Volume 110, Issue 5, Pages 826–832
Authors:
Linn Håkonsen Arendt, Ph.D., Morten Søndergaard Lindhard, Ph.D., Camilla Kjersgaard, M.D., Tine Brink Henriksen, Ph.D., Jørn Olsen, Ph.D., Cecilia Høst Ramlau-Hansen, Ph.D.
Abstract:
Objective
To study if parental subfertility is related to the occurrence of the male genital anomalies, cryptorchidism and hypospadias.
Design
Population-based cohort study.
Setting
Not applicable.
Patient(s)
A total of 80,220 singleton boys and their mothers from the Danish National Birth Cohort and the Aarhus Birth Cohort.
Intervention(s)
None.
Main Outcome Measure(s)
The two congenital anomalies; cryptorchidism and hypospadias, registered within the Danish National Patient Register up until December 31, 2012.
Result(s)
By means of Cox regression analyses, we found no associations between waiting time-to-pregnancy (TTP) and cryptorchidism or hypospadias among those who conceived spontaneously. The highest hazard ratio for cryptorchidism was seen among boys of couples with a TTP>12 months who conceived after fertility treatment (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.92–1.55). For hypospadias, we found that boys of couples with a TTP>12 months who conceived after fertility treatment, had a 71% higher risk of hypospadias (aHR 1.71, [95% confidence interval 1.24–3.36]) as compared with boys of couples with a TTP<5 months.
Conclusion(s)
The findings from this study showed that boys of couples with TTP>12 months who conceived after fertility treatment, had a higher occurrence of hypospadias than boys conceived spontaneously of couples with a short TTP. Among those who conceived spontaneously, TTP was not associated with hypospadias or cryptorchidism. These findings indicate that fertility treatment or severity of subfertility is related to hypospadias.
Please sign in or register for FREE
Your Fertility and Sterility Dialog login information is not the same as your ASRM or EES credentials. Users must create a separate account to comment or interact on the Dialog.
This is interesting data, and I will be curious to see how it evolves. Were the authors able to tease out if this incidence was different after frozen embryo transfer, when the uterus has had time to "reset"?