Download PDF
Am J Perinatol 2019; 36(02): 205-211
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1667029
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

The Impact of Sperm and Egg Donation on the Risk of Pregnancy Complications

Michal Fishel Bartal
1   Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat Gan, Tel-Aviv, Israel
,
Baha M. Sibai
2   Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, McGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (UT Health), Houston, Texas
,
Yossi Bart
1   Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat Gan, Tel-Aviv, Israel
,
Avi Shina
1   Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat Gan, Tel-Aviv, Israel
,
Shali Mazaki-Tovi
1   Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat Gan, Tel-Aviv, Israel
,
Irit Schushan Eisen
3   Department of Neonatology, The Edmond and Lily Safra Children's Hospital, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Ramat Gan, Tel-Aviv, Israel
,
Israel Hendler
1   Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat Gan, Tel-Aviv, Israel
,
Micha Baum   *
1   Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat Gan, Tel-Aviv, Israel
,
Eyal Schiff   *
1   Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat Gan, Tel-Aviv, Israel
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

07 May 2018

07 June 2018

Publication Date:
21 July 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate obstetric outcomes in relation to the extent of donor sperm exposure with and without egg donation.

Materials and Methods This is a retrospective cohort study in a single tertiary care center. All women with a singleton pregnancy who conceived following sperm donation (SD) were included. Obstetrics and neonatal outcomes for pregnancies following single SD were compared with pregnancies following repeat SD from the same donor. In a secondary analysis, we compared pregnancy outcomes among three modes of assisted reproductive technology (intrauterine insemination [IUI-SD], in vitro fertilization [IVF-SD], and IVF sperm + egg donation [IVF-SD + ED]).

Results A total of 706 pregnant women met the inclusion criteria, 243 (34.4%) following the first SD and 463 (65.6%) following repeat donations. Compared with repeat SDs, single donation was not associated with higher rates of preterm delivery (12.8 vs. 12.7%, respectively, p = 0.99), preeclampsia (7.0 vs. 6.9%, p = 0.999), and intrauterine growth restriction (4.1 vs. 3.9%, p = 0.88). Pregnancies following IVF-SD + ED had increased risk for preeclampsia (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 3.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5–6.6), preterm labor (AOR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.1–5.4), and cesarean section (AOR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.0–4.3) compared with IUI-SD and IVF-SD.

Conclusion The extent of donor sperm exposure did not correlate with obstetrics complications, but double gamete donation was associated with increased risk for preeclampsia, preterm labor, and cesarean section.

Keywords

sperm donation - intrauterine insemination - prenatal - egg donation

Note

This study was presented as a poster presentation at the Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine 38th Annual meeting, January 27–Febuary 3, 2018, Dallas, TX.


* Micha Baum and Eyal Schiff are co-senior authors of the study.


 

