Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Yasuj University of Medical Sciences, Yasuj, Iran.
Center for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Mar 25;3(3):CD012650. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012650.pub2.
Clinicians primarily recommend weight loss for obese women seeking pregnancy. The effectiveness of interventions aimed at weight loss in obese women with subfertility is unclear.
To assess the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies compared with each other, placebo, or no treatment for achieving weight loss in obese women with subfertility.
We searched the CGF Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and AMED from inception to 18 August 2020. We also checked reference lists and contacted experts in the field for additional relevant papers.
We included published and unpublished randomised controlled trials in which weight loss was the main goal of the intervention. Our primary effectiveness outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy and primary safety outcomes were miscarriage and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy, weight change, quality of life, and mental health outcome.
Review authors followed standard Cochrane methodology.
This review includes 10 trials. Evidence was of very low to low quality: the main limitations were due to lack of studies and poor reporting of study methods. The main reasons for downgrading evidence were lack of details by which to judge risk of bias (randomisation and allocation concealment), lack of blinding, and imprecision. Non-pharmacological intervention versus no intervention or placebo Evidence is insufficient to determine whether a diet or lifestyle intervention compared to no intervention affects live birth (odds ratio (OR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.11; 918 women, 3 studies; I² = 78%; low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth following no intervention is assumed to be 43%, the chance following diet or lifestyle changes would be 33% to 46%. We are uncertain if lifestyle change compared with no intervention affects miscarriage rate (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.39; 917 women, 3 studies; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence). Evidence is insufficient to determine whether lifestyle change compared with no intervention affects clinical pregnancy (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.40; 917 women, 3 studies; I² = 73%; low-quality evidence). Lifestyle intervention resulted in a decrease in body mass index (BMI), but data were not pooled due to heterogeneity in effect (mean difference (MD) -3.70, 95% CI -4.10 to -3.30; 305 women, 1 study; low-quality evidence; and MD -1.80, 95% CI -2.67 to -0.93; 43 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). Non-pharmacological versus non-pharmacological intervention We are uncertain whether intensive weight loss interventions compared to standard care nutrition counselling affects live birth (OR 11.00, 95% CI 0.43 to 284; 11 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), clinical pregnancy (OR 11.00, 95% CI 0.43 to 284; 11 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), BMI (MD -3.00, 95% CI -5.37 to -0.63; 11 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), weight change (MD -9.00, 95% CI -15.50 to -2.50; 11 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), quality of life (MD 0.06, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.15; 11 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), or mental health (MD -7.00, 95% CI -13.92 to -0.08; 11 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). No study reported on adverse events . Pharmacological versus pharmacological intervention For metformin plus liraglutide compared to metformin we are uncertain of an effect on the adverse events nausea (OR 7.22, 95% CI 0.72 to 72.7; 28 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), diarrhoea (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.3; 28 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), and headache (OR 5.80, 95% CI 0.25 to 133; 28 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain if a combination of metformin plus liraglutide vs metformin affects BMI (MD 2.1, 95% CI -0.42 to 2.62; 28 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence) and total body fat (MD -0.50, 95% CI -4.65 to 3.65; 28 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). For metformin, clomiphene, and L-carnitine versus metformin, clomiphene, and placebo, we are uncertain of an effect on miscarriage (OR 3.58, 95% CI 0.73 to 17.55; 274 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), clinical pregnancy (OR 5.56, 95% CI 2.57 to 12.02; 274 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence) or BMI (MD -0.3, 95% CI 1.17 to 0.57, 274 women, 1 study, very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain if dexfenfluramine versus placebo affects weight loss in kilograms (MD -0.10, 95% CI -2.77 to 2.57; 21 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). No study reported on live birth, quality of life, or mental health outcomes. Pharmacological intervention versus no intervention or placebo We are uncertain if metformin compared with placebo affects live birth (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.44 to 5.57; 65 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth following placebo is assumed to be 15%, the chance following metformin would be 7% to 50%. We are uncertain if metformin compared with placebo affects gastrointestinal adverse events (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.32 to 2.57; 65 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence) or miscarriage (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.04 to 5.80; 65 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence) or clinical pregnancy (OR 2.67, 95% CI 0.90 to 7.93; 96 women, 2 studies; I² = 48%; very low-quality evidence). We are also uncertain if diet combined with metformin versus diet and placebo affects BMI (MD -0.30, 95% CI -2.16 to 1.56; 143 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence) or waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) (MD 2.00, 95% CI -2.21 to 6.21; 143 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). Pharmacological versus non-pharmacological intervention No study undertook this comparison.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence is insufficient to support the use of pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies for obese women with subfertility. No data are available for the comparison of pharmacological versus non-pharmacological strategies. We are uncertain whether pharmacological or non-pharmacological strategies effect live birth, ongoing pregnancy, adverse events, clinical pregnancy, quality of life, or mental heath outcomes. However, for obese women with subfertility, a lifestyle intervention may reduce BMI. Future studies should compare a combination of pharmacological and lifestyle interventions for obese women with subfertility.
