Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance — United States, 2016

Problem/Condition Since the first U.S. infant conceived with assisted reproductive technology (ART) was born in 1981, both the use of ART and the number of fertility clinics providing ART services have increased steadily in the United States. ART includes fertility treatments in which eggs or embryos are handled in the laboratory (i.e., in vitro fertilization [IVF] and related procedures). Although the majority of infants conceived through ART are singletons, women who undergo ART procedures are more likely than women who conceive naturally to deliver multiple-birth infants. Multiple births pose substantial risks for both mothers and infants, including obstetric complications, preterm delivery (<37 weeks), and low birthweight (<2,500 g). This report provides state-specific information for the United States (including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) on ART procedures performed in 2016 and compares birth outcomes that occurred in 2016 (resulting from ART procedures performed in 2015 and 2016) with outcomes for all infants born in the United States in 2016. Period Covered 2016. Description of System In 1995, CDC began collecting data on ART procedures performed in fertility clinics in the United States as mandated by the Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992 (FCSRCA) (Public Law 102–493 [October 24, 1992]). Data are collected through the National ART Surveillance System (NASS), a web-based data collection system developed by CDC. This report includes data from 52 reporting areas (the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico). Results In 2016, a total of 197,706 ART procedures (range: 162 in Wyoming to 24,030 in California) with the intent to transfer at least one embryo were performed in 463 U.S. fertility clinics and reported to CDC. These procedures resulted in 65,964 live-birth deliveries (range: 57 in Puerto Rico to 8,638 in California) and 76,892 infants born (range: 74 in Alaska to 9,885 in California). Nationally, the number of ART procedures performed per 1 million women of reproductive age (15–44 years), a proxy measure of the ART use rate, was 3,075. ART use rates exceeded the national rate in 14 reporting areas (Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, and Virginia). ART use exceeded 1.5 times the national rate in nine states, including three (Illinois, Massachusetts, and New Jersey) that also had comprehensive mandated health insurance coverage for ART procedures (i.e., coverage for at least four oocyte retrievals). Nationally, among ART transfer procedures for patients using fresh embryos from their own eggs, the average number of embryos transferred increased with increasing age (1.5 among women aged <35 years, 1.7 among women aged 35–37 years, and 2.2 among women aged >37 years). Among women aged <35 years, the national elective single-embryo transfer (eSET) rate was 42.7% (range: 8.3% in North Dakota to 83.9% in Delaware). In 2016, ART contributed to 1.8% of all infants born in the United States (range: 0.3% in Puerto Rico to 4.7% in Massachusetts). ART also contributed to 16.4% of all multiple-birth infants, including 16.2% of all twin infants and 19.4% of all triplets and higher-order infants. ART-conceived twins accounted for approximately 96.5% (21,455 of 22,233) of all ART-conceived infants born in multiple deliveries. The percentage of multiple-birth infants was higher among infants conceived with ART (31.5%) than among all infants born in the total birth population (3.4%). Approximately 30.4% of ART-conceived infants were twins and 1.1% were triplets and higher-order infants. Nationally, infants conceived with ART contributed to 5.0% of all low birthweight (<2,500 g) infants. Among ART-conceived infants, 23.6% had low birthweight compared with 8.2% among all infants. ART-conceived infants contributed to 5.3% of all preterm (gestational age <37 weeks) infants. The percentage of preterm births was higher among infants conceived with ART (29.9%) than among all infants born in the total birth population (9.9%). The percentage of ART-conceived infants who had low birthweight was 8.7% among singletons, 54.9% among twins, and 94.9% among triplets and higher-order multiples; the corresponding percentages among all infants born were 6.2% among singletons, 55.4% among twins, and 94.6% among triplets and higher-order multiples. The percentage of ART-conceived infants who were born preterm was 13.7% among singletons, 64.2% among twins, and 97.0% among triplets and higher-order infants; the corresponding percentages among all infants were 7.8% for singletons, 59.9% for twins, and 97.7% for triplets and higher-order infants. Interpretation Multiple births from ART contributed to a substantial proportion of all twins, triplets, and higher-order infants born in the United States. For women aged <35 years, who typically are considered good candidates for eSET, on average, 1.5 embryos were transferred per ART procedure, resulting in higher multiple birth rates than could be achieved with single-embryo transfers. Of the four states (Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island) with comprehensive mandated health insurance coverage, three (Illinois, Massachusetts, and New Jersey) had rates of ART use >1.5 times the national average. Although other factors might influence ART use, insurance coverage for infertility treatments accounts for some of the difference in per capita ART use observed among states because most states do not mandate any coverage for ART treatment. Public Health Action Twins account for almost all of ART-conceived multiple births born in multiple deliveries. Reducing the number of embryos transferred and increasing use of eSET, when clinically appropriate, could help reduce multiple births and related adverse health consequences for both mothers and infants. Because multiple-birth infants are at increased risk for numerous adverse sequelae that cannot be ascertained from the data collected through NASS alone, long-term follow-up of ART infants through integration of existing maternal and infant health surveillance systems and registries with data available from NASS might be useful for monitoring adverse outcomes.

