Next Article in Journal
Protective Factors against Self-Harm and Suicidality among Australian Indigenous Adolescents: A Strengths-Based Analysis of the Longitudinal Study of Indigenous Children
Next Article in Special Issue
A Scoping Review of Preterm Births in Sub-Saharan Africa: Burden, Risk Factors and Outcomes
Previous Article in Journal
Dietary Diversity and Dietary Patterns in School-Aged Children in Western Kenya: A Latent Class Analysis
Previous Article in Special Issue
Prepregnancy Polycystic Ovary Syndrome as a Risk Factor of Subsequent Preterm Labor: A National Population-Based Cohort Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 19
Issue 15
10.3390/ijerph19159094
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Association between Pre-Pregnancy Overweightness/Obesity and Pregnancy Outcomes in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

by
Szu-Ting Yang
1,2,3,
Chia-Hao Liu
1,2,3,
Sheng-Hsiang Ma
2,4,
Wen-Hsun Chang
1,3,5,*,
Yi-Jen Chen
1,2,3,
Wen-Ling Lee
3,6 and
Peng-Hui Wang
1,2,3,7,8,*
1
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan
2
Faculty of Medicine, School of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei 112, Taiwan
3
Institute of Clinical Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei 112, Taiwan
4
Department of Dermatology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan
5
Department of Nursing, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan
6
Department of Medicine, Cheng-Hsin General Hospital, Taipei 112, Taiwan
7
Department of Medical Research, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung 404, Taiwan
8
Female Cancer Foundation, Taipei 104, Taiwan
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(15), 9094; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159094
Submission received: 27 June 2022 / Accepted: 23 July 2022 / Published: 26 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Emerging Research in Maternal and Child Healthcare)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common metabolic problem in women of reproductive age. Evidence suggests pregnant women with PCOS may have a higher risk of the development of adverse pregnancy outcomes; however, the relationship between pre-pregnancy overweight/obesity and pregnancy outcomes in women with PCOS remains uncertain. We try to clarify the relationship between pre-pregnancy overweight/obesity and subsequent pregnancy outcomes. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis. We used the databases obtained from the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases, plus hand-searching, to examine the association between pre-pregnancy overweightness/obesity and pregnancy outcomes in women with PCOS from inception to 4 February 2022. A total of 16 cohort studies, including 14 retrospective cohort studies (n = 10,496) and another two prospective cohort studies (n = 818), contributed to a total of 11,314 women for analysis. The meta-analysis showed significantly increased odds of miscarriage rate in PCOS women whose pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) is above overweight (OR 1.71 [95% CI 1.38–2.11]) or obese (OR 2.00 [95% CI 1.38–2.90]) under a random effect model. The tests for subgroup difference indicated the increased risk was consistent, regardless which body mass index cut-off for overweight (24 or 25 kg/m2) or obesity (28 and 30 kg/m2) was used. With the same strategies, we found that pregnant women in the control group significantly increased live birth rate compared with those pregnant women with PCOS as well as pre-pregnancy overweight/obesity (OR 0.79 [95% CI 0.71–0.89], OR 0.78 [95% CI 0.67–0.91]). By contrast, we did not find any association between PCOS women with pre-pregnancy overweight/obesity and preterm birth. Based on the aforementioned findings, the main critical factor contributing to a worse pregnancy outcome may be an early fetal loss in these PCOS women with pre-pregnancy overweight/obesity. Since PCOS women with pre-pregnancy overweightness/obesity were associated with worse pregnancy outcomes, we supposed that weight reduction before attempting pregnancy in the PCOS women with pre-pregnancy overweightness/obesity may improve the subsequent pregnancy outcomes.

1. Introduction

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) affects 4–18% of women of reproductive age, which is characterized by hyperandrogenism, chronic anovulation, and a picture of multiple small follicular cysts in the ovary [1,2,3,4,5]. PCOS is closely linked to metabolic and reproductive disorders, such as obesity, insulin resistance (IR), anovulation-related infertility and a thickened endometrium [6,7]. Furthermore, women with PCOS were associated with greater risk of obstetric complications, including preterm birth (PB), miscarriage, perinatal death, preeclampsia, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), and cesarean sections (C/S) [8].
Around 80% of women with PCOS have a higher body mass index (BMI) value, reaching overweightness or obesity [9]. Previous studies have explored the relationship between higher BMI and adverse pregnancy outcomes, including GDM, preeclampsia, intrauterine death, and C/S in general population [10]. However, whether higher pre-pregnancy BMI affects the outcome of pregnancy in women with PCOS is unclear [11]. Taking miscarriage as an example, some studies found that the miscarriage rate was similar among different BMI categories [12,13,14,15,16]. Nevertheless, some studies suggested a higher miscarriage rate in overweight or obese women with PCOS [17,18,19,20]. Conversely, one study reported that miscarriage rate was higher in lean women with PCOS, although the difference did not reach significance [21]. The association between pre-pregnancy BMI value and pregnancy outcomes remains inconclusive in women with PCOS. Additionally, we believe the fact that worse pregnancy outcomes are present in pregestational overweight/obese women, regardless of whether they are diagnosed with PCOS or not [22,23,24,25,26]. Therefore, we thus performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to elucidate the association between pre-pregnancy overweightness/obesity and pregnancy outcomes in the PCOS women. The results may improve personalized risk assessment in PCOS women and can be useful for the guidance of further therapeutic plan and policy to provide a better chance to enhance pregnancy outcomes in PCOS women with pre-pregnancy overweightness/obesity who plan the pregnancy.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Search Strategy

This meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022300037) and was conducted adhering to the Meta-analyses of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) checklist and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [27,28,29,30]. Two reviewers (Drs. Yang and Liu) independently performed the literature search, data extraction, and quality assessment. Any disagreement was resolved by consensus among the reviewers or referred to a third reviewer (Dr. Wang).
The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases, plus hand-searching, were searched for relevant studies from the respective inception of these databases to 4 February 2022. The Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and Emtree were identified using the selected search terms and were combined using appropriate Boolean operators (Table S1). Both reviewers independently selected relevant studies by scanning the titles and abstracts of search results. The full text of potential studies was obtained and examined for eligibility.

2.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

The key questions for the systematic literature review were based on the Populations, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study Design (PICOSD) framework as follows: (1) The study population was pregnant women diagnosed with PCOS; (2) The case group consists of patients with pregestational overweightness or obesity. The control group consists of women without overweightness or obesity; and (3) The outcomes of interest for this review included miscarriage, fetal death, PB, pregnancy-induced hypertension, pre-eclampsia, GDM, C/S, fetal macrosomia, and intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR). Case reports, case series, reviews, comments, letters, and conference abstracts were excluded. Only articles published in English and conducted on humans were included.

2.3. Data Extraction and Risk of Bias Assessment

The following data were extracted from the included studies: first author, year of publication, country, study design, and characteristics of participants (sample size, mean age, mean BMI), conception method, causes of infertility, diagnostic criteria for PCOS, the outcome variables and the definition of outcomes. The quality of the selected studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale with a maximum score of 9 representing the highest quality [31,32].

2.4. Statistical Analysis

The statistical analyzes were performed using RevMan software version 5.4.1 (The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020.) and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Version 3.3.070 (20 November 2014). Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes with a 95% confidence interval (Cl). A random-effects model was used for analysis because of possible different characteristics existing between the studies. The inconsistency test (I2) was used to assess statistical heterogeneity across the included studies. Publication bias was assessed using Egger’s regression test with 2-tailed p-value.

3. Results

3.1. Study Selection

As shown in Figure 1, a total of 1189 studies were identified by our search. A total of 344 studies were removed due to duplicate records, and 767 studies were excluded after assessing the title or abstract. A total of 78 studies remained for full-text review and 64 studies were not eligible for criteria, including 52 not relevant study design, 3 without outcome of interest, 6 where the article is not in English, and 3 studies without full text found. Two other articles were identified after searching the reference lists. A total of 16 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria.

3.2. Study Characteristics

Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of the 16 studies which contain a total of 11,314 women. Fourteen of the 16 studies were retrospective cohort studies (n = 10,496) and another 2 studies were prospective cohort studies (n = 818). The majority of the studies were conducted in China (10 studies, n = 10,737). Of the 16 studies, the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale score ranged from 6 to 9 (median 7).
The classifications of underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese were not consistent among these studies. World Health Organization (WHO) classification for nutritional status is defined by underweight as <18.5 kg/m2, normal weight as 18.5–24.9 kg/m2, overweight as 25.0–29.9 kg/m², and obese as BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 [2,33], and most of studies adopted this classification [13,15,16,17,18,19,34,35,36]. However, some studies used 24 kg/m2 and 28 kg/m2 as cut-off points for overweightness and obesity [37], respectively, especially studies conducted in China [12,14,20,21,38,39]. Regarding the criteria of PCOS, 15 studies used the 2003 Rotterdam criteria to diagnose PCOS, while only one study in 1992 used ultrasound images as diagnostic criteria [40].
Table
Table 1. Characteristics of the included studies.
Table 1. Characteristics of the included studies.
Study [Reference], Year (Country)Study DesignStudy PopulationOutcomePCOS CriteriaCon MethodDetail of Con MethodNOS Score
BMI (kg/m2)Sample SizeAge(y)Miscarriage
A: Definition of Miscarriage
B: Definition of Miscarriage (M) Rate		Live Birth
A: Definition of Live Birth
B: Definition of Live Birth (L) Rate		Preterm Birth
A: Definition of Preterm Birth
B: Definition of Preterm Birth (P) Rate
Hamilton-Fairley et al. [40]. 1992 (UK) RC≧25.0, <282530.9 ± 3.7A: not mentioned
B: M/positive pregnancy test		 Adams (US)OIGonadotrophin9
≧19, <257529.8 ± 4.3
McCormick et al. [15]. 2008 (USA)RC≧301031.5 ± 5.0A: GA < 20 weeks
B: M/positive pregnancy test		A: alive newborn
B: L/egg retrievals		 RotIVFGnRH agonist protocol (97.9%);
GnRH-anta protocol (2.1%)		9
≧18.5, <30631.5 ± 3.0
Ozgun et al. [19]. 2011 (Turkey)PC≧301826.7 ± 2.9A: GA < 20 weeks
B: M/clinical pregnancy		A: not mentioned
B: L/all patients		 RotICSILong protocol8
<302626.8 ± 4.5
Shalom-Paz et al. [13]. 2011 (Canada) RC≧35,1329.6 ± 1.0A: not mentioned
B: M/clinical pregnancy		A: not mentioned
B: L/clinical pregnancy		 RotIVFNot mentioned7
≧30, <351231.0 ± 0.9
≧25, <302431.2 ± 0.7
≧20, <255030.8 ± 0.4
<201731.3 ± 0.8
De Frène et al. [34]. 2014 (Belgium)RC>259329.0 ± 4.2A: GA < 25 weeks
B: M/positive hCG at GA 4 weeks		 A: GA < 37 weeks
B: P/live birth		RotAny Not mentioned8
≦2510728.4 ± 3.1
Huang et al. [21]. 2014 (China) RC≧244930.5 ± 4.1A: not mentioned
B: M/clinical pregnancy		A: alive and survived > 1 month
B: L/all patients		 RotIVF/ICSINot mentioned7
<247929.4 ± 3.4
Bailey et al. [35]. 2014 (USA)RC≧303132.4 ± 3.2A: GA < 20 weeks
B: M/FET cycles		A: alive newborn
B: L/FET cycles		 RotIVF/ICSINot mentioned8
≧25, <301932.6 ± 2.9
≧18.7, <255132.0 ± 3.5
Cui et al. [20]. 2016 (China) RC≧288827.50 ± 3.4A: GA < 20 weeks
B: M/clinical pregnancy		 A: not mentioned
B: P/clinical pregnancy		RotIVF/ICSILong protocol6
≧24, <2812527.50 ± 3.1
≧18.5, <2418326.99 ± 2.9
<18.51227.33 ± 3.3
Sheng et al. [12]. 2017 (China)PC≧286328.7 ± 2.7A: <1 st trimester
B: M/clinical pregnancy		 RotIVF/ICSILong protocol7
≧24, <2821128.5 ± 3.1
≧18.5, <2444927.7 ± 3.1
<18.55126.3 ± 3.1
Pan et al. [14]. 2018 (China)RC≧2810229.77 ± 3.5A: GA < 28 weeks
B: M/ET		A: alive newborn
B: L/ET		A: GA 28~37 weeks
B: P/ET		RotIVFLong protocol6
≧24, <2831529.45 ± 3.5
≧18.5, <2460629.08 ± 3.2
<18.55127.78 ± 3.1
Yang et al. [36]. 2018 (China)RC≥2521329.5A: not mentioned
B: M/clinical pregnancy		A: not mentioned
B: not mentioned		A: not mentioned
B: P/clinical pregnancy		RotIVFGnRH-anta protocol7
<2537029.1
Chen et al. [39]. 2018 (China)RC≥2413828.9 ± 3.0A: GA < 12 weeks
B: M/clinical pregnancy		A: not mentioned
B: L/all patients		A: not mentioned
B: P/live birth		RotIVFGnRH-anta protocol7
<2426028.8 ± 2.7
Lin et al. [16]. 2019 (China) RC≧3022833.27 ± 3.6A: not mentioned
B: M/clinical pregnancy		A: alive at GA ≥ 24 weeks
B: L/FET cycles		A: <37 weeks
B: P/FET cycles		RotIVF/ICSIGnRH-anta protocol;
mild stimulation;
PPOS (Percentage not mentioned)		7
≧25.0, <3048033.09 ± 3.8
≧18.5, <2597232.82 ± 3.4
Qiu et al. [18]. 2019 (China)RC≧3020430.05 ± 3.6A: <1 st trimester
B: M/clinical pregnancy		A: alive at GA ≥24 weeks
B: L/FET cycles		 RotIVF/ICSI with freeze allGnRH-anta protocol6
≧25, <3078030.48 ± 3.9
≧18.5, <25191129.97 ± 3.3
<18.518428.91 ± 3.2
Zhou et al. [17]. 2020 (China) RC≧3019827.97 ± 3.0A: not mentioned
B: M/clinical pregnancy		A: not mentioned
B: not mentioned		A: not mentioned
