Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Impact of elevated peak serum estradiol levels during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation on the birth weight of term singletons from fresh IVF-ET cycles

  • Assisted Reproduction Technologies
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the impact of elevated serum estradiol (E2) levels on the day of hCG trigger on the birth weight of term singletons after fresh In Vitro Fertilization (IVF)-Embryo Transfer (ET) cycles.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study of all patients initiating fresh IVF-ET cycles resulting in live births between January 2004 and February 2013. The incidence of low birthweight (LBW) term singletons in patients with E2 levels on day of hCG trigger above or below the 95 % cutoff for E2 values in our clinic (3,069.2 pg/mL) was estimated. Multiple gestations and vanishing twin pregnancies were excluded.

Results

Two thousand nine hundred thirty-nine singleton live births were identified for inclusion. One hundred forty seven (5 %) and 2792 (95 %) live singleton births occurred in patients with peak E2 levels above and below 3,069.2 pg/mL, respectively. The overall incidence of term LBW was 5.4 % in the >3,069.2 pg/mL group compared to 2.4 % in the ≤3,069.2 pg/mL group (P = .038). An E2 level >3,069.2 pg/mL on the day of hCG administration was associated with increased odds of LBW term singletons (OR = 2.29; 95 % CI = 1.03–5.11). The increased odds remained unchanged when adjusting for maternal age (aOR = 2.29; 95 % CI = 1.02–5.14; P = .037), gestational age at delivery (aOR = 2.04; 95 % CI = 1.22–3.98; P = .025), and day 3 versus blastocyst transfer (aOR = 2.5; 95 % CI = 1.11–5.64; P = .023).

Conclusions

Peak E2 level >3,069.2 pg/mL is associated with increased odds of LBW term singletons after fresh IVF-ET cycles. Conservative stimulation protocols aiming not to exceed an E2 level of 3,000 pg/mL may be advantageous for placentation and fetal growth if a fresh transfer is planned.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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. Sunderam S, Kissin DM, Crawford S, Anderson JE, Folger SG, Jamieson DJ, et al. Assisted reproductive technology surveillance – United States, 2010. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2013;62(9):1–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART). Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/art. Accessed on 10/18/2014.

  3. Kalra SK, Barnhart KT. In vitro fertilization and adverse childhood outcomes: what we know, where we are going, and how we will get there. A glimpse into what lies behind and beckons ahead. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(6):1887–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kondapalli LA, Perales-Puchalt A. Low birth weight: is it related to assisted reproductive technology or underlying infertility? Fertil Steril. 2013;99(2):303–10.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Barnhart KT. Assisted reproductive technologies and perinatal morbidity: interrogating the association. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(2):299–302.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Schieve LA, Meikle SF, Ferre C, Peterson HB, Jeng G, Wilcox LS. Low and very low birth weight in infants conceived with the use of assisted reproductive technology. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:731–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Helmerhorst FM, Perquin DA, Donker D, Keirse MJ. Perinatal outcome of singletons and twins after assisted conception; a systematic review of controlled studies. BMJ. 2004;328:261–5.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Jackson R, Gibson KA, Wu YW, Croughan MS. Perinatal outcomes in singletons following in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;130:551–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. McDonald SD, Han Z, Mulla S, Murphy KE, Beyene J, Ohlsson A. Preterm birth and low birth weight among in vitro fertilization singletons: a systematic review and meta-analyses. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2009;146:138–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kalra SK, Ratcliffe SJ, Coutifaris C, Molinaro T, Barnhart KT. Ovarian stimulation and low birth weight in newborns conceived through in vitro fertilization. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(4):863–71.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Imudia AN, Awonuga AO, Doyle JO, Kaimal AJ, Wright DL, Toth TL, et al. Peak serum estradiol level during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation is associated with increased risk of small for gestational age and preeclampsia in singleton pregnancies after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(6):1374–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Spong CY, Mercer BM, D’alton M, Kilpatrick S, Blackwell S, Saade G. Timing of indicated late-preterm and early-term birth. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(2 Pt 1):323–33.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Alexander GR, Himes JH, Kaufman RB, Mor J, Kogan M. A United States national reference for fetal growth. Obstet Gynecol. 1996;87:163–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Reichman DE, Greenwood E, Meyer L, Kligman I, Rosenwaks Z. Can in vitro fertilization cycles be salvaged by repeat administration of intramuscular human chorionic gonadotropin the day after failed injection? Fertil Steril. 2012;98:671–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Reichman DE, Chung P, Meyer L, Greenwood E, Davis O, Rosenwaks Z. Consecutive gonadotropin-releasing hormone-antagonist in vitro fertilization cycles: does the elapsed time interval between successive treatments affect outcomes? Fertil Steril. 2013;99:1277–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Reichman DE, Goldschlag D, Rosenwaks Z. Value of antimüllerian hormone as a prognostic indicator of in vitro fertilization outcome. Fertil Steril. 2014;98(5):1225–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Engmann L, Benadiva C. Agonist trigger: what is the best approach? Agonist trigger with aggressive luteal support. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:531–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ma WG, Song H, Das SK, Paria BC, Dey SK. Estrogen is a critical determinant that specifies the duration of the window of uterine receptivity for implantation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100:2963–8.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Valbuena D, Martin J, de Pablo JL, Remohi J, Pellicer A, Simon C. Increasing levels of estradiol are deleterious to embryonic implantation because they directly affect the embryo. Fertil Steril. 2001;76:962–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bittner AK, Horsthemke B, Winterhager E, Grummer R. Hormone-induced delayed ovulation affects early embryonic development. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:2390–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ertzeid G, Storeng R. The impact of ovarian stimulation on implantation and fetal development in mice. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:221–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kalra SK. Adverse perinatal outcome and in vitro fertilization singleton pregnancies: what lies beneath? Further evidence to support an underlying role of the modifiable hormonal milieu in in vitro fertilization stimulation. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(6):1295–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Albrecht ED, Bonagura TW, Burleigh DW, Enders AC, Aberdeen GW, Pepe GJ. Suppression of extravillous trophoblast invasion of uterine spiral arteries by estrogen during early baboon pregnancy. Placenta. 2006;27:483–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Simon C, Cano F, Valbuena D, Remohi J, Pellicer A. Clinical evidence for a detrimental effect on uterine receptivity of high serum oestradiol concentrations in high and normal responder patients. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:2432–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Valbuena D, Jasper M, Remohi J, Pellicer A, Simon C. Ovarian stimulation and endometrial receptivity. Hum Reprod. 1999;14 Suppl 2:107–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Norwitz ER, Schust DJ, Fisher SJ. Implantation and the survival of early pregnancy. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:1400–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Dominguez F, Remohi J, Pellicer A, Simon C. Human endometrial receptivity: a genomic approach. Reprod Biomed Online. 2003;6:332–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Horcajadas JA, Riesewijk A, Polman J, van Os R, Pellicer A, Mosselman S, et al. Effect of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in IVF on endometrial gene expression profiles. Mol Hum Reprod. 2005;11:195–205.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Goldenberg RL, Culhane JF, Iams JD, Romero R. Epidemiology and causes of preterm birth. Lancet. 2008;371(9606):75–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Barnhart KT. Introduction: are we ready to eliminate the transfer of fresh embryos in in vitro fertilization? Fertil Steril. 2014;102(1):1–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Grella PV. Low birth weight and early life origins of adult disease: insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2007;34(1):9–13.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Nesterenko TH, Aly H. Fetal and neonatal programming: evidence and clinical implications. Am J Perinatol. 2009;26(3):191–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Negrato C, Gomes M. Low birth weight: causes and consequences. Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2013;5(1):49.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Author notes

    Authors and Affiliations

    1. Ronald O. Perelman and Claudia Cohen Center for Reproductive Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical Center, 1305 York Ave., New York, NY, 10021, USA

      Nigel Pereira, David E. Reichman, Dan E. Goldschlag, Jovana P. Lekovich & Zev Rosenwaks

    Authors
    1. Nigel Pereira
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

    2. David E. Reichman
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

    3. Dan E. Goldschlag
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

    4. Jovana P. Lekovich
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

    5. Zev Rosenwaks
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

    Corresponding author

    Correspondence to Zev Rosenwaks.

    Additional information

    Capsule Peak estradiol levels and birth weight

    Nigel Pereira and David E. Reichman contributed equally to this work.

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    About this article

    Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

    Cite this article

    Pereira, N., Reichman, D.E., Goldschlag, D.E. et al. Impact of elevated peak serum estradiol levels during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation on the birth weight of term singletons from fresh IVF-ET cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet 32, 527–532 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-015-0434-1

    Download citation

    • Received:

    • Accepted:

    • Published:

    • Issue Date:

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-015-0434-1

    Keywords