIA, Roest I, Van der Steeg JW, et al. Pain scores during oocyte retrieval for IVF/ICSI: a retrospective cohort study comparing three different analgesia protocols. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2022;51:102394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogoh.2022.102394 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jogoh.2022.102394
pubmed: 35487403
Rolland L, Perrin J, Villes V, et al. IVF oocyte retrieval: prospective evaluation of the type of anesthesia on live birth rate, pain, and patient satisfaction. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017;34:1523–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-017-1002-7 .
doi: 10.1007/s10815-017-1002-7
pubmed: 28755151
pmcid: 5699983
Janssenswillen C, Christiaens F, Camu F, et al. The effect of propofol on parthenogenetic activation, in vitro fertilization and early development of mouse oocytes. Fertil Steril. 1997;67:769–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(97)81381-7 .
doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(97)81381-7
pubmed: 9093209
Tatone C, Francione A, Marinangeli F, et al. An evaluation of propofol toxicity on mouse oocytes and preimplantation embryos. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:430–5. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/13.2.430 .
doi: 10.1093/humrep/13.2.430
pubmed: 9557852
Petrini A, Pereira N, Spandorfer S. The effect of propofol dosage during oocyte retrieval on in vitro fertilization outcomes. FERTIL STERIL. 2016;106:e345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.07.977 .
doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.07.977
Scaravelli G, Zacà C, Levi Setti PE, et al. Fertilization rate as a novel indicator for cumulative live birth rate: a multicenter retrospective cohort study of 9,394 complete in vitro fertilization cycles. Fertil Steril. 2021;116:766–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.04.006 .
doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.04.006
pubmed: 33972085
Rosen MP, Shen S, Rinaudo PF, et al. Fertilization rate is an independent predictor of implantation rate. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1328–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.05.024 .
doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.05.024
pubmed: 19560757
Rehman R, Fatima SS, Hussain M, et al. Effect of endometrial thickness on pregnancy outcome after intracytoplasmic sperm injection. J Pak Med Assoc. 2015;65:448–51.
pubmed: 26028374
ESHRE Special Interest Group of Embryology; Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine. The Vienna consensus: report of an expert meeting on the development of art laboratory performance indicators. Hum Reprod Open. 2017;2017:hox011. Published 2017 Aug 4. https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hox011 .
Boney O, Bell M, Bell N, et al. Identifying research priorities in anaesthesia and perioperative care: final report of the joint National Institute of Academic Anaesthesia/James Lind Alliance Research Priority Setting Partnership. BMJ Open. 2015;5:e010006. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010006 . Published 2015 Dec 16.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010006
pubmed: 26674506
pmcid: 4691782
Wilder RT, Flick RP, Sprung J, et al. Early exposure to anesthesia and learning disabilities in a population-based birth cohort. Anesthesiology. 2009;110:796–804. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.anes.0000344728.34332.5d .
doi: 10.1097/01.anes.0000344728.34332.5d
pubmed: 19293700
Jevtovic-Todorovic V, Hartman R, Izumi Y, et al. Early exposure to common anesthetic agents causes widespread neurodegeneration in the developing rat brain and persistent learning deficits. J Neurosci. 2003;23:876–82. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.23-03-00876.2003 .
doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.23-03-00876.2003
pubmed: 12574416
pmcid: 6741934
Slikker W, Zou X, Hotchkiss CE, et al. Ketamine-induced neuronal cell death in the perinatal rhesus monkey. Toxicol Sci. 2007;98:145–58. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfm084 .
doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfm084
pubmed: 17426105
Ngamprasertwong P, Dong M, Niu J, et al. Propofol Pharmacokinetics and Estimation of fetal propofol exposure during mid-gestational fetal surgery: a maternal-fetal Sheep Model. PLoS ONE. 2016;11:e0146563. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146563 . Published 2016 Jan 11.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0146563
pubmed: 26752560
pmcid: 4713870
Hansen TG, Pedersen JK, Henneberg SW, et al. Academic performance in adolescence after inguinal hernia repair in infancy: a nationwide cohort study. Anesthesiology. 2011;114:1076–85. https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0b013e31820e77a0 .
doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31820e77a0
pubmed: 21368654
Andropoulos DB. Effect of Anesthesia on the developing brain: infant and Fetus. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2018;43:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1159/000475928 .
doi: 10.1159/000475928
pubmed: 28586779
Hu L, Pan J, Zhang S, et al. Propofol in combination with remifentanil for cesarean section: placental transfer and effect on mothers and newborns at different induction to delivery intervals. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;56:521–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjog.2016.09.010 .
doi: 10.1016/j.tjog.2016.09.010
pubmed: 28805611
Vlahos NF, Giannakikou I, Vlachos A, et al. Analgesia and anesthesia for assisted reproductive technologies. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2009;105:201–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.01.017 .
doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.01.017
pubmed: 19249049
Kim WO, Kil HK, Koh SO, et al. Effects of general and locoregional anesthesia on reproductive outcome for in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis. J Korean Med Sci. 2000;15:68–72. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2000.15.1.68 .
doi: 10.3346/jkms.2000.15.1.68
pubmed: 10719812
pmcid: 3054583
Gejervall AL, Stener-Victorin E, Cerne A, et al. Pain aspects in oocyte aspiration for IVF. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;14:184–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60786-9 .
doi: 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60786-9
pubmed: 17298721
Colagiuri B, Zachariae R. Patient expectancy and post-chemotherapy nausea: a meta-analysis. Ann Behav Med. 2010;40:3–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-010-9186-4 .
doi: 10.1007/s12160-010-9186-4
pubmed: 20387022
Frederiksen Y, Mehlsen MY, Matthiesen SM, et al. Predictors of pain during oocyte retrieval. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2017;38:21–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/0167482X.2016.1235558 .
doi: 10.1080/0167482X.2016.1235558
pubmed: 27670651