B: not mentioned		RotIVF/ICSIUltra-long protocol7
≧25, <3074228.19 ± 3.1
≧18.5, <2580028.13 ± 3.1
<18.54227.76 ± 2.5
Guan et al. [38]. 2021 (China) RC≧28194not mentionedA: not mentioned
B: M/clinical pregnancy		A: not mentioned
B: L/clinical pregnancy		 RotOI with IUICC (3.9%);
LE (18.1%);
hMG (11.3%);
hMG + CC(17.8%);
hMG + LE (48.9%)		7
≧24, <28321
≧18.5, <24299
<18.517
RC, retrospective cohort; PC, prospective cohort; GA, gestational age; Rot, Rotterdam; US, ultrasound; Con, conception, IVF, in vitro fertilization; ICSI, intracytoplasmic sperm injection; OI, ovulation induction; IUI, intrauterine insemination; ET, embryo transfer; FET, frozen embryo transfer; Any, Spontaneous pregnancy, timed-coitus, IUI, IVF/ICSI; GnRH-anta, gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist; PPOS, progestin-primed ovarian stimulation; CC, clomiphene; LE, letrozole; hMG, human menopausal gonadotropin.
The conception method in most of the studies were in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) (13 studies). Ovulation induction was used in one study [40], ovulation induction with intrauterine insemination (IUI) in one study [38], and any conception method (including spontaneous pregnancy, timed-coitus, IUI, IVF/ICSI) in one study [34]. Among IVF or ICSI studies, four studies used long protocol [12,14,19,20], one study applied ultra-long protocol [17], three studies were conducted with GnRH antagonist protocol [18,36,39], two studies used various protocols [15,16], and three studies did not mention which protocol they used [13,21,35]. Regarding the causes of infertility, five studies excluded tubal factor [15,17,36,38,40], five studies excluded male factor [14,21,36,38,40], and three studies exclude oocyte cryopreservation or donation [13,14,21]. The detail information of infertility cause was presented in Table S2.
As only few studies reported outcomes of pregnancy-induced hypertension, pre-eclampsia, GDM, fetal death, C/S, fetal macrosomia, and IUGR, we focused our analysis on miscarriage, live birth, and PB after summarizing the outcomes of studies. Various definitions of miscarriage, live birth, and PB were adapted in these studies. Miscarriage was defined before first trimester in three studies [12,18,39], at gestational age before 20 weeks in four studies [15,19,20,35], at gestational age before 25 weeks in one study [34], at gestational age before 28 weeks in one study [14], and not mentioned in the remaining seven studies [13,16,17,21,36,38,40]. Miscarriage rate was defined as the number of miscarriages among the number of clinical pregnancies in most of the studies [12,13,16,17,18,19,20,21,36,38,39]. The definition of live birth was alive newborn in three studies [14,15,35], alive newborn at gestational age ≥24 weeks in two studies [16,18], alive newborn surviving more than one month after birth in one study [21], and not mentioned in the rest of the studies [13,17,19,36,38,39]. Live birth rate was defined differently, including live birth among number of all patients in three studies [19,21,39], the number of clinical pregnancies in two studies [13,38], the number of embryos transferred (ET) in one study [14], and the number of frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles in three studies [16,18,35]. As for PB, there were two studies defining PB as delivery before 37 weeks [16,26], one study defining PB as delivery between 28 to 37 weeks [14], and three study not mentioning [20,36,39].

3.3. Miscarriage

All the sixteen studies provided information on miscarriage. We excluded studies conducted by De Frène et al. defining miscarriage up to 25 weeks of gestation and Pan et al. defining miscarriage up to 28 weeks of gestation, because miscarriage is generally defined as a nonviable fetus up to 20 or 24 weeks of gestation. Twelve studies analyzed the association between miscarriage and overweightness (Figure 2). The meta-analysis showed significantly increased odds of miscarriage in PCOS women whose pre-pregnancy BMI is above overweight (OR 1.71 [95% CI 1.38–2.11]) under a random effect model. Heterogeneity (I2) was 12%. Egger’s test showed no significant publication bias (p = 0.23). Subgroup analysis of BMI cut-off value with 24 or 25 kg/m2 was performed, showing consistent results in these two subgroups (OR 2.06 [95% CI 1.32–3.23], and OR 1.66 [95% CI 1.28–2.15], p = 0.41). In regard to the association between miscarriage and obesity, the result showed increased odds of miscarriage in the obese group (OR 2.00 [95% CI 1.38–2.90]) with low heterogeneity (I2 = 30%) (Figure 3). Egger’s test resulted no publication bias (p = 0.38). Moreover, subgroup analysis did not show difference between BMI cut-off 28 and 30 kg/m2 (OR 2.57 [95% CI 1.20–5.53], and OR 1.84 [95% CI 1.19–2.83], p = 0.45).

