Key result
Fertility treatment in women with spinal cord injuries resulted in similar live birth rates compared to spontaneous conception (66.7% vs 64.5%; OR 1.97; 95% CI 0.40-9.69; p=0.41).
Why the study?
Does fertility treatment improve live birth rates in women with spinal cord injuries compared to spontaneous conception?
Cross-Sectional (n=193)
Does fertility treatment improve live birth rates in women with spinal cord injuries compared to spontaneous conception?
Odds Ratio: 1.97 (95% CI 0.4–9.69)
Absolute Event Rate: 66.7% vs 64.5%
p-value: p=0.41
Fertility treatment in women with spinal cord injuries results in similar live birth rates and major obstetrical complications compared to spontaneous conception.
Hypothesis-generating for fertility treatment feasibility after SCI; leaves open practice change pending larger prospective studies.
Women with spinal cord injuries (SCI) who conceived spontaneously or with fertility treatment from the Spinal Cord Injury, Urogenital Health and Pregnancy (SCI-UP) survey were compared. We included 350 pregnancies from 193 participants with at least one pregnancy following SCI. Fertility treatment occurred in 5.1% of pregnancies. Live birth rate was 66.7% with treatment vs. 64.5% without (odds ratio, 1.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.40–9.69; p = .41). Time to first conception was longer in the treatment group (median, 12 [interquartile range, 9–14) vs. 6 years 3–12]). No differences were seen in major obstetrical complications between groups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dinh et al. (2025) conducted a cross-sectional in Spinal cord injuries (SCI) with pregnancy (n=193). Fertility treatment vs. Spontaneous conception (no fertility treatment) was evaluated on Live birth rate (OR 1.97, 95% CI 0.40-9.69, p=0.41). Fertility treatment in women with spinal cord injuries resulted in similar live birth rates compared to spontaneous conception (66.7% vs 64.5%; OR 1.97; 95% CI 0.40-9.69; p=0.41).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: