Abstract
Background
Whether artificial oocyte activation (ICSI-AOA) will increase the risk of birth defects remains controversial. Thus, we performed this study to evaluate the risk of birth defects and further compare the incidence of different birth defects types (chromosomal aberrations and non-chromosomal aberrations) in children conceived by ICSI-AOA and conventional intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in an enlarged sample size.
Method
A comprehensive review of the literatures comparing birth defects in children conceived by ICSI-AOA and conventional ICSI by October 2020 was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Libraries, Web of Science, and Chinese databases including China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Biology Medicine disc and Wan Fang. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.
Results
Five studies were included in the final analysis. Compared with conventional ICSI, ICSI-AOA did not increase the birth defects rate (RR = 1.27, 95%CI 0.70–2.28) of children. Furthermore, in a subgroup analysis, birth defects were classified into two types (chromosomal aberrations and non-chromosomal aberrations) in four studies and no statistical difference were revealed.
Conclusion
Our analysis indicates that ICSI-AOA represents no significant difference in the prevalence of major birth defects or types of birth defects (chromosomal aberrations and non-chromosomal aberrations) comparing with conventional ICSI. This conclusion may provide clinicians evidence-based support in patient counseling and instruction of the application and safety concern about ICSI-AOA.
Artificial oocyte activation (AOA) treatment offers a new option in previous unsuccessful cases due to poor fertilization history; a paired cohort study