3.4. Live Birth

Twelve studies included data on live birth. Using a random-effects model, the result suggested that patients in the non-overweight/non-obese groups significantly increased live birth rate compared with patients in overweight/obese groups (OR 0.79 [95% CI 0.71–0.89], and OR 0.78 [95% CI 0.67–0.91]) with low heterogeneity (19% and 1%) (Figure 4 and Figure 5). Egger’s test suggested non-significant publication bias (p = 0.17 and 0.08). The tests for subgroup difference indicated that there is no statistically significant subgroup effect between BMI cut-off 24 and 25 kg/m2, as well as between 28 and 30 kg/m2 (p = 0.61 and 0.45, respectively), suggesting different BMI cut-off does not modify the effect of overweightness/obesity in comparison to the non-overweight/non-obese group.

3.5. Preterm Birth (PB)

Seven of the studies had analysis for PB. Our meta-analysis did not detect a statistical difference between overweight/obese groups and non-overweight/non-obese groups (OR 0.99 [95% CI 0.66–1.49], and OR 0.92 [95% CI 0.43–2.00]) under random effect model (Figure 6 and Figure 7). A test for publication bias was not performed for the outcomes of preterm birth because the number of eligible studies was small. There is no subgroup effect between BMI cut-off 24 and 25 kg/m2 (p = 0.23). Because of the limited amount of data in the analysis of the association between preterm birth and obesity, subgroup analysis was not conducted.

4. Discussion

In this meta-analysis of cohort studies, we found that overweight or obese women with PCOS had a higher risk of miscarriage (1.71-fold increase in overweight, and 2.00-fold increase in obese) and a lower chance to give a live birth (0.21 reduction rate in overweight and 0.22 reduction rate in obese) compared with those without overweightness or obesity. In this study, the heterogeneity between studies is low. However, regarding to PB, we failed to find a significant difference between groups.
Women with PCOS often present with metabolic dysfunction and IR, which have an impact on body weight and may be potentially related to pregnancy loss [11,41]. A subgroup analysis of meta-analysis concluded that miscarriage in PCOS women was not associated with BMI, but it only analyzed four studies [42]. Another meta-analysis reported women with higher BMI increased risk of spontaneous abortion in PCOS patients undergoing artificial reproductive technologies [43]. Our study enrolling women diagnosed with PCOS, regardless of conception method, also yielded that overweight or obese women had higher odds of miscarriage. Among the included cohorts, Huang et al. and Bailley et al. reported the higher miscarriage rate in the group of women with lower BMI [21,35]. These results were contrary to other studies [12,13,16,17,18,19,20,36,38,39], and may result from the bias from small sample size. There are some possible causes for more miscarriages in overweight/obese women with PCOS. First, obesity is more likely to cause diabetes mellitus because of IR [44,45,46,47,48]. Glucose metabolism is important for endometrial decidualization, and IR may have alteration on endometrial receptivity [49]. Second, gene expression during window of implantation presents differently in obese women with PCOS [50]. Third, it may be related to chronic inflammatory conditions. Oróstica et al. found that similar tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) serum levels but higher TNF-α signaling with NFκB in endometrium of higher BMI range of PCOS women [51]. Xue et al. further provided a theoretical basis of abnormal endometrium in PCOS women to explain the subfertility of women with PCOS, including anovulation-induced endometrial hyperplasia, hyper-androgenic inhibition of the growth, differentiation and decidualization of the endometrium, IR related disruption of glucose metabolism in the endometrial with subsequent impairment of endometrial receptivity, progesterone resistance of the endometrium and chronic inflammatory change producing a vicious circle that disrupts the physiological endocrine and metabolic microenvironment of the endometrial and affects the receptivity of the endometrium [52]. Furthermore, obesity is associated with impaired ovarian function, poor oocyte quality and decreased reproductive performance by elevated proinflammatory cytokines, such as interleukin 6 (IL-6) and TNFα as well as oxidative stress [53,54].
Live birth rate is significantly higher in non-overweight/non-obese PCOS women with low heterogeneity. One study with subgroup analysis of PCOS women following FET also reported similar result [55]. The decreased live birth rate in overweight PCOS women may result from adverse obstetric outcomes such as pregnancy-induced hypertension, preeclampsia, and GDM, although most of the studies did not report the above outcomes. Overweight or obesity may result in decreased live birth rate due to defective decidualization, causing implantation abnormalities [56]. Abnormal implantation and placentation are associated with pregnancy-induced hypertension, preeclampsia, and IUGR. Besides, a highly significant elevation was recorded in the waist/hip, cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), fasting glucose, LH, LH/FSH ratio, estradiol (E2), and testosterone, while hip circumference, leptin, progesterone, and sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) were lower in the obese PCOS subjects [57]. One study demonstrated that higher level of triglycerides and lower level of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) decreased live birth rate owing to impaired oocyte maturation [58].
In regard to the impact of pregestational BMI on PB, previous studies demonstrated inconsistent results in the general population [14,16,20,26,36,38]. One meta-analysis of European, North American, and Australian cohorts reported that both lower and higher maternal pregestational BMI were associated with a higher risk of preterm birth [59], while another meta-analysis conducted in low- and middle-income countries showed that only underweight women had higher risk of preterm birth [60]. As the results remains controversial in the general population, it is not surprising that our study did not have a statistical difference between overweight/obese and non-overweight/non-obese individuals among women with PCOS. In addition, our result was in line with one previous meta-analysis conducted in 2018 [61].
This review adds to the body of literature on the effects of overweight/obesity on the pregnancy outcomes of women with PCOS. There are several strengths to our meta-analysis. First, to our limited knowledge, this meta-analysis directly focused on the association between overweightness/obesity and pregnancy outcomes in women with PCOS, although Bahri et al. had performed meta-analyses comparing pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in women with PCOS and without PCOS [42,61]. The subgroup analyses also reported the effect of BMI on miscarriage and preterm birth in the current study. Nevertheless, the study population in Bahri’s analyses were different from ours, because studies including only PCOS women would not be eligible in meta-analysis conducted by Bahri. In fact, Bahri et al. concluded that miscarriage is not associated with higher BMI value in women with PCOS, and their results could not explain why the live birth rate is lower in PCOS women with higher BMI value. Second, though various criteria for diagnosis of PCOS have been proposed by different societies, including National Institutes of Health (NIH) in 1990, Rotterdam criteria in 2003, and Androgen Excess and PCOS Society (AE-PCOS) in 2006 [62,63,64], most of the cohort studies enrolled into this meta-analysis adopted Rotterdam criteria, and only one study conducted in 1992 using ultrasound image as diagnostic method was included [40]. Third, the definitions of BMI were heterogenous in the literatures [65,66,67,68,69,70,71]. Generally, studies conducted in western countries used WHO classification for nutritional status, whereas studies in China partly used WHO classification, partly used lower cutoff for overweightness and obesity (i.e., BMI 24 kg/m2 and 28 kg/m2) compared to the WHO classification. The lower cutoff of BMI in China was based on previous studies that Asians generally had lower BMI than Western people [37]. To overcome the concerning that the cut-offs of BMI may potentially influence the results of this study, we added subgroup analysis using different BMI cut-offs.
There are some limitations for this study. First, most of the studies were patients receiving IVF or ICSI treatment. Since patients with PCOS are characterized by chronic anovulation, resulting infertility, it may explain that a lot of studies analyzed individuals with PCOS and infertility treatment. Second, observational studies were included, for which the risk of bias could not be eliminated completely. Third, most of the studies were conducted in China, the results cannot be fully applied in other countries. Finally, we did not discuss other pregnancy outcomes such as GDM, preeclampsia, C/S in our meta-analysis due to scarce information in the studies. Further research aiming on the effect of pre-pregnancy BMI on other pregnancy outcomes in PCOS women is warranted.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, the evidence to date supports a negative association between pre-pregnant overweightness/obesity and live birth rate and a positive association between pre-pregnant overweightness/obesity and miscarriage rate in pregnant women with PCOS, suggesting that the main critical factor contributing to the worse pregnancy outcome may be an early fetal loss in these women with pre-pregnancy overweight/obesity. Therefore, weight control during the preconception period may be warranted and overweight/obese women with PCOS who attempt to get pregnant should be well-informed that reduction of body weight may have a benefit for the subsequent pregnancy outcomes.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijerph19159094/s1, Table S1: Use MeSH term and Emtree combined with Boolean operators; Table S2: Causes of infertility in the included studies.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.-T.Y., C.-H.L., S.-H.M., W.-H.C., Y.-J.C., W.-L.L. and P.-H.W.; formal analysis, S.-T.Y., C.-H.L., S.-H.M., W.-L.L. and P.-H.W.; investigation, W.-H.C. and P.-H.W.; resources, S.-T.Y., C.-H.L., S.-H.M. and P.-H.W.; data curation, S.-T.Y.; methodology, S.-T.Y., C.-H.L., S.-H.M., W.-H.C. and P.-H.W.; writing—original draft, S.-T.Y.; writing—review and editing, S.-T.Y., S.-H.M., W.-H.C. and P.-H.W.; supervision, W.-H.C., W.-L.L. and P.-H.W.; project administration, P.-H.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This article was supported by grants from the Ministry of Science and Technology, Executive Yuan, Taiwan (MOST 111-2314-B-075-045 and MOST 110-2314-B-075-016-MY3), and Taipei Veterans General Hospital (V110C-082, VGH111C-103, and VGH111A-009).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Taipei Veterans General Hospital (IRB number: 2020-12-002BC) on 7 December 2020.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was waived by the IRB due to the anonymous nature of all the subjects involved in the study.