  • References

  • 1 Olayemi O, Strobino D, Aimakhu C. , et al. Influence of duration of sexual cohabitation on the risk of hypertension in nulliparous parturients in Ibadan: a cohort study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2010; 50 (01) 40-44
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Einarsson JI, Sangi-Haghpeykar H, Gardner MO. Sperm exposure and development of preeclampsia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 188 (05) 1241-1243
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Verwoerd GR, Hall DR, Grové D, Maritz JS, Odendaal HJ. Primipaternity and duration of exposure to sperm antigens as risk factors for pre-eclampsia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2002; 78 (02) 121-126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Morcos RN, Bourguet CC, Gill PP. , et al. Pregnancy-induced hypertension and duration of sexual cohabitation. J Reprod Med 2000; 45 (03) 207-212
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Gratacós E, Torres PJ, Cararach V, Quinto L, Alonso PL, Fortuny A. Does the use of contraception reduce the risk of pregnancy-induced hypertension?. Hum Reprod 1996; 11 (10) 2138-2141
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Robillard PY, Hulsey TC. Association of pregnancy-induced-hypertension, pre-eclampsia, and eclampsia with duration of sexual cohabitation before conception. Lancet 1996; 347 (9001): 619
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Robillard PY, Hulsey TC, Périanin J, Janky E, Miri EH, Papiernik E. Association of pregnancy-induced hypertension with duration of sexual cohabitation before conception. Lancet 1994; 344 (8928): 973-975
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Ness RB, Markovic N, Harger G, Day R. Barrier methods, length of preconception intercourse, and preeclampsia. Hypertens Pregnancy 2004; 23 (03) 227-235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Mills JL, Klebanoff MA, Graubard BI, Carey JC, Berendes HW. Barrier contraceptive methods and preeclampsia. JAMA 1991; 265 (01) 70-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Adams DH, Clark RA, Davies MJ, de Lacey S. A meta-analysis of sperm donation offspring health outcomes. J DevOrig Health Dis 2017; 8 (01) 44-55
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Lansac J, Royere D. Follow-up studies of children born after frozen sperm donation. Hum Reprod Update 2001; 7 (01) 33-37
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Salha O, Sharma V, Dada T. , et al. The influence of donated gametes on the incidence of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Hum Reprod 1999; 14 (09) 2268-2273
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 González-Comadran M, Urresta Avila J, SaavedraTascón A. , et al. The impact of donor insemination on the risk of preeclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014; 182: 160-166
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Smith GN, Walker M, Tessier JL, Millar KG. Increased incidence of preeclampsia in women conceiving by intrauterine insemination with donor versus partner sperm for treatment of primary infertility. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 177 (02) 455-458
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Saito S, Shiozaki A, Nakashima A, Sakai M, Sasaki Y. The role of the immune system in preeclampsia. Mol Aspects Med 2007; 28 (02) 192-209
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Sibai B, Dekker G, Kupferminc M. Pre-eclampsia. Lancet 2005; 365 (9461): 785-799
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine; Practice Committee of Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Recommendations for gamete and embryo donation: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2013; 99 (01) 47-62
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine; Practice Committee of Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. 2008 Guidelines for gamete and embryo donation: a Practice Committee report. Fertil Steril 2008; 90 (5, Suppl): S30-S44
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Committee on Practice Bulletins—Obstetrics. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 190: gestational diabetes mellitus. Obstet Gynecol 2018; 131 (02) e49-e64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Dekker GA, Robillard PY, Hulsey TC. Immune maladaptation in the etiology of preeclampsia: a review of corroborative epidemiologic studies. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1998; 53 (06) 377-382
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Robillard PY, Hulsey TC, Alexander GR, Keenan A, de Caunes F, Papiernik E. Paternity patterns and risk of preeclampsia in the last pregnancy in multiparae. J Reprod Immunol 1993; 24 (01) 1-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Li DK, Wi S. Changing paternity and the risk of preeclampsia/eclampsia in the subsequent pregnancy. Am J Epidemiol 2000; 151 (01) 57-62
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Hoy J, Venn A, Halliday J, Kovacs G, Waalwyk K. Perinatal and obstetric outcomes of donor insemination using cryopreserved semen in Victoria, Australia. Hum Reprod 1999; 14 (07) 1760-1764
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Gerkowicz SA, Crawford SB, Hipp HS, Boulet SL, Kissin DM, Kawwass JF. Assisted reproductive technology with donor sperm: national trends and perinatal outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018; 218 (04) 421.e1-421.e10
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Lansac J, Thepot F, Mayaux MJ. , et al. Pregnancy outcome after artificial insemination or IVF with frozen semen donor: a collaborative study of the French CECOS Federation on 21,597 pregnancies. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1997; 74 (02) 223-228
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Robertson SA, Prins JR, Sharkey DJ, Moldenhauer LM. Seminal fluid and the generation of regulatory T cells for embryo implantation. Am J Reprod Immunol 2013; 69 (04) 315-330
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Tarlatzi TB, Imbert R, Alvaro Mercadal B. , et al. Does oocyte donation compared with autologous oocyte IVF pregnancies have a higher risk of preeclampsia?. Reprod Biomed Online 2017; 34 (01) 11-18
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Storgaard M, Loft A, Bergh C. , et al. Obstetric and neonatal complications in pregnancies conceived after oocyte donation-a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG 2017; 124 (04) 561-572
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Jeve YB, Potdar N, Opoku A, Khare M. Three-arm age-matched retrospective cohort study of obstetric outcomes of donor oocyte pregnancies. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2016; 133 (02) 156-158
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Malchau SS, Loft A, Larsen EC. , et al. Perinatal outcomes in 375 children born after oocyte donation: a Danish national cohort study. Fertil Steril 2013; 99 (06) 1637-1643
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Stoop D, Baumgarten M, Haentjens P. , et al. Obstetric outcome in donor oocyte pregnancies: a matched-pair analysis. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2012; 10: 42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Blázquez A, Vassena R, Rodríguez A, Figueras F, Vernaeve V. Characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing fertility treatment by double gamete donation. Hum Fertil (Camb) 2016; 19 (03) 180-185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Blázquez A, García D, Rodríguez A, Vassena R, Vernaeve V. Use of donor sperm in addition to oocyte donation after repeated implantation failure in normozoospermic patients does not improve live birth rates. Hum Reprod 2016; 31 (11) 2549-2553
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Preaubert L, Vincent-Rohfritsch A, Santulli P, Gayet V, Goffinet F, Le Ray C. Outcomes of pregnancies achieved by double gamete donation: a comparison with pregnancies obtained by oocyte donation alone. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2018; 222: 1-6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar