Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Do ART patients face higher C-section rates during their stage of delivery? A German monocenter experience

  • Gynecologic Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The mode of delivery depends on multiple parameters. After assisted reproductive technology (ART), previous studies have shown elevated C-section rates but few studies differentiated between elective and emergency operations and different protocols of cryopreservation. Because these studies did not use multiparity as exclusion criteria which reduces confounding with previous pregnancies, aim of this study is to compare mode of delivery of different techniques of ART using data of primiparae only [1, 2].

Methods

Retrospective analysis of patient data treated at the university hospital of Luebeck in a period of 12 years. Patients were divided in different groups according to their way of conception: spontaneous conception and conception after ART. The group of ART was further divided into: (a) a group of fresh transferred embryos (IVF/ICSI), (b) vitrification and (c) slow freezing. Exclusion criteria were defined as: multiparity, delivery <24. + 0 p.m., incomplete data and treatment outside university of Luebeck. Main parameter of this study was mode of delivery which was divided into spontaneous delivery or C-section. C-sections were further differentiated into elective or emergency C-sections.

Results

The group of fresh transferred embryos and slow freezing showed higher risks for elective and emergency C-sections (elective C-sections odds ratio 2.0, CI 95% 1.6–2.6, emergency C-sections odds ratio 1.4, CI 95% 1.1–1.9). Moreover, all groups of ART show enhanced risk of significant perinatal bleeding.

Conclusion

Patients after ART treatment suffer from higher C-section rates during their stage of delivery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Maheshwari A, Pandey S, Shetty A, Hamilton M, Bhattacharya S (2012) Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies resulting from the transfer of frozen thawed versus fresh embryos generated through in vitro fertilization treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 98(2):368–377

  2. Pandey S, Shetty A, Hamilton M, Bhattacharya S, Maheshwari A (2012) Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies resulting from IVF/ICSI: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 18(5):485–503

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bohlmann MK, Luedders DW, Beyer D, Kavallaris A, Baumann K, Diedrich K, Hornemann A (2010) Nulliparous patients with small stature delivering at term have an increased risk of secondary cesarean section. Arch Gynecol Obstet 282(3):241–244. doi:10.1007/s00404-009-1216-8 (Epub 2009 Aug 28)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dhont M, De Sutter P, Ruyssinck G, Martens G, Bekaert A (1999) Perinatal outcome of pregnancies after assisted reproduction: a case–control study. Obstet Gynecol 181:688–695

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Pelkonen S, Koivunen R, Gissler M, Nuojua-Huttunen S, Suikkari A, Hyden- Granskog C et al (2010) Perinatal outcome of children born after frozen and fresh embryo transfer: the finnish cohort study 1995–2006. Hum Reprod 25:914–923

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. McMahon CA, Ungerer JA, Beaurepaire J, Tennant C, Saunders D (1997) Anxiety during pregnancy and fetal attachment after in vitro fertilization conception. Hum Reprod 12:176–182

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sazonova A, Kllen K, Thurin-Kjellberg A, Wennerholm UB, Bergh C (2011) Factors affecting obstetric outcome of singletons born after IVF. Hum Reprod 26:2878–2886

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Healy DL, Breheny S, Halliday J, Jaques A, Rushford D, Garrett C et al (2010) Prevalence and risk factors for obstetric haemorrhage in 6730 singleton births after assisted reproductive technology in Victoria, Australia. Hum Reprod 25:265–274

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Schleswig- Holstein University, Campus Luebeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Luebeck, Germany

    Kay Neumann, Christoph Cirkel & Achim Rody

  2. Westpfalz-Klinikum GmbH, Hellmut-Hartert-Str. 1, 67655, Kaiserslautern, Germany

    Daniel A. Beyer

Authors
  1. Kay Neumann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christoph Cirkel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Achim Rody
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Daniel A. Beyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kay Neumann.

Ethics declarations

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflict of interest

There are no conflicts of interest for any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Neumann, K., Cirkel, C., Rody, A. et al. Do ART patients face higher C-section rates during their stage of delivery? A German monocenter experience. Arch Gynecol Obstet 295, 481–485 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-016-4252-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-016-4252-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation