logo
Medical news
of the North Caucasus
Scientific journal
Mass media registration certificate dated December 7, 2006.
Series ПИ #ФС 77-26521.
Federal service for surveillance over non-violation of the legislation in the sphere of mass communications and protection of cultural heritage.
ISSN 2073-8137
rus
русский
eng
english

Site search



Correspondence address
310 Mira Street, Stavropol, Russia, 355017

Tel
+7 8652 352524; +7 8652 353229.

Fax
+7 8652 352524.

E-mail
medvestnik@stgmu.ru

Basic principles for the management of pregnancy after assisted reproductive technologies

[Review]
Olga Vladimirovna Yakovleva; Tatyana Nikolaevna Glukhova; Irina Evgenievna Rogozhina;

The problem of complications of pregnancy after assisted reproductive technologies (ART) remains unresolved up to date. The paper is a review of data from multicenter randomized studies conducted in 2014–2018 and devoted to the management of pregnancy after assisted reproductive technologies (in vitro fertilization, intracytoplasmic sperm injection) and pregnancy management protocols (USA, Canada, Australia). The authors substantiated the expediency of thorough monitoring during pregnancy after ART, as well as pathogenic principles of management, emphasized the importance of adequate weight gain for pregnant women with multiple fetuses. For timely diagnosis of the preterm birth risk ultrasound transvaginal cervicometry at 18–24 weeks of gestation, surgical correction of cervical insufficiency up to 24 weeks of gestation, or the introduction of obstetric pessary are recommended. The expediency of hormonal support with progesterone preparations, as well as of prescribing low-dose aspirin preparations after ART within 12–16 weeks has been shown. Data on the principles of delivery after ART are provided.

