According to two separate studies presented at a fertility conference of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology in Barcelona, in-vitro fertilization (IVF) and the freezing of embryos does not increase babies’ chances of birth defects or any other medical problems. In fact, scientists have discovered babies born from embryos that are frozen, thawed and then implanted had higher birth weights than babies born from fresh embryos and they were also less likely to be premature.

One study examined over 120 babies born following in-vitro fertilization. These babies were compared to 90 babies born to parents who had fertility problems, but spontaneously conceived while awaiting fertility treatment, as well as 450 babies naturally conceived. This Danish study was done by Dr. Karin Middelburg, of the University Medical Center Groningen in the Netherlands and colleagues. The researchers assessed babies’ brain development after their first six months of life. “When a child is wired right in the brain, he is able to show a wide range of different movements,” said Dr. Middelburg. The results: IVF babies moved just as well as the babies who were born spontaneously to parents awaiting fertility treatments. When the IVF babies were compared to babies naturally conceived in the general population, there were also no difference in abnormal movements. This shows IVF is not the cause of early development problems, according to Dr. Middelburg.

The other Danish study presented at the fertility conference looked at more than 19,000 babies total. Approximately 12,000 of the babies had been born from frozen embryos between 1995 and 2006, while approximately 17,800 of the babies had been born from fresh embryos. The results of this study showed fewer babies born from frozen embryos were admitted to neonatal care units, but the researchers said this was most likely due to a higher rate of multiple births that occur from fresh embryos. Also, pregnancies tended to last slightly longer after a frozen embryo transfer.

Additionally, the study concluded babies born from frozen embryos weighed more at birth than babies born after a fresh embryo transfer; an average of 200 grams bigger! But, this may be because, “Only the very top quality embryos survive the freezing and thawing process,” said Dr. Anja Pinborg, who led the research. Dr. Pinborg continued, “If our results continue to be positive, FER (frozen embryo replacement) can be accepted as a completely safe procedure, which can be used even more frequently than it is currently.”

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

A recent press release from The Ohio State University Medical Center urges expectant moms to steer clear of early scheduled C-sections, unless there is a clear medical reason. Early, being defined as, “before completing 39 weeks of pregnancy”. Scheduling an early C-section or induction due to normal third-trimester pregnancy discomforts is not a good reason afterall, even though it may feel that way. Planning an early delivery for visiting family or because your health care provider will be out of town as your due date approaches are not valid reasons, either. Sorry.

According to maternal-fetal medicine specialist at The Ohio State University Medical Center, Dr. Celeste Durnwald, “Certainly, a medical problem with the mother’s health or suspected fetal jeopardy can sometimes necessitate a delivery earlier than otherwise anticipated. Maternal hypertension and poor fetal growth are common reasons.“ In such cases, the benefits of an early C-section or induction obviously outweigh the risk of waiting for your baby’s due date. When healthcare providers and parents-to-be are weighing the risks and benefits they need to realize, “ there are potential complications for a newborn. Even though those last few weeks can seem like months to the patient, I try to emphasize the importance of delivering at a gestational age when the baby gets to go home with the mother and does well in the nursery,” says Dr. Durnwald.

The health of your newborn may be at risk if delivered even a couple of weeks prior to his or her due date because babies’ development is still occurring. “That includes the accumulation of fat tissue that helps the baby regulate their temperature after birth, there is also maturation of the intestinal system to make feeding easier,” Dr. Durnwald points out. Babies born just a “little” early can have problems with premature lungs, jaundice, feeding, breathing when sitting in their car seat and they are much more likely to spend extra time in the hospital than babies born closer to their due date.

Out of my five children, my oldest is the only one who decided to make his way into the world early- a full three weeks early that is- and I had no complaints. I was more than ready for him to be here, especially after losing my first 2 pregnancies, I just wanted to hold him safe in my arms. He struggled with jaundice for the first week and he had to be readmitted to the hospital for an additional two-night stay, after spending only one night at home. He had feeding problems and ended up being my only child I couldn’t breastfeed. He threw up continuously until his first birthday. If I could do it over again and had a choice, I would have chosen for him to keep growing and developing for another 2-3 weeks. My four full-term babies never got jaundice, never had extended hospital stays and none had feeding or digestive problems. I know his problems were all just from him being a mere three weeks early. Those final weeks really do matter afterall.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

A small surgical incision sometimes made in the perineum area during a baby’s delivery is an episiotomy. This cut is performed most commonly for the purpose of avoiding tears. The main idea of routine cutting is that a cut can be repaired more easily and will also heal quicker than a tear. There are some extreme situations when an episiotomy may be unavoidable such as in the case of fetal distress, but well over half of them performed today are not from medical necessity. Episiotomy rates continue their slow decline, although more than 50% of all first-time mothers still have the procedure.

A new study reported in the June 2008 issue of Obstetrics & Gynecology looks at women who had an episiotomy with their first vaginal delivery and then subsequent vaginal deliveries. Researchers were looking at whether women who had an episiotomy were more or less likely to suffer lacerations during future deliveries. Dr. Marianna Alperin and her colleagues at the University of Pittsburgh reviewed records of more than 6,000 women who had their first and second consecutive vaginal deliveries at Magee-Womens Hospital over a period of 10 years (1995-2005), but not those with an episiotomy the second time around.

The study results concluded that women who undergo an episiotomy during their first delivery have a significantly increased risk of suffering tears in subsequent deliveries. Out of all the women, close to half (47.8%) had the procedure during their first delivery. Only 26.7% of the women who never had an episiotomy experienced tearing during their second delivery, while 51.3% of the women who had an episiotomy with their first delivery experienced moderate tearing. As for severe tearing, the percentages were 1.7% compared to 4.8%, according to the report. Dr. Marianna Alperin said, “In the past, episiotomy was thought to be an innocuous procedure and possibly even protective against severe perineal lacerations. It has since been clearly shown that episiotomy increases the risk of severe obstetrical lacerations in that delivery.” She went on to say, “The findings of our analysis demonstrate yet another detrimental aspect to episiotomy and we encourage obstetric care pro viders to further restrict the use of routine episiotomy.”

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!