Hamy A-S, Mayenga J-M, Grefenstette I, Kerneis S, Belaisch-Allart J
Service de gynécologie-obstétrique et de reproduction humaine, chirurgie et assistance médicale à la procréation, CHI Jean-Rostand, 141, Grande-Rue, 92 318 Sèvres cedex, France.
Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2008 Apr;36(4):395-9. doi: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2008.02.004. Epub 2008 Apr 9.
For years, induced abortions (IA) have been deemed responsible for altered fertility. The implication of various mechanisms including tubal infertility, intra-uterine adhesions, spontaneous abortion, ectopic pregnancy, cervical incompetence, shortened gestations, and any psychological trouble leading to anovulation has been raised. Though many authors find no evidence of an increased risk on fertility for women, whose IA is not complicated by infection, it might sometimes be insinuated that infertility is the consequence of previous abortion. Thus, we compared the rate of patients with any prior IA in a population of newly delivered women and in women ongoing IVF.
A retrospective study was conducted at Sèvres hospital, comparing two populations of women, newly delivered women (n=1738) between January 1st and December 31st 2005, and women ongoing IVF at the same period (n=430). We reported the number of previous medical or surgical induced abortions and compared it in both groups. Another analysis compared these rates, among two subgroups of women with one or more prior pregnancy (secondary infertility (n=148), and secondary gestation (n=1088).
The rate of prior IA was not different in the two populations. In the IVF group, 13% (n=56) had undergone one or more IA, versus 16.7% (n=291) in the newly delivered group (P=0.06). Among women with previous pregnancy, 37.8% (56) women of the IVF group had undergone one or more previous IA, versus 26.7% (291) of the newly delivered women (P=0.007).
As expected by literature data on IA and fertility, rates of prior induced abortions were not different in the population of fertile women versus infertile. However, women with one or more previous pregnancy are more likely to have undergone previous IA in the IVF group than in the newly delivered group, possibly due to a bias of age. More data are requested to eliminate linkage between IA and infertility.
多年来,人工流产(IA)一直被认为是导致生育能力改变的原因。人们提出了各种机制的影响,包括输卵管性不孕、宫腔粘连、自然流产、异位妊娠、宫颈机能不全、孕周缩短以及任何导致无排卵的心理问题。尽管许多作者没有发现未并发感染的人工流产女性生育风险增加的证据,但有时可能会暗示不孕是先前流产的后果。因此,我们比较了新分娩女性群体和接受体外受精(IVF)女性中曾有过人工流产的患者比例。
在瑟夫尔医院进行了一项回顾性研究,比较了两组女性,即2005年1月1日至12月31日期间的新分娩女性(n = 1738)和同期接受IVF的女性(n = 430)。我们记录了既往药物或手术人工流产的次数,并在两组中进行比较。另一项分析在有一次或多次既往妊娠的女性的两个亚组中比较了这些比例,这两个亚组分别是继发性不孕(n = 148)和继发性妊娠(n = 1088)。
两组中既往人工流产的比例没有差异。在IVF组中,13%(n = 56)的女性有过一次或多次人工流产,而新分娩组中这一比例为16.7%(n = 291)(P = 0.06)。在有既往妊娠的女性中,IVF组37.8%(56)的女性有过一次或多次既往人工流产,而新分娩女性中这一比例为26.7%(291)(P = 0.007)。
正如关于人工流产与生育能力的文献数据所预期的那样,有生育能力的女性群体与不孕女性群体中既往人工流产的比例没有差异。然而,有一次或多次既往妊娠的女性中,IVF组比新分娩组更有可能有过既往人工流产,这可能是由于年龄偏差所致。需要更多数据来消除人工流产与不孕之间的关联。