To compare the perinatal outcome of singleton siblings conceived differently. National population-based registry study. Denmark, from 1994 to 2008. Pairs of siblings (13,692 pairs; n = 27,384 children) conceived after IVF, intracytoplasmatic sperm injection (ICSI), frozen embryo replacement (FER), or spontaneous conception subcategorized into five groups according to succession: [1] IVF-ICSI vs. spontaneous conception (n = 7,758), [2] IVF-ICSI vs. FER (n = 716), [3] FER vs. FER (n = 34), [4] IVF-ICSI vs. IVF-ICSI (n = 2,876), and [5] spontaneous conception vs. spontaneous conception (n = 16,000). Observations were obtained from national registries. Birth weight, gestational age, low birth weight (<2,500 g), preterm birth (<37 weeks' gestation) and perinatal deaths. Mean birth weight was 65 g (95% confidence interval [CI], 41-89] lower in all assisted reproductive technology children compared with their spontaneously conceived siblings. FER children were 167 g (95% CI, 90-244] heavier than siblings born after replacement of fresh embryos. The difference in birth weight between firstborn and second born sibling depended on order of conception method. Higher risk of low birth weight with (odds ratio [OR], 1.4; 95%CI, 1.1-1.7] and preterm birth (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6] was observed in IVF/ICSI compared with spontaneous conception. When differentiating between order and mode of conception, it seems that assisted reproductive technology plays a role in mean birth weight and risk of low birth weight and preterm birth. Birth weight was higher in siblings born after FER compared with fresh embryos replacement.
Liao M et al., 2024·American journal of obstetrics and gynecology
The global trend of delaying childbearing has led to an increasing number of couples seeking in vitro fertilization. The adverse effects of advanced maternal age on pregnancy and perinatal outcomes are well documented, regardless of the conception method. In addition, advanced paternal age may contribute to poor reproductive potential because of high levels of sperm DNA fragmentation. However, it remains challenging to guide older men regarding the effect of paternal age on pregnancy and birth outcomes in the field of assisted reproduction. This study aimed to investigate the association of paternal age with live birth and perinatal outcomes following in vitro fertilization-frozen embryo transfer. A retrospective study was performed at a university-affiliated fertility center, involving women who were younger than 36 years and had undergone frozen embryo transfer from January 2011 to June 2021. Subjects were categorized into 6 groups based on paternal age: <25, 25 to 29, 30 to 34, 35 to 39, 40 to 44, and ≥45 years. A generalized estimating equation logistic regression model was used to account for the clustered nature of data and to adjust for confounders. Paternal age between 25 and 29 years served as the reference group in the logistic regression models. A total of 56,113 cycles who met the inclusion criteria were included in the final analysis. On unadjusted analyses, the reproductive outcome parameters showed a considerable decline with increasing male age. The live birth rate decreased from 47.9% for men aged 25 to 29 years to 40.3% among men aged ≥40 years. Similarly, the clinical pregnancy rate decreased from 54.4% in the reference group to 47.8% in the ≥40 years age group. Conversely, the miscarriage rate increased as male age increased, from 10.2% among men aged 25 to 29 years to 13.5% among men aged ≥45 years. However, the differences in the reproductive outcomes mentioned above were no longer significant in the multivariable models. Compared with the younger controls, advanced paternal age was not associated with a lower chance of live birth (males aged 40-44 years: adjusted odds ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.85-1.04; males aged ≥45 years: adjusted odds ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.10). In addition, the rates of clinical pregnancy (males aged 40-44 years: adjusted odds ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.85-1.05; males aged ≥45 years: adjusted odds ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.12) and miscarriage (males aged 40-44 years: adjusted odds ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.85-1.31; males aged ≥45 years: adjusted odds ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.50) were comparable between the reference and advanced paternal age groups. Furthermore, men in the youngest age group (<25 years) did not have worse pregnancy outcomes than those in the reference group. Regarding perinatal outcomes, there was no difference among the study cohorts in terms of preterm birth, low birthweight, macrosomia, small for gestational age, and large for gestational age, both in the unadjusted and confounder-adjusted models. This study did not demonstrate a significant association between paternal age and live birth and perinatal outcomes after in vitro fertilization-frozen embryo transfer when the female partners were younger than 36 years. With the global trend toward delaying childbirth, our findings provide useful information for counseling patients that increasing paternal age may not adversely affect pregnancy and perinatal outcomes in assisted reproduction.
