Entity

Time filter

Source Type

Montréal, Canada

Chaabane S.,University of Montreal | Monnier P.,University of Montreal | Monnier P.,McGill University | Bissonnette F.,OVO Fertility Clinic | And 4 more authors.
Birth Defects Research Part B - Developmental and Reproductive Toxicology | Year: 2016

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the risk of major congenital malformations (MCMs) associated with the use of ovarian stimulators alone, intrauterine insemination (IUI), and assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs). METHODS: We conducted a case–control analysis using a birth cohort, built with the linkage of data obtained by a self-administered questionnaire, medical, pharmaceutic, and birth databases. Cases were pregnancies with at least one live birth with an MCM. Controls were pregnancies that did not result in major or minor congenital malformations. Multiple logistic regression models were used to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Among the 5021 pregnancies identified, 825 were cases of MCM and 4196 were controls. Compared with spontaneous conception, the use of ART increased the risk of major urogenital malformations (adjusted OR, 3.11; 95% CI, 1.33–7.27). The use of IUI was associated with an increased risk of major musculoskeletal malformations (adjusted OR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.10–3.71). Among the 471 women who used fertility treatments for conception, the use of ART was associated with an increased risk of any MCM (adjusted OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.00–2.79) and urogenital malformations (adjusted OR, 7.18; 95% CI, 1.59–32.53) when compared with ovarian stimulators used alone. CONCLUSIONS: The use of ART and IUI was associated with an increased risk of major musculoskeletal and urogenital malformations. ART was associated with a higher risk of MCM compared to ovarian stimulators used alone. Even the adjustment, a contribution of the underlying subfertility problems cannot completely ruled out given the differences in the severity of subfertility. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Source


Zini A.,McGill University | Lefebvre J.,OVO Fertility Clinic | Kornitzer G.,OVO Fertility Clinic | Bissonnette F.,University of Montreal | And 3 more authors.
Journal of Reproductive Immunology | Year: 2011

Seminal antisperm antibodies (ASAs) have been associated with male infertility and a reduced probability of achieving a spontaneous pregnancy. However, the impact of ASAs on reproductive outcomes after assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) remains controversial. We sought to further examine the relationship between ASAs and reproductive outcomes after in vitro fertilization (IVF) or IVF with intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). We conducted a retrospective study of consecutive IVF and IVF/ICSI cycles where the male partner had had direct ASA testing in the six months preceding the ART cycle. We examined the relationship between semen parameters (sperm concentration, motility, strict morphology, ASA levels [by direct mixed agglutination reaction and expressed as the percentage of spermatozoa with IgG or IgA antibodies]) and reproductive outcomes (fertilization and clinical pregnancy rate) after IVF and IVF/ICSI. There was no significant relationship between direct ASA levels and reproductive outcomes after IVF and IVF/ICSI. Similarly, we found no significant relationships between sperm parameters (concentration, motility, strict morphology) and reproductive outcomes after IVF and IVF/ICSI. Clinical pregnancy rates were not significantly different in ASA-positive (>50% of sperm coated with ASAs) compared with ASA-negative samples (42% vs. 52% respectively, odds ratio: 1.45 (95% CI 0.63, 3.30, P>0.05). The data indicate that ASAs in semen are not associated with reproductive outcomes (fertilization and clinical pregnancy rate) after IVF or IVF/ICSI. © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. Source


Chaabane S.,University of Montreal | Monnier P.,University of Montreal | Monnier P.,McGill University | Bissonnette F.,OVO Fertility Clinic | And 3 more authors.
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology | Year: 2015

Objective We sought to quantify the risk of multiple births associated with the use of different modalities of medically assisted reproduction. Study Design We conducted a case-control study using a birth cohort from 2006 through 2009. This cohort was built with the linkage of data obtained by a self-administered questionnaire and medical, hospital, pharmaceutical, birth, and death databases in Quebec. Cases were pregnancies resulting in multiple live births (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision/International Statistical Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision codes). Each case was matched, on maternal age and year of delivery, with 3 singleton pregnancies (controls) randomly selected among all Quebec singleton pregnancies. Data on the use of different fertility treatments were collected by a self-administered questionnaire. Multiple logistic regression models, adjusted for body mass index, number of previous live births, ethnicity, family income, place of residence, marital status, subfertility, reduction of embryos, diabetes, metformin treatment, folic acid supplementation, and lifestyle factors, were used to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals (CIs). We evaluated the associations between each type of fertility treatment (ovarian stimulators used alone, intrauterine insemination [IUI] used with ovarian stimulation, and assisted reproductive technologies [ART]) and the risk of multiple births. Results A total of 1407 cases of multiple births and 3580 controls were analyzed. More than half of multiple births following medically assisted reproduction (53.6%) occurred among women having used ovarian stimulation with or without IUI. The use of ovarian stimulators alone and IUI with ovarian stimulation increase the risk of multiple births (adjusted OR, 4.5; 95% CI, 3.2-6.4; and adjusted OR, 9.32; 95% CI, 5.60-15.50, respectively) compared to spontaneous conception. The use of invasive ART was associated with a greatly increased risk of multiple births. Among only the 465 women who used medically assisted reproduction for conception, the use of IUI with ovarian stimulation was associated with an increased risk of multiple births (adjusted OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.12-3.49) when compared to ovarian stimulators used alone. Invasive ART were associated with an increased risk of multiple births (adjusted OR, 6.81; 95% CI, 3.72-12.49) when compared to ovarian stimulators used alone. Conclusion Although the risk of multiple births associated with invasive ART can be decreased by elective implementing of single embryo transfer, special attention should be paid to the greatly increased risk associated with ovarian stimulation used alone or with IUI. © 2015 Elsevier Inc. Source