临床医生主要建议肥胖女性减肥以实现妊娠。肥胖伴生育力低下女性的减肥干预措施的有效性尚不清楚。
评估减肥药物和非药物策略与彼此、安慰剂或无治疗相比,在肥胖伴生育力低下的女性中实现减肥的有效性和安全性。
我们检索了 CGF 特藏、CENTRAL、MEDLINE、Embase、PsycINFO 和 AMED 自成立以来至 2020 年 8 月 18 日的资料。我们还检查了参考文献,并联系了该领域的专家以获取其他相关文献。
我们纳入了减肥是干预主要目标的已发表和未发表的随机对照试验。我们的主要有效性结局为活产或持续妊娠,主要安全性结局为流产和不良事件。次要结局包括临床妊娠、体重变化、生活质量和心理健康结局。
综述作者遵循了标准的 Cochrane 方法。
本综述纳入了 10 项试验。证据质量为极低至低:主要限制因素是研究数量少且研究方法报告质量差。证据降级的主要原因是缺乏判断偏倚风险(随机化和分配隐藏)、缺乏盲法和不精确的详细信息。非药物干预与无干预或安慰剂相比:我们不确定饮食或生活方式干预与无干预相比是否会影响活产(比值比(OR)0.85,95%置信区间(CI)0.65 至 1.11;918 名女性,3 项研究;I²=78%;低质量证据)。这表明,如果假设无干预后活产的机会为 43%,那么生活方式改变后活产的机会为 33%至 46%。我们不确定生活方式改变与无干预相比是否会影响流产率(OR 1.54,95%CI 0.99 至 2.39;917 名女性,3 项研究;I²=0%;极低质量证据)。证据不足以确定生活方式改变与无干预相比是否会影响临床妊娠(OR 1.06,95%CI 0.81 至 1.40;917 名女性,3 项研究;I²=73%;低质量证据)。生活方式干预导致体重指数(BMI)下降,但由于效果存在异质性,数据未进行合并(均数差(MD)-3.70,95%CI -4.10 至 -3.30;305 名女性,1 项研究;低质量证据;MD-1.80,95%CI -2.67 至 -0.93;43 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)。非药物干预与非药物干预相比:我们不确定强化减肥干预与标准营养咨询相比是否会影响活产(OR 11.00,95%CI 0.43 至 284;11 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)、临床妊娠(OR 11.00,95%CI 0.43 至 284;11 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)、BMI(MD-3.00,95%CI-5.37 至 -0.63;11 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)、体重变化(MD-9.00,95%CI-15.50 至 -2.50;11 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)、生活质量(MD 0.06,95%CI-0.03 至 0.15;11 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)或心理健康(MD-7.00,95%CI-13.92 至 -0.08;11 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)。无研究报告不良事件。药物干预与药物干预相比:对于二甲双胍加利拉鲁肽与二甲双胍相比,我们不确定不良事件恶心(OR 7.22,95%CI 0.72 至 72.7;28 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)、腹泻(OR 0.31,95%CI 0.01 至 8.3;28 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)和头痛(OR 5.80,95%CI 0.25 至 133;28 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)的发生情况。我们不确定二甲双胍加利拉鲁肽与二甲双胍相比是否会影响 BMI(MD 2.1,95%CI-0.42 至 2.62;28 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)和总体脂(MD-0.50,95%CI-4.65 至 3.65;28 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)。对于二甲双胍、氯米芬和左旋肉碱与二甲双胍、氯米芬和安慰剂相比,我们不确定流产(OR 3.58,95%CI 0.73 至 17.55;274 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)、临床妊娠(OR 5.56,95%CI 2.57 至 12.02;274 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)或 BMI(MD-0.3,95%CI 1.17 至 0.57,274 名女性,1 项研究,极低质量证据)的发生情况。我们不确定地昔氟胺与安慰剂相比是否会影响体重减轻(MD-0.10,95%CI-2.77 至 2.57;21 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)。无研究报告活产、生活质量或心理健康结局。药物干预与无干预或安慰剂相比:我们不确定二甲双胍与安慰剂相比是否会影响活产(OR 1.57,95%CI 0.44 至 5.57;65 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)。这表明,如果假设安慰剂后活产的机会为 15%,那么二甲双胍后活产的机会为 7%至 50%。我们不确定二甲双胍与安慰剂相比是否会影响胃肠道不良事件(OR 0.91,95%CI 0.32 至 2.57;65 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)或流产(OR 0.50,95%CI 0.04 至 5.80;65 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)或临床妊娠(OR 2.67,95%CI 0.90 至 7.93;96 名女性,2 项研究;I²=48%;极低质量证据)。我们也不确定饮食联合二甲双胍与饮食和安慰剂相比是否会影响 BMI(MD-0.30,95%CI-2.16 至 1.56;143 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)或腰臀比(WHR)(MD 2.00,95%CI-2.21 至 6.21;143 名女性,1 项研究;极低质量证据)。药物干预与非药物干预相比:没有研究进行过这种比较。
目前的证据不足以支持肥胖伴生育力低下的女性使用药物和非药物策略。没有数据可比较药物与非药物策略的效果。我们不确定药物或非药物策略是否会影响活产、持续妊娠、不良事件、临床妊娠、生活质量或心理健康结局。然而,对于肥胖伴生育力低下的女性,生活方式干预可能会降低 BMI。未来的研究应比较肥胖伴生育力低下的女性的药物和生活方式联合干预措施。