Table 1.
Author(s) Publication year | Location | Study design | Time-period | Length of follow-up | Included study population | Methods of oocyte activation | Conventional-ICSI | ICSI-AOA | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No. of children (singletons/multiples)a |
Children with birth defects | No. of children (singletons/multiples)a |
Children with birth defects | |||||||
Deemeh (2015) [18] | Iran | Historical cohort study | 2008–2010 | 1–30 months | Live births | ionomycin | 89 (67/22) | 2 (2.2%) | 79 (68/2019) | 0 (0%) |
Nakajo (2016) [16] | Japan | Retrospective cohort study | 1995–2014 | 6 years | Live births | Ca2+ ionophore/SrCl2 | 1978 (1640/338) | 75 (3.8%) | 62 (51/11) | 2 (3.2%) |
Miller (2016) [15] | Israel | Retrospective cohort study | 2006–2014 | Birth | Live births and TOP | Ca2+ ionophore | 426 (315/111) | 26 (6.1%) | 62 (51/11) | 6 (9.7%) |
Li B (2019) [17] | China | Retrospective cohort study | 2011–2016 | Birth | Live births | ionomycin | 2442 (1504/938) | 31 (1.3%) | 95 (59/36) | 2 (2.1%) |
Kobayashi (2013) [28] | Japan | Retrospective cohort study | 2006–2012 | Not known | Live births | ionomycin | 571 (Not known) | 8 (1.4%) | 18 (Not known) | 1 (5.5%) |
Total | 5506 | 142 (2.6%) | 316 | 11 (3.5%) |
ICSI intracytoplasmic sperm injection, AOA artificial oocyte activation, TOP terminal of pregnancy
aMultiples including twins and triplets