Association of assisted reproductive technology with autism spectrum disorder in the offspring: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

This study aims to provide an up-to-date meta-analysis of data from studies investigating the risk of bearing a child with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) after being conceived by assisted reproductive technology (ART). The study was conducted according to the PRISMA Statement. PubMed and Scopus databases were searched up to August 2, 2020. Observational studies using a type of conception of assisted reproductive technology and examined as outcome offspring with ASD were included. A random effect model was applied due to the heterogeneity of the studies. Statistical analysis was performed with Stata 13 software. The Newcastle–Ottawa scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. The search strategy identified 587 potentially relevant studies. A total of 15 studies provided adequate data for statistical comparisons and, therefore, were included in the meta-analysis. Analysis of the subset of studies that examined all offspring and controlled for confounder factors revealed that the use of ART is associated with a higher risk of ASD (RR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.03–1.19, p < 0.009), while in the case of studies that focused on singletons, a statistically significant association between ART and ASD was not observed (RR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.82–1.13, p = 0.654). Conclusion: The present meta-analysis confirmed the existing positive correlation between ART and ASD in offspring, suggesting that ART is correlated with a higher risk for bearing a child with ASD. In contrast, this relationship is not confirmed in singletons. High quality prospective studies with a larger number of participants are still required.What is Known:• Studies that investigated the association between ART and ASD in offspring have shown conflicting results.• A previous meta-analysis showed that offspring conceived by ART are 1.35 times more likely to develop ASD than offspring spontaneously conceived.What is New:• This investigation separately considered studies with and without adjustment for confounders.• The findings from the two analyses were similar. © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.