Effect of female coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination on assisted reproductive outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

COVID-19 and abnormal uterine bleeding: potential associations and mechanisms

The impact of COVID-19 on menstruation has received a high level of public and media interest. Despite this, uncertainty exists about the advice that women and people who menstruate should receive in relation to the expected impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection, long COVID or COVID-19 vaccination on menstruation. Furthermore, the mechanisms leading to these reported menstrual changes are poorly understood. This review evaluates the published literature on COVID-19 and its impact on menstrual bleeding, discussing the strengths and limitations of these studies. We present evidence consistent with SARS-CoV-2 infection and long COVID having an association with changes in menstrual bleeding parameters and that the impact of COVID vaccination on menstruation appears less significant. An overview of menstrual physiology and known causes of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is provided before discussing potential mechanisms which may underpin the menstrual disturbance reported with COVID-19, highlighting areas for future scientific study. Finally, consideration is given to the effect that menstruation may have on COVID-19, including the impact of the ovarian sex hormones on acute COVID-19 severity and susceptibility and reported variation in long COVID symptoms across the menstrual cycle. Understanding the current evidence and addressing gaps in our knowledge in this area are essential to inform public health policy, direct the treatment of menstrual disturbance and facilitate development of new therapies, which may reduce the severity of COVID-19 and improve quality of life for those experiencing long COVID.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccination and Assisted Reproduction Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and female assisted reproduction outcomes through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Medline (OVID), EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov on January 11, 2023, for original articles on assisted reproduction outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination. The primary outcome was rates of clinical pregnancy; secondary outcomes included number of oocytes retrieved, number of mature oocytes retrieved, fertilization rate, implantation rate, ongoing pregnancy rate, and live-birth rate.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently screened citations for relevance, extracted pertinent data, and rated study quality. Only peer-reviewed published studies were included.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Our query retrieved 216 citations, of which 25 were studies with original, relevant data. Nineteen studies reported embryo transfer outcomes, with a total of 4,899 vaccinated and 13,491 unvaccinated patients. Eighteen studies reported data on ovarian stimulation outcomes, with a total of 1,878 vaccinated and 3,174 unvaccinated patients. There were no statistically significant results among our pooled data for any of the primary or secondary outcomes: clinical pregnancy rate (odds ratio [OR] 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-1.01, P =.10), number of oocytes retrieved (mean difference -0.26, 95% CI -0.68 to 0.15, P =.21), number of mature oocytes retrieved (mean difference 0.31, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.75, P =.18), fertilization rate (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.87-1.11, P =.83), implantation rate (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84-1.00, P =.06), ongoing pregnancy rate (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.86-1.06, P =.40), or live-birth rate (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.78-1.17, P =.63). A subanalysis based on country of origin and vaccine type was also performed for the primary and secondary outcomes and did not change the study results.

CONCLUSION

Vaccination against COVID-19 is not associated with different fertility outcomes in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technologies.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42023400023.

Assisted reproductive technology in Japan: A summary report for 2021 by the Ethics Committee of the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Purpose

The Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (JSOG) registry gathers comprehensive data from registered assisted reproductive technology (ART) facilities in Japan. Herein, we report 2021 ART cycle characteristics and outcomes.

Methods

Descriptive statistics were used to summarize and analyze 2021 data.

Results

In 2021, 625 ART facilities participated in the registry; 27 facilities did not conduct ART cycles and 598 registered treatment cycles. In total, 498 140 cycles were registered, and there were 69 797 neonates (increases of 10.7% and 15.5%, respectively, from the previous year). The number of freeze-all in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles decreased in 2021; the number of neonates born was 2268 for IVF-embryo transfer (ET) cycles and 2850 for ICSI cycles. Frozen-thawed ET (FET) cycles increased markedly from 2020 (11.2% increase). In 2021, 239 428 FET cycles were conducted, resulting in 87 174 pregnancies and 64 679 neonates. For fresh transfers, the total single ET, singleton pregnancy rate, and singleton live birth rates were 82.7%, 97.0%, and 97.3%; for FET, these rates were 84.9%, 96.9%, and 97.1%.

Conclusions

The 2021 Japanese ART registry analysis showed marked increases in both total treatment cycles and live births from the previous year.

Effects of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Inactivated Vaccine on the Outcome of Frozen Embryo Transfers: A Large Scale Clinical Study

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is a life-threatening infectious disease that has become a global pandemic.

Objective

This study aimed to explore the effects of SARS-CoV-2 inactivated vaccine on the outcome of frozen embryo transfer (FET).

Methods

We grouped patients who underwent FET between August 2021 and March 2022 based on their vaccination status, number of doses, and the interval between the last dose and the FET, and then compared the differences in pregnancy outcomes among the groups.

Results

There were 1084 vaccinated patients and 1228 non-vaccinated ones. There were significant differences in the live birth rate between the vaccination and non-vaccination groups (16.61% vs 28.26%), among the one-dose, two-dose, and three-dose groups (22.28% vs 19.51% vs 7.27%), and among the groups with interval ≤ 1 month, 1-2 months, and ≥ 2 months (38.38% vs 27.27% vs 12.03%). There were significant differences in the persistent pregnancy rate between the vaccination and non-vaccination groups (22.88% vs 14.09%), among the one-dose, two-dose, and three-dose groups (14.51% vs 23.80% vs 38.18%), and among the groups with interval ≤ 1 month, 1-2 months, and ≥ 2 months (1.01% vs 8.44% vs 28.16%). There were significant differences in the neonatal weight between the vaccination and non-vaccination groups [3805.50 (3746.00-3863.50) vs 2970.00 (2500.00-3400.00)]. There were significant differences in the premature birth rate among the one-dose, two-dose, and three-dose groups (23.26% vs 34.59% vs 100.00%), and among the groups with interval ≤ 1 month, 1-2 months, and ≥ 2 months (15.79% vs 21.43% vs 37.00%).

Conclusion

Pregnancy outcomes were not affected by taking the SARS-CoV-2 inactivated vaccine before FET, the number of doses, and the interval between doses. These findings provide evidence supporting the safety of administering the SARS-CoV-2 inactivated vaccine during pregnancy, which can be used as a guide for vaccinating patients undergoing ART.

COVID-19 Pharmacotherapy in Pregnancy: A Literature Review of Current Therapeutic Choices

The clinical management of COVID-19 in pregnant women, who are considered a vulnerable population, remains uncertain even as the pandemic subsides. SARS-CoV-2 affects pregnant individuals in multiple ways and has been associated with severe maternal morbidity and mortality, as well as neonatal complications. The unique anatomy and physiology of gestation make managing COVID-19 in this population a complex and challenging task, emphasizing the importance of spreading knowledge and expertise in this area. Therapeutic interventions require distinct clinical consideration, taking into account differences in pharmacokinetics, vertical transmission, drug toxicities, and postnatal care. Currently, there is limited data on antiviral and immunomodulating COVID-19 pharmacotherapy in pregnancy. Some medication has been shown to be safe and well tolerated among pregnant women with COVID-19; however, the lack of randomized clinical trials and studies in this patient population is evident. Available vaccines are considered safe and effective, with no evidence of harm to the fetus, embryo development, or short-term postnatal development. Pregnant women should be counseled about the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and informed of available ways to protect themselves and their families. Effective treatments for COVID-19 should not be withheld from pregnant individuals, and more research is needed to ensure the best outcomes.