Boyle PC et al., 2018·Front Med (Lausanne)·
Open Access
To determine the live birth rate for patients who chose to undergo treatment with Restorative Reproductive Medicine (RRM) after previous IVF (includes ICSI). To look at birth outcomes with RRM after IVF, particularly rates of twin and higher order pregnancies, premature birth, low birth weight, and potential cost savings achieved with RRM. Two outpatient clinics in Ireland providing advanced RRM treatment of infertility. All patients presenting between January 2004 and January 2010, with a history of infertility and previous IVF treatment were included if they proceeded beyond the initial consultation and began treatment. Main outcome is live birth per couple calculated using life table analysis. 403 patients met the study criteria, among which 74 had a subsequent live birth. These women had significant negative predictive characteristics for healthy live birth including: advanced reproductive age (average 37.2 years), an average of 5.8 years of infertility with 2.1 (range 1-9) previous IVF attempts, with only 5% having previously had a live birth from IVF. Despite these undesirable prognostic indicators, the overall RRM live birth rate was 32.1% (crude 18.4%). Women aged 35-38 had a live birth rate of 37.5% (crude 23.6%) and older women over 40 had a live birth rate of 27.4% (crude 16.0%). The average birth weight was 3374g (7lb 7oz) with 92% being born at 37+ weeks and no very low birth weight babies. There was only one twin pregnancy in the study population; the potential health care savings for avoidable multiple pregnancies in these patients was estimated at £205 672 (USD$284 915). Patients who have already tried IVF can achieve comparable live birth outcomes with RRM compared to another cycle of IVF. RRM has a low risk of twin or multiple births, and very good neonatal outcomes with a potential cost savings to the health care system.
Ibrahim Y et al., 2017·Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics·
Open Access
The purpose of the study was to examine the association between serum progesterone levels on the day of hCG administration and birth weight among singleton live births after fresh embryo transfer. This study was conducted as a retrospective cohort database analysis on patients who underwent IVF treatment cycles from January 2004 to April 2012. The study was performed at a University affiliated private infertility practice. All cycles that had achieved a singleton live birth after fresh embryo transfer and for which progesterone was measured on the day of hCG administration were examined. Generalized linear models were used to calculate mean birth weight and z-scores. We analyzed 817 fresh IVF embryo transfers in which birth weight, gestational age, and progesterone (ng/mL) level on day of hCG administration were documented. While there was a decrease in birth weight as progesterone quartile [≤0.54; >0.54 to ≤0.81; >0.81 to ≤1.17; >1.17 ng/mL] increased, the difference in mean birth weights among the four quartiles was not statistically significant (p = 0.11) after adjusting for maternal age and peak estradiol levels. When dichotomizing based on a serum progesterone considered clinically elevated, cycles with progesterone >2.0 ng/mL had a significantly lower mean singleton birth weight (2860 g (95% CI 2642 g, 3079 g)) compared to cycles with progesterone ≤2.0 ng/mL (3167 g (95% CI 3122 g, 3211 g) p = 0.007)) after adjusting for maternal age and estradiol. We demonstrated that caution should be exercised when performing fresh embryo transfers with elevated progesterone levels and in particular with levels (>2.0 ng/mL) as this may lead to lower birth weight.
Restorative Care and Assisted Reproduction · Outcome Comparisons
Restorative Reproductive Medicine (RRM) aims to restore fertility by diagnosing and treating the underlying causes of infertility. RRM is frequently promoted as an alternative to assisted reproductive technology (ART), despite uncertainty regarding its comparative effectiveness and safety. Where delayed childbearing and infertility are becoming more common, reliance on optimization of natural physiology alone may delay effective treatment and compromise reproductive outcomes. A systematic review of the current evidence comparing RRM to either ART or unassisted conception is, therefore, essential to inform clinical practice, guideline development, and shared decision-making for patients experiencing infertility. To assess the effectiveness and safety of RRM approaches, evaluated as a whole, rather than as individual components, compared with ART and medically unassisted conception in couples experiencing infertility. A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and the Journal of Restorative Reproductive Medicine from inception to 28 November 2025. We included randomized control trials (RCTs) or nonrandomized comparative studies evaluating reproductive and safety outcomes of RRM as a unified treatment, compared with either ART or expectant management (attempted medically unassisted conception). Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. We retrieved 724 records, of which 16 studies underwent full-text review. No RCTs or comparative observational studies were identified. All 16 full-text studies were excluded for an ineligible study design (no control group); most were cohort studies in which all participants underwent RRM. Ten studies reported reproductive outcomes; nine of these made claims regarding the benefits or effectiveness of RRM. None of these claims were supported by the study designs used, as the lack of a comparison group precludes reliable estimation of treatment effects. Consequently, these studies cannot provide valid estimates of RRM success rates, nor permit any meaningful inference about its effectiveness relative to unassisted conception or ART. Large-scale RCTs or prospective cohort studies reporting effectiveness and safety outcomes are required to inform evidence-based fertility guidelines. There are no comparative studies to support reliable estimates of the safety and effectiveness of RRM compared with ART or medically unassisted conception for couples experiencing infertility.