Download

References:
1. Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, Okun N., Sierra S. Pregnancy outcomes after assisted human reproduction. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Can. 2014;36(1):64-83.
2. Orbach-Zinger S., Eidelman L. A., Lutsker A., Oron G., Fisch B., Ben-Haroush A. The effect of in vitro fertilization on coagulation parameters as measured by thromboelastogram. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2016;201:118-120.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.04.010
3. Vermey B. G., Buchanan A., Chambers G. M., Kolibianakis E. M., Bosdou J. [et al.]. Are singleton pregnancies after assisted reproduction technology (ART) associated with a higher risk of placental anomalies compared with non-ART singleton pregnancies? A systematic review and metaanalysis. BJOG. 2018;126:209-218. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.15227
4. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Perinatal risks associated with assisted reproductive technology. Committee Opinion No. 671. Obstet. Gynecol. 2016;128:61-68.
5. Feng C., Li W. J., He R. H., Sun X. W., Wang G., Wang L. Q. Impacts of different methods of conception on the perinatal outcome of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy in twin pregnancies. Sci. Rep. 2018;8(1):3985. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-22387-6
6. Henningsen A. A., Wennerholm U. B., Gissler M., Romundstad L. B., Nygren K. G. [et al.]. Risk of stillbirth and infant deaths after assisted reproductive technology: a nordic study from the CoNARTaS group. Hum. Reprod. 2014;29(5):1090-1096. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deu031
7. Sabban H., Zakhari A., Patenaude V., Tulandi T., Abenhaim H. A. Arch Gynecol Obstetrical and perinatal morbidity and mortality among in-vitro fertilization pregnancies: a population-based study. Obstet. 2017;296(1):107-113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-017-4379-8
8. World Health Organization. Use of multiple micronutrient powders for point-of-use fortification of foods consumed by pregnant women. 2016. Available at: http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/micronutrients/guidelines/mmpowders_pregnant_women/en/
9. Aziz M. M., Guirguis G., Maratto S., Benito C., Forman E. J. Is there an association between assisted reproductive technologies and time and complications of the third stage of labor? Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2016;293(6):1193-1196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-015-3943-3
10. Cromi A., Candeloro I., Marconi N., Casarin J., Serati M. [et al.]. Risk of peripartum hysterectomy in births after assisted reproductive technology. Fertil. Steril. 2016;106(3):623- 628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.05.005
11. Sennstrom M., Rova K., Hellgren M., Hjertberg R., Nord E. [et al.]. Thromboembolism and in vitro fertilization –a systematic review. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2017;96(9):1045-1052. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13147
12. National Guideline Clearinghouse. Guideline summary: eating disorders: recognition and treatment. 2017. Available at: https://www.guideline.gov.
13. NICE Guidance. Antenatal care for uncomplicated pregnancies. Clinical guideline. 2017. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg6214 . World Health Organization. WHO recommendations on antenatal care for a positive pregnancy experience.2016. Available at: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/250796/1/9789241549912-eng.pdf?ua=1 .
15. Hesketh K. R., Evenson K. R. Prevalence of U.S. pregnant women meeting 2015 ACOG physical activity guidelines. Am. J. Prevent. Med. 2016;51(3):87-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2016.05.023
16. Lutsiv O., Hulman A., Woolcott C., Beyene J., Giglia L. [et al.]. Examining the provisional guidelines for weight gain in twin pregnancies: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Pregn. Child. 2017;17:330. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1530-2
17. Nicklas J. M., Barbour L. A. Optimizing weight for maternal and infant health – tenable, or too late? Exp. Rev. Endocr. Metab. 2015;10(2):227-242. https://doi.org/10.1586/17446651.2014.991102
18. National Guideline Clearinghouse. Guideline summary: VA/DoD clinical practice guideline for the management of pregnancy. 2018. Available at: https://www.guideline.gov.
19. Russian Association of human reproduction. The use of estrogen in art programs. Scientific and practical recommendations. 2015. Available at: http://www.rahr.ru/d_pech_mat_metod/estrogen.pdf. Accessed November 1, 2018. (In Russ.).
20. NICE. Preterm labour and birth: final scope. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. 2013. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/14004/64413/64413.pdf.
21. UK NSC. Screening for preterm labour in asymptomatic, low-risk women. External review against programme appraisal criteria for the UK National Screening Committee. 2014. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/uk-national-screening-committeeuk-/Desktop/Preterm_labour_and_Bacterial_Vaginosis.pdf.
22. National Guideline Clearinghouse. Guideline summary: final recommendation statement: preeclampsia: screening. 2017. Available at: https://www.guideline.gov. 23. Arain N., Mirza W. A., Aslam M. Review-vitamin D and the prevention of preeclampsia: a systematic review. Pak. J. Pharm. Sci. 2015;28(3):1015-1021. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26004709 .
24. O’Gorman N., Wright D., Poon L.C., Rolnik D. L., Syngelaki A. [et al.] Accuracy of competing-risks model in screening for pre-eclampsia by maternal factors and biomarkers at 11–13 weeks’ gestation. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2017;49(6):751-755. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.17399
25. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Low-dose aspirin use during pregnancy. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 743. Obstet. Gynecol. 2018;132:44-52. Available at: https://www.acog.org/Clinical-Guidanceand-Publications/Committee-Opinions/Committeeon-Obstetric-Practice/Low-Dose-Aspirin-Use-DuringPregnancy.
26. Roberge S., Bujold E., Kypros H. N. Aspirin for the prevention of preterm and term preeclampsia: systematic review and metaanalysis. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.2018;218(3):287-293. Available at: https://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378(17)32326-8/fulltext
27. Dodd J. M., Dowswell T., Crowther C. A. Specialised antenatal clinics for women with a multiple pregnancy for improving maternal and infant outcomes. Cochr. Datab. Syst. Rev. 2015;11:CD005300. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005300.pub4
28. Shub A., Walker S. P. Planned early delivery versus expectant management for monoamniotic twins. Cochr. Datab. Syst. Rev. 2015;4:CD008820. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008820.pub2
29. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine. Practice parameter for the performance of obstetric ultrasound examinations. 2013. Available at: https://www.aium.org/resources/guidelines/obstetric.pdf.
30. Clinical practice guideline. Ultrasound for twin and multiple pregnancies. 2017. Available at: http://www.topalbertadoctors.org/download/2130/TwinMultiple%20Pregnancies.pdf?_20180712182054.
31. D’Antonio F., Khalil A., Bhide A., Thilaganathan B. Second trimester cervical length and spontaneous preterm birth in twin pregnancies. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.12641
32. Alberta reproductive health report working group. Pregnancies and births. 2011. Available at: https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/06456e95-348e-403f-8c04- 5eb79391d252/resource/4601364f-a9f1-40e3-9f39 e8920da0f149/download/reproductive-health-2011.pdf.
33. Woolcock J. G., Grivell R. M., Dodd J. M. Regimens of ultrasound surveillance for twin pregnancies for improving outcomes. Cochr. Datab. Syst. Rev. 2017;11:CD011371. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011371.pub2
34. Dodd J. M., Grivell R. M., Obrien C. M., Dowswell T., Deussen A. R. Prenatal administration of progestogens for preventing spontaneous preterm birth in women with a multiple pregnancy. Cochr. Datab. Syst. Rev. 2017;10:CD012024. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012024.pub2
35. Yamasmit W., Chaithongwongwatthana S., Tolosa J. E., Limpongsanurak S., Pereira L., Lumbiganon P. Prophylactic oral betamimetics for reducing preterm birth in women with a twin pregnancy. Cochr. Datab. Syst. Rev. 2015;12:CD004733. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004733.pub4
36. Fuchs F., Senat M. V. Multiple gestations and preterm birth. Semin. Fetal. Neonatal. Med. 2016;21(2):113-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.siny.2015.12.010
37. Degani N., Sikich N. Caesarean delivery rate review: an evidence-based analysis. Ontario Health Technol. Assessm. Ser. 2015;15(9):1-58. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4561764/#R11
38. Mylonas I., Friese K. Indications for and risks of elective cesarean section. Deutsch. Arz. Intern. 2015;112(29-30):489-495. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2015.0489
39. Cheong-See F., Schuit E., Arroyo-Manzano D., Khalil A., Barrett J. [et al.] Global Obstetrics Network Collaboration. Prospective risk of stillbirth and neonatal complications in twin pregnancies: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2016;6:354:4353. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4353
40. Dodd J. M., Deussen A. R., Grivell R. M., Crowther C. A. Elective birth at 37 weeks’ gestation for women with an uncomplicated twin pregnancy. Cochr. Datab. Syst. Rev. 2014;2:CD003582. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003582.pub2

Keywords: аssisted reproductive technologies, pregnancy complications, pregnancy management


Founders:
Stavropol State Medical Academy
Pyatigorsk State Research Institute of Balneotherapeutics
Pyatigorsk State Pharmaceutical Academy