Evidence Hub

Polycystic ovarian syndrome and miscarriage in IVF: systematic revision of the literature and meta-analysis

Matorras R, Pijoan JI, Laínz L, Díaz-Nuñez M, Sainz H, Pérez-Fernandez S, Moreira D

Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2023

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the risk of miscarriage in IVF cycles in women with PCOS.

METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar. The language search was restricted to English, Spanish and French, from 2000 to 2019, with crosschecking of references from relevant articles. Inclusion criteria were: (1) IVF cycles (2) a group of patients with PCOS was considered separately, (3) the miscarriage rate was reported, (4) there was a control group, (5) definition of PCOS according the Rotterdam criteria. Exclusion criteria were been excluded from the meta-analysis: (1) publication prior to the year 2000, (2) animal studies, (3) reviews, (4) abstracts or conference papers, (5) letters, (6) case reports, (7) studies comparing different IVF techniques, (8) studies comparing groups with and without metformin or other treatments, (9) studies on induced abortions. Risk of bias was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa score (NOS). All the included studies had a low risk of bias (NOS scores ranging 7-8). The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020186713). Seventeen studies were included in the meta-analysis. There was a total of 10,472 pregnancies (2650 in PCOS and 7822 in controls) of which 1885 were miscarriages (682 in PCOS and 1203 in controls). We considered the miscarriage rate (MR), preclinical MR, early MR, and late MR.

RESULTS: In IVF pregnancies the risk of miscarriage was significantly increased when considering…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free