Developmental outcomes of children born through ICSI versus conventional IVF (cIVF) in couples with non-male factor infertility.

STUDY QUESTION: In non-male factor infertile couples, are there any differences in the developmental outcomes between children born through ICSI and conventional IVF (cIVF)? SUMMARY ANSWER: In this preliminary study, ICSI and cIVF seem to have a comparable effect on developmental outcomes after 12 months in children born to non-male factor infertile couples. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: ICSI, an invasive technique, has raised concerns about potential developmental abnormalities in children. Limited data are available regarding the developmental outcomes of ICSI-conceived infants born to non-male factor infertile couples. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This prospective cohort study involved a follow-up of all children aged 12 months or older who were born from pregnancies resulting from either ICSI or cIVF as part of a previous randomized controlled trial (RCT) (NCT03428919). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: In the original RCT, 1064 women were randomly assigned to the ICSI or cIVF groups (532 women for each group). Follow-up was conducted with 155 couples (195 children) in the ICSI group and 141 couples (185 children) in the cIVF group. The Vietnamese version of the Ages & Stages Third Edition Questionnaires (ASQ-3) and the Development Red Flags questionnaires were completed by the participants. A total of 141 (90.1%) women (177 children) in the ICSI group and 113 (80.1%) women (145 children) in the cIVF group returned fully completed questionnaires. The primary outcomes were the developmental outcomes based on responses to the ASQ-3 and the Red Flags questionnaire. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The mean age of children at follow-up was 19.5 ± 5.0 months in the ICSI group and 19.3 ± 5.5 months in the cIVF group. The mean height and weight of children in both groups were similar. The overall proportion of children with any abnormal ASQ-3 score did not differ significantly between the ICSI and cIVF groups (16.9% vs 13.1%, P = 0.34). The proportion of children with Red Flag signs was also comparable between the two groups (6.2% vs 9.2%, P = 0.36, ICSI vs cIVF, respectively). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Despite a reasonably high follow-up response rate, there is a potential risk of sampling bias, and overall, the number of children with developmental abnormalities was very small. The study relied solely on questionnaires as screening tools, rather than incorporating additional behavioral observations or physical developmental tests; this may have affected the statistical power and the significance of between-group comparisons. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The current findings contribute to the existing evidence and support the comparative safety of ICSI and cIVF regarding early childhood development. However, more extensive and prolonged follow-up data for these children are needed to draw definitive conclusions. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No external funding was received for this study, and no authors reported conflicting interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04866524 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Development of children born to women with twin pregnancies treated with cervical pessary or vaginal progesterone: Follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Preterm birth is the most common cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality. Women with twin pregnancies and a short cervical length are at high risk for preterm birth. Vaginal progesterone and cervical pessary have been proposed as potential strategies to reduce preterm birth in this high-risk population. Therefore, we aimed to compare the effectiveness of cervical pessary and vaginal progesterone in improving developmental outcomes of children born to women with twin pregnancies and mid-trimester short cervical length. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a follow-up study (NCT04295187) of all children at 24 months of age, born from women treated with cervical pessary or progesterone to prevent preterm birth in a randomized controlled trial (NCT02623881). We used a validated Vietnamese version of Ages & Stages Third Edition Questionnaires (ASQ-3) and a red flag questionnaire. In surviving children, we compared the mean ASQ-3 scores, abnormal ASQ-3 scores, the number of children with any abnormal ASQ-3 scores and red flag signs between the two groups. We reported the composite outcome of perinatal death or survival with any abnormal ASQ-3 score in offspring. These outcomes were also calculated in a subgroup of women with a cervical length ≤28 mm (<25th percentile). RESULTS: In the original randomized controlled trial, we randomized 300 women to pessary or progesterone. After counting the number of perinatal deaths and lost to follow-up, 82.8% parents in the pessary group and 82.5% parents in progesterone group returned the questionnaire. The mean ASQ-3 scores of the five skills and red flag signs did not differ significantly between the two groups. However, the percentage of children having abnormal ASQ-3 scores in fine motor skills was significantly lower in the progesterone group (6.1% vs 1.3%, P = 0.01). There were no significant differences in the composite outcome of perinatal death or survival with any abnormal ASQ-3 score in unselected women and in those with cervical length ≤28 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical pessary and vaginal progesterone may have comparable effects on developmental outcomes in children at ≥24 months of age, born to women with twin pregnancies and short cervical length. However, this finding could be likely due to a lack of study power.