Alrabeeah K.,McGill University | Witmer J.,OVO Fertility Clinic | Ruiz S.,OVO Fertility Clinic | Almalki A.,McGill University | And 2 more authors.
Andrology | Year: 2016

Summary: Microdissection testicular sperm extraction (micro-TESE) was developed to minimize the testicular injury associated with multiple open TESEs. We sought to evaluate a mini-incision micro-TESE in men with cryptozoospermia and non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA). We conducted a retrospective study of 26 consecutive men with NOA and cryptozoospermia who underwent a primary (first) micro-TESE between March 2015 and August 2015. Final assessment of sperm recovery (reported on the day of intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)) was recorded as (i) successful (available spermatozoa for ICSI) or (ii) unsuccessful (no spermatozoa for ICSI). The decision to perform a mini-incision micro-TESE (with limited unilateral micro-dissection) or standard/extensive (with unilateral or bilateral micro-dissection) was guided by the intra-operative identification of sperm recovery (≥5 spermatozoa) from the first testicle. Overall, sperm recovery was successful in 77% (20/26) of the men. In 37% of the men (8/26), the mini-incision micro-TESE was successful (positive sperm recovery). The remaining 18 men required a standard (extensive) microdissection: 61% (11/18) underwent a unilateral and 39% (7/18) a bilateral micro-TESE. We found that 90% (9/10) of the men with cryptozoospermia and 63% (10/16) of the men with NOA underwent a unilateral (mini or standard micro-TESE). The mini-incision micro-TESE allowed for successful sperm recovery in 60% (6/10) of the men with cryptozoospermia and 13% (2/16) of the men with NOA. The data demonstrate that a mini-incision micro-TESE together with rapid intra-operative assessment and identification of spermatozoa recovery can be useful in men undergoing microTESE, particularly, men with cryptozoospermia. © 2016 American Society of Andrology and European Academy of Andrology. Source


Alrabeeah K.,McGill University | Wachter A.,OVO Fertility Clinic | Phillips S.,OVO Fertility Clinic | Cohen B.,OVO Fertility Clinic | And 2 more authors.
Andrology | Year: 2015

Several studies support of the use of testicular rather than ejaculated spermatozoa for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in couples with virtual azoospermia or cryptozoospermia, although this approach remains controversial. We sought to evaluate sperm retrieval outcomes with microdissection testicular sperm extraction (micro-TESE) in men with cryptozoospermia. We conducted a retrospective study of 24 consecutive micro-TESEs in men with cryptozoospermia. We also evaluated the outcomes of seven consecutive TESAs (testicular sperm aspiration) in cryptozoospermic men during the same time period (January 2007 and September 2014). Micro-TESE and TESA were performed on the day prior to ICSI. Final assessment of sperm recovery (reported on the day of ICSI) was recorded as (i) successful (available spermatozoa for ICSI) or (ii) unsuccessful (no spermatozoa for ICSI). The decision to perform a unilateral or bilateral micro-TESE was guided by the intra-operative evaluation of sperm recovery from the first testicle. A unilateral procedure was performed in 87.5% (21/24) and 57% (4/7) of the micro-TESE and TESA cohorts, respectively. Sperm recovery was successful in 96% (23/24) of the men who underwent micro-TESE and 43% (3/7) of the men who underwent TESA (p < 0.01). The ICSI pregnancy rates (per embryo transfer) in the micro-TESE and TESA groups were comparable [33% (6/18) and 50% (1/2), respectively]. The data indicate that micro-TESE is a highly successful sperm retrieval technique for men with cryptozoospermia and few of these men will require a bilateral procedure. Moreover, sperm retrieval rates are higher with micro-TESE than TESA in this group of men. © 2015 American Society of Andrology and European Academy of Andrology. Source

Discover hidden collaborations