Back

Stopping the misinformation: BNT16b2 COVID-19 vaccine has no negative effect on women's fertility

Safrai, M.; Rottenstreich, A.; Herzberg, S.; Imbar, T.; Reubinoff, B.; Ben-Meir, A.

2021-06-01 obstetrics and gynecology
10.1101/2021.05.30.21258079
Show abstract

ObjectiveTo investigate the possible impact of Pfizer-BioNTechs mRNA BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine on womens fertility. MethodsA retrospective single-center study examining womens IVF treatment parameters and pregnancies before and after their vaccination between February and May 2021. Each woman served as a self-control before and after vaccination. Additionally, in order to neutralize the effect of the sperm on fertilization, only Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) patients who were currently being treated with an ICSI cycle and had an earlier ICSI cycle available were included in the study. The study outcomes compared between the PRE and POST vaccination groups and consisted of: the IVF cycle outcomes, including the number of oocytes retrieved; the number of matured oocytes; the fertilization rate; and the number and quality of embryos at day 3. Clinical pregnancy was based on the first hCG value reported if the data were available for both cycles. ResultsA final total of 47 women were eligible for inclusion with a mean interval of 362 {+/-}368 days between the two ovum pick ups. The characteristics of their ICSI cycles before and after the vaccination were similar for all the parameters. Additionally, the number and percentage of clinical pregnancies did not significantly differ between the PRE and POST vaccination groups (n=15). ConclusionThis study is the first to evaluate the impact of the BNT162b2 vaccine on womens fertility. From our findings, the vaccine appears to have no impact on womens fertility. This study is the first step in abolishing the misinformation derived from unreliable sources and reassuring patients in order to improve compliance and promote COVID-19 eradication.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
based on 1737 papers
Top 10%
31.1%
2
Human Reproduction
based on 11 papers
Top 0.1%
20.3%
50% of probability mass above
3
Journal of Clinical Medicine
based on 77 papers
Top 1%
6.4%
4
Vaccines
based on 131 papers
Top 2%
3.5%
5
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
based on 19 papers
Top 0.7%
3.4%
6
Scientific Reports
based on 701 papers
Top 45%
3.4%
7
Cureus
based on 64 papers
Top 5%
2.9%
8
Heliyon
based on 57 papers
Top 4%
1.9%
9
BMJ Open
based on 553 papers
Top 38%
1.9%
10
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
based on 14 papers
Top 0.8%
1.6%
11
Diagnostics
based on 36 papers
Top 3%
1.6%
12
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
based on 12 papers
Top 1%
1.0%
13
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
based on 116 papers
Top 19%
1.0%
14
BioMed Research International
based on 11 papers
Top 2%
1.0%
15
Journal of Medical Economics
based on 10 papers
Top 0.8%
1.0%
16
Public Health
based on 34 papers
Top 7%
0.8%
17
Clinical Infectious Diseases
based on 219 papers
Top 20%
0.8%
18
BMJ
based on 49 papers
Top 8%
0.5%
19
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
based on 53 papers
Top 7%
0.5%
20
JAMA Network Open
based on 125 papers
Top 22%
0.5%
21
Clinical Chemistry
based on 14 papers
Top 2%
0.5%
22
Journal of Medical Internet Research
based on 81 papers
Top 17%
0.5%
23
Applied Sciences
based on 10 papers
Top 2%
0.5%
24
BMC Medicine
based on 155 papers
Top 27%
0.5%
25
Journal of Clinical Pathology
based on 11 papers
Top 1%
0.5%
26
eLife
based on 262 papers
Top 36%
0.5%