[1]  Christine Wyns,et al.  ART in Europe, 2015: results generated from European registries by ESHRE† , 2020, Human reproduction open.

[2]  J. Martin,et al.  Births: Final Data for 2017. , 2018, National vital statistics reports : from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System.

[3]  E. Adashi,et al.  Delayed Childbearing as a Growing, Previously Unrecognized Contributor to the National Plural Birth Excess. , 2018, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[4]  J. Kawwass,et al.  Preterm Birth and Small Size for Gestational Age in Singleton, In Vitro Fertilization Births Using Donor Oocytes , 2018, American journal of epidemiology.

[5]  D. Kissin,et al.  Effects of patient education on desire for twins and use of elective single embryo transfer procedures during ART treatment: A systematic review , 2018, Reproductive biomedicine & society online.

[6]  Aaron D. Levine,et al.  Assessing the use of assisted reproductive technology in the United States by non-United States residents. , 2017, Fertility and sterility.

[7]  D. Kissin,et al.  Overview of 2015 U.S. assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment outcomes and contribution of ART and non-art fertility treatments to U.S. multiple births , 2017 .

[8]  Jeani Chang,et al.  Perinatal outcomes among singletons after assisted reproductive technology with single-embryo or double-embryo transfer versus no assisted reproductive technology. , 2017, Fertility and sterility.

[9]  Alan S. Penzias,et al.  Guidance on the limits to the number of embryos to transfer: a committee opinion. , 2021, Fertility and sterility.

[10]  W. Barfield,et al.  Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance — United States, 2014 , 2017, Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Surveillance summaries.

[11]  M. Diamond,et al.  Assisted Reproductive Technology and Newborn Size in Singletons Resulting from Fresh and Cryopreserved Embryos Transfer , 2017, PloS one.

[12]  D. Kissin,et al.  Fertility Treatments in the United States: Improving Access and Outcomes. , 2016, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[13]  B. Luke,et al.  Factors associated with the use of elective single-embryo transfer and pregnancy outcomes in the United States, 2004-2012. , 2016, Fertility and sterility.

[14]  G. Copeland,et al.  Assisted Reproductive Technology and Birth Defects Among Liveborn Infants in Florida, Massachusetts, and Michigan, 2000-2010. , 2016, JAMA pediatrics.

[15]  Jeani Chang,et al.  First trimester pregnancy loss after fresh and frozen in vitro fertilization cycles. , 2016, Fertility and sterility.

[16]  D. Kissin,et al.  Costs of achieving live birth from assisted reproductive technology: a comparison of sequential single and double embryo transfer approaches. , 2015, Fertility and sterility.

[17]  W. Barfield,et al.  CDC releases a National Public Health Action Plan for the Detection, Prevention, and Management of Infertility. , 2015, Journal of women's health.

[18]  J. Martin,et al.  Measuring Gestational Age in Vital Statistics Data: Transitioning to the Obstetric Estimate. , 2015, National vital statistics reports : from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System.

[19]  Morton B. Brown,et al.  Application of a validated prediction model for in vitro fertilization: comparison of live birth rates and multiple birth rates with 1 embryo transferred over 2 cycles vs 2 embryos in 1 cycle. , 2015, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[20]  P. Bearman,et al.  Association between assisted reproductive technology conception and autism in California, 1997-2007. , 2015, American journal of public health.

[21]  C. Coddington,et al.  Multiple pregnancy: changing expectations for patients and patterns for physicians. , 2015, Fertility and sterility.

[22]  L. Warner,et al.  Embryo transfer practices and multiple births resulting from assisted reproductive technology: an opportunity for prevention. , 2015, Fertility and sterility.

[23]  J. Norman,et al.  Multiple pregnancies following assisted reproductive technologies--a happy consequence or double trouble? , 2014, Seminars in fetal & neonatal medicine.

[24]  W. Barfield,et al.  Monitoring health outcomes of assisted reproductive technology. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  N. Talge,et al.  United States Birth Weight Reference Corrected For Implausible Gestational Age Estimates , 2014, Pediatrics.

[26]  D. Kissin,et al.  Number of Embryos Transferred After In Vitro Fertilization and Good Perinatal Outcome , 2014, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[27]  E. Adashi,et al.  Fertility treatments and multiple births in the United States. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[28]  E. Lemos,et al.  Healthcare expenses associated with multiple vs singleton pregnancies in the United States. , 2013, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[29]  H. Jones,et al.  Refuting a misguided campaign against the goal of single-embryo transfer and singleton birth in assisted reproduction. , 2013, Human reproduction.

[30]  D. Kissin,et al.  Embryo transfer practices and perinatal outcomes by insurance mandate status. , 2013, Fertility and sterility.

[31]  G. Copeland,et al.  States Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (SMART) Collaborative: data collection, linkage, dissemination, and use. , 2013, Journal of women's health.

[32]  S. Bhattacharya,et al.  Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies resulting from IVF/ICSI: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2012, Human reproduction update.

[33]  Denise V. D’Angelo,et al.  Assessment of Assisted Reproductive Technology Use Questions: Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System Survey, 2004 , 2012, Public health reports.

[34]  B. Hamilton,et al.  The effects of insurance mandates on choices and outcomes in infertility treatment markets. , 2012, Health economics.

[35]  W. Barfield,et al.  Assisted reproductive technology program reporting. , 2011, JAMA.

[36]  Denise V. D’Angelo,et al.  Birth outcomes of intended pregnancies among women who used assisted reproductive technology, ovulation stimulation, or no treatment. , 2011, Fertility and sterility.

[37]  M. Bundorf,et al.  The effects of competition on assisted reproductive technology outcomes. , 2010, Fertility and sterility.

[38]  L. Rombauts,et al.  Can an educational DVD improve the acceptability of elective single embryo transfer? A randomized controlled study. , 2008, Fertility and sterility.

[39]  O. Devine,et al.  Perinatal outcomes of twin births conceived using assisted reproduction technology: a population-based study. , 2008, Human reproduction.

[40]  B. V. Van Voorhis,et al.  A mandatory single blastocyst transfer policy with educational campaign in a United States IVF program reduces multiple gestation rates without sacrificing pregnancy rates. , 2007, Fertility and sterility.

[41]  L. Schieve,et al.  Pregnancy loss among pregnancies conceived through assisted reproductive technology, United States, 1999-2002. , 2007, American journal of epidemiology.

[42]  W. Callaghan,et al.  The Contribution of Preterm Birth to Infant Mortality Rates in the United States , 2006, Pediatrics.

[43]  L. Schieve,et al.  Trends in embryo transfer practices and multiple gestation for IVF procedures in the USA, 1996-2002. , 2006, Human reproduction.

[44]  C. Berg,et al.  Pregnancy-Related Mortality Among Women With Multifetal Pregnancies , 2006, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[45]  C. Wren,et al.  Cardiovascular Malformations Among Preterm Infants , 2005, Pediatrics.

[46]  L. Schieve,et al.  Multiple-birth risk associated with IVF and extended embryo culture: USA, 2001. , 2005, Human reproduction.

[47]  D. Hellberg,et al.  The couple's decision-making in IVF: one or two embryos at transfer? , 2005, Human reproduction.

[48]  L. Schieve,et al.  Monozygotic twinning associated with day 5 embryo transfer in pregnancies conceived after IVF. , 2004, Human reproduction.

[49]  S. Bhattacharya,et al.  A randomized comparison of alternative methods of information provision on the acceptability of elective single embryo transfer. , 2004, Human reproduction.

[50]  L. Schieve,et al.  Live-birth rates and multiple-birth risk of assisted reproductive technology pregnancies conceived using thawed embryos, USA 1999-2000. , 2003, Human reproduction.

[51]  Gary Jeng,et al.  Trends in multiple births conceived using assisted reproductive technology, United States, 1997-2000. , 2003, Pediatrics.

[52]  A. Pinborg,et al.  Attitudes of IVF/ICSI-twin mothers towards twins and single embryo transfer. , 2003, Human reproduction.

[53]  Tarun Jain,et al.  Insurance coverage and outcomes of in vitro fertilization. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[54]  L. Schieve,et al.  Risk of multiple birth associated with in vitro fertilization using donor eggs. , 2001, American journal of epidemiology.

[55]  W. Grobman,et al.  Patient perceptions of multiple gestations: an assessment of knowledge and risk aversion. , 2001, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[56]  S. Rasmussen,et al.  Risk for birth defects among premature infants: a population-based study. , 2001, The Journal of pediatrics.

[57]  L. Schieve,et al.  Does assisted hatching pose a risk for monozygotic twinning in pregnancies conceived through in vitro fertilization? , 2000, Fertility and sterility.

[58]  L. Schieve,et al.  Live-birth rates and multiple-birth risk using in vitro fertilization. , 1999, JAMA.

[59]  D. Braat,et al.  Assisted Reproductive Technology , 2017, Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine.

[60]  W. Barfield,et al.  Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance - United States, 2015. , 2018, Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Surveillance summaries.

[61]  J. Stanford,et al.  Use of Fertility Treatments in Relation to the Duration of Pregnancy Attempt Among Women Who Were Trying to Become Pregnant and Experienced a Live Birth , 2013, Maternal and Child Health Journal.

[62]  Criteria for number of embryos to transfer: a committee opinion. , 2013, Fertility and sterility.

[63]  J. Martin,et al.  Three decades of twin births in the United States, 1980-2009. , 2012, NCHS data brief.

[64]  Multiple gestation associated with infertility therapy: an American Society for Reproductive Medicine Practice Committee opinion. , 2012, Fertility and sterility.

[65]  S. Bhattacharya,et al.  Global variations in the uptake of single embryo transfer. , 2011, Human reproduction update.

[66]  Guidelines on number of embryos transferred. , 2009, Fertility and sterility.

[67]  M. Bundorf,et al.  Insurance mandates and trends in infertility treatments. , 2008, Fertility and sterility.

[68]  H. Holzer,et al.  Guidelines on number of embryos transferred. , 2008, Fertility and sterility.

[69]  C. Dirksen,et al.  Economic evaluations of single- versus double-embryo transfer in IVF. , 2007, Human reproduction update.

[70]  Assuring Healthy Outcomes,et al.  Committee on Understanding Premature Birth and Assuring Healthy Outcomes , 2007 .

[71]  Guidelines on number of embryos transferred. , 2006, Fertility and sterility.

[72]  Guidelines on the number of embryos transferred. , 2004, Fertility and sterility.

[73]  王德伦,et al.  英语-翻译-Internet , 2000 .

[74]  Luca Gianaroli,et al.  Multiple gestation pregnancy , 2000 .

[75]  J. Gerberding,et al.  Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance — United States, 2000 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Epidemiology Program Office Division of Public Health Surveillance and Informatics Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance — United States, 2000 , 2022 .