Table 3.
Comparison of the assisted reproductive technology outcomes by tertiles of the dietary patterns in infertile women
| Variables | Helthy pattern | Western pattern | Unhelthy pattern | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | P valuec | T1 | T2 | T3 | P value | T1 | T2 | T3 | P value | |
| The average number of total oocyte | ||||||||||||
| Model1a (mean ± SD) | 7.1 ± 6.1 | 10.6 ± 8.6 | 12.2 ± 9 | 0.009 | 12 ± 9.3 | 8.7 ± 6.7 | 9.2 ± 8.3 | 0.119 | 9.8 ± 7.9 | 9.8 ± 8.8 | 10.4 ± 8.1 | 0.929 |
| Model2b (mean ± SE) | 7.4 ± 1.2 | 11.1 ± 1.2 | 11.4 ± 1.3 | 0.053 | 12.1 ± 1.2 | 9.5 ± 1.1 | 8.4 ± 1.2 | 0.088 | 9.8 ± 1.2 | 10.5 ± 1.2 | 9.6 ± 1.2 | 0.837 |
| The average number of metaphase II oocyte | ||||||||||||
| Model1 (mean ± SD) | 6.1 ± 5.3 | 8.6 ± 6.8 | 10.6 ± 7.9 | 0.006 | 10 ± 7.4 | 7.5 ± 6.3 | 7.9 ± 7.1 | 0.184 | 8.6 ± 7 | 8.2 ± 7.6 | 8.6 ± 6.4 | 0.956 |
| Model2 (mean ± SE) | 6.2 ± 1 | 8.9 ± 1 | 10.2 ± 1.1 | 0.034 | 9.9 ± 1 | 8.1 ± 1 | 7.4 ± 1 | 0.225 | 8.6 ± 1 | 8.8 ± 1 | 7.9 ± 1 | 0.824 |
| The fertilization rate | ||||||||||||
| Model1 (mean ± SD) | 0.61 ± 0.4 | 0.7 ± 0.3 | 0.7 ± 0.2 | 0.168 | 0.7 ± 0.3 | 0.7 ± 0.3 | 0.7 ± 0.3 | 0.776 | 0.7 ± 0.3 | 0.7 ± 0.3 | 0.6 ± 0.3 | 0.649 |
| Model2 (mean ± SE) | 0.6 ± 0.05 | 0.7 ± 0.05 | 0.7 ± 0.05 | 0.310 | 0.7 ± 0.05 | 0.7 ± 0.05 | 0.7 ± 0.05 | 0.545 | 0.7 ± 0.05 | 0.7 ± 0.05 | 0.6 ± 0.05 | 0.536 |
| The ratio of good quality embryo | ||||||||||||
| Model1 (mean ± SD) | 0.2 ± 0.3 | 0.2 ± 0.2 | 0.2 ± 0.3 | 0.705 | 0.2 ± 0.3 | 0.2 ± 0.3 | 0.2 ± 0.3 | 0.870 | 0.2 ± 0.3 | 0.2 ± 0.3 | 0.2 ± 0.3 | 0.433 |
| Model2 (mean ± SE) | 0.2 ± 0.05 | 0.2 ± 0.04 | 0. 2 ± 0.05 | 0.874 | 0.2 ± 0.04 | 0.2 ± 0.04 | 0.2 ± 0.04 | 0.656 | 0.2 ± 0.04 | 0.2 ± 0.04 | 0.2 ± 0.04 | 0.352 |
| The ratio of bad quality embryo | ||||||||||||
| Model1 (mean ± SD) | 0.2 ± 0.3 | 0.4 ± 0.3 | 0.3 ± 0.3 | 0.159 | 0.3 ± 0.3 | 0.3 ± 0.3 | 0.3 ± 0.3 | 0.559 | 0.3 ± 0.3 | 0.3 ± 0.3 | 0.3 ± 0.3 | 0.733 |
| Model2 (mean ± SE) | 0.3 ± 0.05 | 0.4 ± 0.05 | 0.3 ± 0.05 | 0.425 | 0.3 ± 0.05 | 0.3 ± 0.05 | 0.4 ± 0.05 | 0.653 | 0.3 ± 0.05 | 0.3 ± 0.05 | 0.3 ± 0.05 | 0.923 |
| The biochemical pregnancy [OR (IC)]d | ||||||||||||
| Model1 (mean ± SD) | 1 | 1.5 (0.4-5.3) | 1.1 (0.3-4.2) | 0.816 | 1 | 1.4 (0.3-5.5) | 1.4 (0.4-5.1) | 0.858 | 1 | 0.14 (0.3-0.7) | 0.72 (0.2-2.6) | 0.036 |
| Model2 (mean ± SE) | 1 | 1.3 (0.3-5.8) | 1.3 (0.3-6.7) | 0.914 | 1 | 1.8 (0.3-9.4) | 1.1 (0.2-5.9) | 0.749 | 1 | 0.09 (0.01-0.6) | 0.9 (0.1-5.9) | 0.022 |
| The clinical pregnancy[OR (IC)] | ||||||||||||
| Model1 (mean ± SD) | 1 | 1.5(0.4-5.3) | 1.1(0.3-4.2) | 0.816 | 1 | 1.4(0.3-5.5) | 1.4(0.4-5.1) | 0.858 | 1 | 0.14 (0.3-0.7) | 0.72(0.2-2.6) | 0.036 |
| Model2 (mean ± SE) | 1 | 1.3(0.3-5.8) | 1.3(0.3-6.7) | 0.914 | 1 | 1.8(0.3-9.4) | 1.1(0.2-5.9) | 0.749 | 1 | 0.09 (0.01-0.6) | 0.9(0.1-5.9) | 0.022 |
Model1a; Crude, Model2b; Adjusted for age, marriage age, BMI, waist circumference, physical activity, total energy intake, supplement consumption, duration of metformin consumption, c; P trends from ANOVA analysis for model1 and from ANCOVA analysis for model2 in quantitative variables and p trends from logistic regression analysis for qualitative variables, and d; OR (CI): Odds ratio and 95% interval confidence calculated by logistic regression analysis.