Acknowledgments

The authors appreciate the support from Female Cancer Foundation, Taipei, Taiwan.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. McCartney, C.R.; Marshall, J.C. Polycystic Ovary Syndrome. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016, 375, 54–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Armanini, D.; Boscaro, M.; Bordin, L.; Sabbadin, C. Controversies in the Pathogenesis, Diagnosis and Treatment of PCOS: Focus on Insulin Resistance, Inflammation, and Hyperandrogenism. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 4110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Sadeghi, H.M.; Adeli, I.; Calina, D.; Docea, A.O.; Mousavi, T.; Daniali, M.; Nikfar, S.; Tsatsakis, A.; Abdollahi, M. Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Comprehensive Review of Pathogenesis, Management, and Drug Repurposing. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Chen, Q.; Zheng, B.; Du, S.; Lin, Y. Explore the potential molecular mechanism of polycystic ovarian syndrome by protein-protein interaction network analysis. Taiwan. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2021, 60, 807–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Lin, J.H.; Sun, K.C.; Wang, P.H. Does the observation of lower ratio of anterior anogenital distance and posterior anogenital distance appear in adolescent and remain constant in women diagnosed with polycystic ovary syndrome? J. Chin. Med. Assoc. 2020, 83, 211–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Dennett, C.C.; Simon, J. The role of polycystic ovary syndrome in reproductive and metabolic health: Overview and approaches for treatment. Diabetes Spectr. 2015, 28, 116–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Seow, K.M.; Chang, Y.W.; Chen, K.H.; Juan, C.C.; Huang, C.Y.; Lin, L.T.; Tsui, K.H.; Chen, Y.J.; Lee, W.L.; Wang, P.H. Molecular Mechanisms of Laparoscopic Ovarian Drilling and Its Therapeutic Effects in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 8147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Yu, H.F.; Chen, H.S.; Rao, D.P.; Gong, J. Association between polycystic ovary syndrome and the risk of pregnancy complications: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine 2016, 95, e4863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Toosy, S.; Sodi, R.; Pappachan, J.M. Lean polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS): An evidence-based practical approach. J. Diabetes Metab. Disord. 2018, 17, 277–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sebire, N.J.; Jolly, M.; Harris, J.P.; Wadsworth, J.; Joffe, M.; Beard, R.W.; Regan, L.; Robinson, S. Maternal obesity and pregnancy outcome: A study of 287,213 pregnancies in London. Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. 2001, 25, 1175–1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Valent, A.M.; Barbour, L.A. Management of Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome during Pregnancy. Endocrinol. Metab. Clin. N. Am. 2021, 50, 57–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Sheng, Y.; Lu, G.; Liu, J.; Liang, X.; Ma, Y.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, S.; Sun, Y.; Sun, Y.; Chen, W.; et al. Effect of body mass index on the outcomes of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in Chinese women with polycystic ovary syndrome: A multicenter, prospective, observational study. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2017, 34, 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. Shalom-Paz, E.; Marzal, A.; Wiser, A.; Almog, B.; Reinblatt, S.; Tulandi, T.; Holzer, H. Effects of different body mass indices on in vitro maturation in women with polycystic ovaries. Fertil. Steril. 2011, 96, 336–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Pan, X.-M.; Lin, Z.; Li, N.; Wu, J.-Q.; Chen, D.-Q.; Zhu, Y.-M.; Qu, F. Effects of body mass index on the outcomes of in vitro fertilization in Chinese patients with polycystic ovary syndrome: A retrospective cohort study. J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. B 2018, 19, 490–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. McCormick, B.; Thomas, M.; Maxwell, R.; Williams, D.; Aubuchon, M. Effects of polycystic ovarian syndrome on in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer outcomes are influenced by body mass index. Fertil. Steril. 2008, 90, 2304–2309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Lin, J.; Huang, J.; Wang, N.; Kuang, Y.; Cai, R. Effects of pre-pregnancy body mass index on pregnancy and perinatal outcomes in women with PCOS undergoing frozen embryo transfer. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2019, 19, 487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Zhou, H.; Zhang, D.; Luo, Z.; Yang, A.; Cui, N.; Hao, G.; Wang, W. Association between Body Mass Index and Reproductive Outcome in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Receiving IVF/ICSI-ET. Biomed. Res. Int. 2020, 2020, 6434080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Qiu, M.; Tao, Y.; Kuang, Y.; Wang, Y. Effect of body mass index on pregnancy outcomes with the freeze-all strategy in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome. Fertil. Steril. 2019, 112, 1172–1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Ozgun, M.T.; Uludag, S.; Oner, G.; Batukan, C.; Aygen, E.M.; Sahin, Y. The influence of obesity on ICSI outcomes in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2011, 31, 245–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Cui, N.; Wang, H.; Wang, W.; Zhang, J.; Xu, Y.; Jiang, L.; Yang, A.; Hao, G. Impact of Body Mass Index on Outcomes of In Vitro Fertilization/Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection among Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome Patients. Cell. Physiol. Biochem. 2016, 39, 1723–1734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Huang, K.; Liao, X.; Dong, X.; Zhang, H. Effect of overweight/obesity on IVF-ET outcomes in chinese patients with polycystic ovary syndrome. Int. J. Clin. Exp. Med. 2014, 7, 5872–5876. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  22. Lee, W.L.; Lee, F.K.; Wang, P.H. Pre-pregnancy body mass index is a determined risk factor for the development of gestational diabetes, regardless of singleton or twin pregnancy. Taiwan. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2022, 61, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Song, X.; Shu, J.; Zhang, S.; Chen, L.; Diao, J.; Li, J.; Li, Y.; Wei, J.; Liu, Y.; Sun, M.; et al. Pre-Pregnancy Body Mass Index and Risk of Macrosomia and Large for Gestational Age Births with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus as a Mediator: A Prospective Cohort Study in Central China. Nutrients 2022, 14, 1072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Kuo, S.C.; Lee, W.L.; Wang, P.H. The effects of maternal body weight and gestational diabetes mellitus on the risk of the delivery of large-for-gestational age babies: Synergistic or additive? Taiwan. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2022, 61, 413–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Fakhraei, R.; Denize, K.; Simon, A.; Sharif, A.; Zhu-Pawlowsky, J.; Dingwall-Harvey, A.L.J.; Hutton, B.; Pratt, M.; Skidmore, B.; Ahmadzai, N.; et al. Predictors of Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes in Pregnant Women Living with Obesity: A Systematic Review. Int. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 2063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Chang, W.H.; Lee, W.L.; Wang, P.H. Gestational weight gain and birth weight of newborn. Taiwan. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2021, 60, 979–980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Stroup, D.F.; Berlin, J.A.; Morton, S.C.; Olkin, I.; Williamson, G.D.; Rennie, D.; Moher, D.; Becker, B.J.; Sipe, T.A.; Thacker, S.B. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: A proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 2000, 283, 2008–2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021, 372, n71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Latina, R.; Iacorossi, L.; Fauci, A.J.; Biffi, A.; Castellini, G.; Coclite, D.; D’Angelo, D.; Gianola, S.; Mari, V.; Napoletano, A.; et al. On Behalf of Inih-Major Trauma. Effectiveness of Pre-Hospital Tourniquet in Emergency Patients with Major Trauma and Uncontrolled Haemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 12861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Magrini, M.; Curzio, O.; Tampucci, M.; Donzelli, G.; Cori, L.; Imiotti, M.C.; Maestro, S.; Moroni, D. Anorexia Nervosa, Body Image Perception and Virtual Reality Therapeutic Applications: State of the Art and Operational Proposal. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 2533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Stang, A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 2010, 25, 603–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  32. Alam, M.K.; Alfawzan, A.A.; Shrivastava, D.; Srivastava, K.C.; Alswairki, H.J.; Mussallam, S.; Abutayyem, H.; Ahmed, N. Oral Health Status in Marfan Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 353 Cases. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 5048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. World Health Organization. Obesity: Preventing and Managing the Global Epidemic; Report of a WHO consultation; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2000; Volume 894, pp. 1–253. [Google Scholar]
  34. De Frene, V.; Vansteelandt, S.; T’Sjoen, G.; Gerris, J.; Somers, S.; Vercruysse, L.; De Sutter, P. A retrospective study of the pregnancy, delivery and neonatal outcome in overweight versus normal weight women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Hum. Reprod. 2014, 29, 2333–2338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Bailey, A.P.; Hawkins, L.K.; Missmer, S.A.; Correia, K.F.; Yanushpolsky, E.H. Effect of body mass index on in vitro fertilization outcomes in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2014, 211, 163.e161–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Yang, W.; Yang, R.; Lin, M.M.; Yang, Y.; Song, X.L.; Zhang, J.J.; Yang, S.; Song, Y.; Li, J.; Pang, T.S.; et al. Body mass index and basal androstenedione are independent risk factors for miscarriage in polycystic ovary syndrome. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 2018, 16, 119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Chen, C.M. Overview of obesity in Mainland China. Obes. Rev. 2008, 9 (Suppl. S1), 14–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Guan, H.J.; Pan, L.Q.; Song, H.; Tang, H.Y.; Tang, L.S. Predictors of pregnancy after intrauterine insemination in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. J. Int. Med. Res. 2021, 49, 3000605211018600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Chen, R.; Chen, S.; Liu, M.; He, H.; Xu, H.; Liu, H.; Du, H.; Wang, W.; Xia, X.; Liu, J. Pregnancy outcomes of PCOS overweight/obese patients after controlled ovarian stimulation with the GnRH antagonist protocol and frozen embryo transfer. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 2018, 16, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Hamilton-Fairley, D.; Kiddy, D.; Watson, H.; Paterson, C.; Franks, S. Association of moderate obesity with a poor pregnancy outcome in women with polycystic ovary syndrome treated with low dose gonadotrophin. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 1992, 99, 128–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Maryam, K.; Bouzari, Z.; Basirat, Z.; Kashifard, M.; Zadeh, M.Z. The comparison of insulin resistance frequency in patients with recurrent early pregnancy loss to normal individuals. BMC Res. Notes 2012, 5, 133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Bahri Khomami, M.; Joham, A.E.; Boyle, J.A.; Piltonen, T.; Silagy, M.; Arora, C.; Misso, M.L.; Teede, H.J.; Moran, L.J. Increased maternal pregnancy complications in polycystic ovary syndrome appear to be independent of obesity—A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Obes. Rev. 2019, 20, 659–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Sun, Y.F.; Zhang, J.; Xu, Y.M.; Cao, Z.Y.; Wang, Y.Z.; Hao, G.M.; Gao, B.L. High BMI and Insulin Resistance Are Risk Factors for Spontaneous Abortion in Patients with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front. Endocrinol. 2020, 11, 592495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Wu, T.H.; Lee, I.T.; Ho, L.T.; Sheu, W.H.; Hwu, C.M. Combined Lipid Goal Attainment in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Dyslipidemia: A Head-to-Head Comparative Trial of Statins. J. Chin. Med. Assoc. 2022, 85, 832–839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Zhang, S.; Sun, D.; Qian, X.; Li, L.; Wu, W. Combined Effects of Obesity and Dyslipidaemia on the Prevalence of Diabetes Amongst Adults Aged ≥45 Years: Evidence from a Nationally Representative Cross-Sectional Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 8036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Chuang, W.C.; Chu, C.H.; Hsu, Y.H.; Yao, C.S. Effect of socioeconomic status on survival in patients on the Diabetes Shared Care Program: Finding from a Taiwan nationwide cohort. J. Chin. Med. Assoc. 2022, 85, 311–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Sheehan, C.M.; Gotlieb, E.E.; Ayers, S.L.; Tong, D.; Oesterle, S.; Vega-López, S.; Wolfersteig, W.; Ruelas, D.M.; Shaibi, G.Q. Neighborhood Conditions and Type 2 Diabetes Risk among Latino Adolescents with Obesity in Phoenix. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 7920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Lo, W.J.; Lin, Y.C.; Chang, H.Y.; Chen, M.J. Risk factors for ocular neovascularization after central retinal artery occlusion. J. Chin. Med. Assoc. 2022, 85, 881–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Zhao, J.; Chen, Q.; Xue, X. An Update on the Progress of Endometrial Receptivity in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome. Reprod. Sci. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Bellver, J.; Martinez-Conejero, J.A.; Labarta, E.; Alama, P.; Melo, M.A.; Remohi, J.; Pellicer, A.; Horcajadas, J.A. Endometrial gene expression in the window of implantation is altered in obese women especially in association with polycystic ovary syndrome. Fertil. Steril. 2011, 95, 2335–2341, 2341.e1–2341.e8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Oróstica, L.; Astorga, I.; Plaza-Parrochia, F.; Vera, C.; Garcia, V.; Carvajal, R.; Gabler, F.; Romero, C.; Vega, M. Proinflammatory environment and role of TNF-alpha in endometrial function of obese women having polycystic ovarian syndrome. Int. J. Obes. 2016, 40, 1715–1722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Xue, Z.; Li, J.; Feng, J.; Han, H.; Zhao, J.; Zhang, J.; Han, Y.; Wu, X.; Zhang, Y. Research Progress on the Mechanism between Polycystic Ovary Syndrome and Abnormal Endometrium. Front. Physiol. 2021, 12, 788772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Snider, A.P.; Wood, J.R. Obesity induces ovarian inflammation and reduces oocyte quality. Reproduction 2019, 158, R79–R90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  54. Yang, C.C.; Liao, P.H.; Cheng, Y.H.; Chien, C.Y.; Cheng, K.H.; Chien, C.T. Diabetes associated with hypertension exacerbated oxidative stress-mediated inflammation, apoptosis and autophagy leading to erectile dysfunction in rats. J. Chin. Med. Assoc. 2022, 85, 346–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Yang, J.; He, Y.; Wu, Y.; Zhang, D.; Huang, H. Association between abnormal body mass index and pregnancy outcomes in patients following frozen embryo transfer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 2021, 19, 140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Jiang, X.; Liu, R.; Liao, T.; He, Y.; Li, C.; Guo, P.; Zhou, P.; Cao, Y.; Wei, Z. A Predictive Model of Live Birth Based on Obesity and Metabolic Parameters in Patients with PCOS Undergoing Frozen-Thawed Embryo Transfer. Front. Endocrinol. 2021, 12, 799871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Bednarz, K.; Kowalczyk, K.; Cwynar, M.; Czapla, D.; Czarkowski, W.; Kmita, D.; Nowak, A.; Madej, P. The Role of Glp-1 Receptor Agonists in Insulin Resistance with Concomitant Obesity Treatment in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 4334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Liu, T.; Liu, D.; Song, X.; Qu, J.; Zheng, X.; Li, J.; Yang, R.; Yang, S.; Zhang, X.; Wang, H.; et al. Lipid Metabolism Was Associated with Oocyte in vitro Maturation in Women with Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome Undergoing Unstimulated Natural Cycle. Front. Cell. Dev. Biol. 2021, 9, 719173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Santos, S.; Voerman, E.; Amiano, P.; Barros, H.; Beilin, L.J.; Bergstrom, A.; Charles, M.A.; Chatzi, L.; Chevrier, C.; Chrousos, G.P.; et al. Impact of maternal body mass index and gestational weight gain on pregnancy complications: An individual participant data meta-analysis of European, North American and Australian cohorts. BJOG 2019, 126, 984–995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Rahman, M.M.; Abe, S.K.; Kanda, M.; Narita, S.; Rahman, M.S.; Bilano, V.; Ota, E.; Gilmour, S.; Shibuya, K. Maternal body mass index and risk of birth and maternal health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes. Rev. 2015, 16, 758–770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Bahri Khomami, M.; Joham, A.E.; Boyle, J.A.; Piltonen, T.; Arora, C.; Silagy, M.; Misso, M.L.; Teede, H.J.; Moran, L.J. The role of maternal obesity in infant outcomes in polycystic ovary syndrome-A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Obes. Rev. 2019, 20, 842–858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Wang, R.; Mol, B.W. The Rotterdam criteria for polycystic ovary syndrome: Evidence-based criteria? Hum. Reprod. 2017, 32, 261–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Teede, H.J.; Misso, M.L.; Costello, M.F.; Dokras, A.; Laven, J.; Moran, L.; Piltonen, T.; Norman, R.J.; International PCOS Network. Recommendations from the international evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome. Fertil. Steril. 2018, 110, 364–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  64. Zhang, Y.; Wu, L.; Li, T.C.; Wang, C.C.; Zhang, T.; Chung, J.P.W. Systematic review update and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials of ovarian stimulation versus artificial cycle for endometrial preparation prior to frozen embryo transfer in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 2022, 20, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Lin, C.H.; Li, Y.H.; Wang, Y.Y.; Chang, W.D. Higher Neutrophil-To-Lymphocyte Ratio Was Associated with Increased Risk of Chronic Kidney Disease in Overweight/Obese but Not Normal-Weight Individuals. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 8077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Hung, K.Y.; Chen, S.T.; Chu, Y.Y.; Ho, G.; Liu, W.L. Nutrition support for acute kidney injury 2020-consensus of the Taiwan AKI task force. J. Chin. Med. Assoc. 2022, 85, 252–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Cooke, M.B.; Deasy, W.; Ritenis, E.J.; Wilson, R.A.; Stathis, C.G. Effects of Intermittent Energy Restriction Alone and in Combination with Sprint Interval Training on Body Composition and Cardiometabolic Biomarkers in Individuals with Overweight and Obesity. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 7969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Abdul Basir, S.M.; Abdul Manaf, Z.; Mohd Noor, N.; Mat Ludin, A.F.; Shahar, S.; Abdul Manaf, M.R. The Challenges and Strategies towards Healthy Eating during COVID-19 Home Confinement Period among Working Adults with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 Enrolled in a Weight Loss Program: Qualitative Findings. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 6656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Lin, B.Z.; Lin, T.J.; Lin, C.L.; Liao, L.Y.; Chang, T.A.; Lu, B.J.; Chen, K.Y. Differentiation of clinical patterns and survival outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma on hepatitis B and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. J. Chin. Med. Assoc. 2021, 84, 606–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Chen, C.T.; Lin, M.C.; Lee, Y.J.; Li, L.H.; Chen, Y.J.; Chuanyi Hou, P.; How, C.K. Association between body mass index and clinical outcomes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors treated with targeted temperature management. J. Chin. Med. Assoc. 2021, 84, 504–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Ellahi, B.; Aitken, A.; Dikmen, D.; Seyhan-Erdoğan, B.; Makda, M.; Razaq, R. Acceptability, Usability and Weight Loss Outcomes in a Randomized Cross-Over Study of Commercially Available Portion Size Tools in an Overweight South Asian Community. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 7714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijerph 19 09094 g001 550
Figure 1. Flowchart of literature search and selection.
Figure 1. Flowchart of literature search and selection.
Ijerph 19 09094 g001
Ijerph 19 09094 g002 550
Figure 2. Forest plot of the association between miscarriage and overweightness in women with PCOS.
Figure 2. Forest plot of the association between miscarriage and overweightness in women with PCOS.
Ijerph 19 09094 g002
Ijerph 19 09094 g003 550
Figure 3. Forest plot of the association between miscarriage and obesity in women with PCOS.
Figure 3. Forest plot of the association between miscarriage and obesity in women with PCOS.
Ijerph 19 09094 g003
Ijerph 19 09094 g004 550
Figure 4. Forest plot of the association between live birth and overweightness in women with PCOS.
Figure 4. Forest plot of the association between live birth and overweightness in women with PCOS.
Ijerph 19 09094 g004
Ijerph 19 09094 g005 550
Figure 5. Forest plot of the association between live birth and obesity in women with PCOS.
Figure 5. Forest plot of the association between live birth and obesity in women with PCOS.
Ijerph 19 09094 g005
Ijerph 19 09094 g006 550
Figure 6. Forest plot of the association between preterm birth and overweightness in women with PCOS.
Figure 6. Forest plot of the association between preterm birth and overweightness in women with PCOS.
Ijerph 19 09094 g006
Ijerph 19 09094 g007 550
Figure 7. Forest plot of the association between preterm birth and obesity in women with PCOS.
Figure 7. Forest plot of the association between preterm birth and obesity in women with PCOS.
Ijerph 19 09094 g007
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yang, S.-T.; Liu, C.-H.; Ma, S.-H.; Chang, W.-H.; Chen, Y.-J.; Lee, W.-L.; Wang, P.-H. Association between Pre-Pregnancy Overweightness/Obesity and Pregnancy Outcomes in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 9094. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159094

AMA Style

Yang S-T, Liu C-H, Ma S-H, Chang W-H, Chen Y-J, Lee W-L, Wang P-H. Association between Pre-Pregnancy Overweightness/Obesity and Pregnancy Outcomes in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(15):9094. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159094

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yang, Szu-Ting, Chia-Hao Liu, Sheng-Hsiang Ma, Wen-Hsun Chang, Yi-Jen Chen, Wen-Ling Lee, and Peng-Hui Wang. 2022. "Association between Pre-Pregnancy Overweightness/Obesity and Pregnancy Outcomes in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 15: 9094. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159094

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop