This chapter should be cited as follows:
Giudice LC, Glob. libr. women's med.,
ISSN: 1756-2228; DOI 10.3843/GLOWM.421103
The Continuous Textbook of Women’s Medicine Series – Gynecology Module
Volume 15
Reproductive medicine for the obstetrician and gynecologist
Volume Editors:
Professor Luca Gianaroli, S.I.S.Me.R. Reproductive Medicine Institute, Italy; Director of Global Educational Programs, IFFS
Professor Edgar Mocanu, RCSI Associate Professor in Reproductive Medicine and Surgery, Rotunda Hospital, Ireland; President, IFFS
Professor Linda Giudice, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, USA; Immediate Past President, IFFS
Published in association with the
International Federation of
Fertility Societies
Chapter
Environmental Toxicant Effects on Reproductive Health and Clinical Management to Mitigate Risk
First published: November 2024
Study Assessment Option
By completing 4 multiple-choice questions (randomly selected) after studying this chapter readers can qualify for Continuing Professional Development awards from FIGO plus a Study Completion Certificate from GLOWM
See end of chapter for details
INTRODUCTION
Abundant scientific and epidemiologic data over the past 20 years support significant harmful effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals, heavy metals, air pollution and climate change on human health and, specifically, reproductive health including fertility, pregnancy and neonatal outcomes, and risks of developing reproductive tract abnormalities.1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16 Unfortunately, patients, consumers, the public at large, healthcare providers in training and in practice, and governmental policy makers are largely unaware of these effects which carry high morbidity and may be preventable.4,17 Moreover, healthcare professionals are mostly uncertain about how to take a history to screen for risk of exposures and how to advise about strategies to mitigate harms.17,18 This chapter describes how individuals and populations are exposed to environmental toxicants and summarizes the evidence for harm to fertility potential and pregnancy outcomes, how to take an environmental history, and approaches for patient and provider education and mitigating strategies to minimize harm. Information conveyed herein is based on systematic reviews, meta-analyses, peer-reviewed scientific publications, commentaries, scoping reviews, narrative reviews, and professional society statements spanning mainly 2014–2024.
HOW PEOPLE ARE EXPOSED
There are four main ways to be exposed to environmental toxicants – inhalation, ingestion, transdermal, transplacental (and transgenerational).3,10 Particularly vulnerable populations include the developing fetus, children, pregnant persons, the elderly, those with chronic diseases, those with disabilities, workers in hazardous jobs, and marginalized populations. Climate change, which involves global warming, extreme temperatures and weather, and increased air pollution, impacts water and food availability and quality19 (Figure 1). It derives mainly from burning fossil fuels (coal, oil, natural gas) to generate energy for industrial processes, electricity, and transportation. Air pollution contains particulate matter PM2.5 and PM10 (2.5 mm and 10 mm diameter, respectively), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), and other components. It also includes endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) (e.g., volatile hydrocarbons, heavy metals) that disrupt endocrine processes – highly relevant to reproductive health. Major sources of EDC exposures to people (Figure 2) are pesticides and industrial waste or accidents that contaminate nearby water and land (and thus human drinking water sources and food). Other exposure sources include personal care products, personal behaviors, lifestyle, hobbies, toys, home or work environments, digital receipts, and plastic waste end e-waste (Table 1).4,10,20,21 As environmental toxicants are ubiquitous, awareness, education, and mitigation are key to optimize reproductive health.
General population | Occupational exposures |
|
|
BPA, bisphenol A; Br, brominated; Cl, chlorinated; CH20, formaldehyde; O3, ozone; PM, particulate matter; Pb, lead; PBDEs, polybrominated diphenyl ethers; VOCs, volatile organochlorines.
METHODOLOGIES TO STUDY POSSIBLE REPRODUCTIVE HARM
Determining whether exposures cause harm is complicated, as studies often differ in study designs, primary outcomes, populations, controls, duration of exposure, age of exposure, genetic susceptibilities, and analytic approaches. That said, there is strong evidence for EDCs, air pollution and heat affecting reproductive health. Cause and effects for these exposures and mechanistic underpinnings for hormone signaling and disruption largely derive from laboratory animal and in vitro cell models.3,21,22 Epidemiologic (mostly observational cohort) studies reveal data correlating environmental exposures and human health outcomes, and the Navigation Guide,23 which bridges clinical and environmental health, integrates animal and human studies, predicts risk of harm, and strength of the evidence. Chemical mixtures are the rule in environmental exposures,3,21 and exposures are routinely to multiple chemicals of different classes with similar or differing signaling mechanisms that can lead to synergistic, additive, or antagonistic or no effect on physiologic outcomes. Notably, mixture risk assessment bio-monitoring data and statistical modeling24,25 are increasingly incorporating more real-life exposures on health outcomes. In addition, job exposure matrices26,27provide the occupational health intersection, key in planning mitigation strategies in the workplace, and wild-life studies can be key as “canaries in the coal mine” for possible human health impacts. Notably, PM can cause systemic and local inflammation, and EDCs disrupt estrogen, androgen, signaling through epigenetic, gene expression and protein alterations, thereby altering cellular and organ functions in multiple systems.3,21 Additionally, many in utero exposures can lead to effects in subsequent generations even without direct exposure due to transgenerational transmission of epigenetic marks in the genome inherited in future generations.28 The following section summarizes evidence for effects of environmental toxicants, climate change, air pollution, and heat on fertility and pregnancy outcomes.
EVIDENCE OF REPRODUCTIVE HARM
Reproductive potential and competence
Endocrine-disrupting chemicals
Numerous studies demonstrate that EDCs can disrupt gamete, embryo, gonadal, and reproductive tract development and functions and increase risk of developing reproductive disorders in females and males associated with diminished reproductive capacity and poor pregnancy and neonatal outcomes3,5,10,29 (Table 2). Assisted reproductive technologies (ART) and fertility cohorts give insights into EDCs affecting reproductive potential and outcomes (e.g., the Environment and Reproductive Health Study at Harvard University (https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/earth/) and the Longitudinal Investigation of Infertility and the Environment (LIFE) Study at the US National Institutes of Health (https://www.nichd.nih.gov/about/org/dir/dph/officebranch/eb/longitudinal). Studies on ART cohorts provide correlations of fertility parameters in blood, follicular fluid, urine, and seminal plasma, as well as oocyte, sperm and embryo quality, and fertilization, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rates.
Chemical | Exposure sources and pathways | Selected health impact |
PCBs | Used as industrial insulators and lubricants; banned in 1970s, but persistent in water and land food chains and exposure by ingestion. | Decreased semen quality, low birth weight Development of attention deficit–hyperactivity disorder–associated behavior |
PFAS | Widely used man-made organofluorine compounds with diverse industrial and consumer product applications; e.g., PFOS and PFOA, used in manufacture of nonstick Teflon and other trademark cookware and in food-contact packaging to provide grease, oil, and water resistance to plates, food containers, bags, and wraps that come into contact with food; persist in the environment; occupational exposure to workers and general population exposure by inhalation, ingestion, and dermal contact. | Reduced intelligence quotient Pregnancy-induced hypertension and pre-eclampsia Reduced birthweight Reduced fetal growth Increased risk for thyroid disease in children |
PBDEs | Flame retardants that persist and bioaccumulate in the environment; found in furniture, textiles, carpeting, electronics, and plastics that are mixed into, but not bound to, foam or plastic. | Impaired neurodevelopment Reduction in sustained attention and fine motor skills Female reproductive toxicity (e.g., recurrent miscarriage) Aggression and hyperactivity in female children |
Phenols | Examples: bisphenol A (BPA), triclosan, and parabens. | Impaired behavioral regulation (anxious, depressive, and hyperactive behaviors) in girls aged 3 years |
BPA | Chemical intermediate for polycarbonate plastic and resins; found in consumer products and packaging; exposure via inhalation, ingestion, and dermal absorption. | Reduced neonatal thyroid-stimulating hormone in boys Decreased thyroxine concentrations |
Triclosan | Synthetic chlorinated aromatic compound with antibacterial properties; used in many consumer products such as antibacterial soaps, deodorants, toothpastes, cosmetics, fabrics, plastics, other; exposure through ingestion, dermal contact, and consumption of contaminated food and drinking water. | |
Parabens | Commonly used preservatives in cosmetic products, including makeup, moisturizers, hair care products, and shaving products; also used in foods and drugs; exposure through dermal absorption and ingestion. | Estrogenic activity in vitro but further studies needed for their reproductive and developmental health impacts |
Phthalates | Synthetically-derived; used in diverse consumer goods, e.g., medical devices, cleaning and building materials, personal care products, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, food processing, and toys; exposure occurs through ingestion, inhalation, dermal absorption. | Shortened gestational age Male reproductive tract/reduced anogenital distance) Impaired neurodevelopment Reduction in executive function at age 4–9 years old |
Heavy metals | ||
Cadmium | Used in batteries, pigments, metal coatings, and plastics; for nonsmoking public, exposures mainly through diet (shellfish, organ meats, grains such as rice and wheat, leafy vegetables, and some root crops, e.g., potato, carrot, and celeriac). For smokers, exposure mainly occurs through tobacco smoke. | Alterations of epigenetic signatures in the DNA (DNA methylation) of the placenta and of the newborns Reduced intelligence quotient Increased risk of emotional problems in 7–8-year-old boys |
Lead | Occupational exposure in battery manufacturing/recycling, smelting, car repair, welding, soldering, firearm cleaning/shooting, stained-glass ornament/jewelry making. Nonoccupational exposures: older homes with lead-based paints, in/on some toys/children's jewelry, water pipes, imported ceramics/pottery, herbal remedies, traditional cosmetics, hair dyes, contaminated soil, toys, costume jewelry. | Alterations in genomic methylation Impaired neurodevelopment (decrease cognitive function, IQ, increased incidence of attention-related behavior and antisocial behavior problems, and decreased hearing in children, reduced intellectual development) |
Mercury | Coal-fired power plants are largest source in the United States; primary human exposure by consumption of contaminated seafood. | Reduced cognitive performance Impaired neurodevelopment; psychomotor outcomes Neurobehavioral deficits |
Pesticides | Can be ingested, inhaled, and absorbed by the skin; pathways of exposure include food, water, air, dust, and soil. | Impaired fetal growth Impaired cognitive development Impaired neurodevelopment |
Solvents | Used in dry cleaning, printing, consumer products, e.g., stain removers, paint thinners, nail polish removers, hobby/craft products; examples; benzene, gasoline, ethyl alcohol, methanol, phenol, styrene, toluene, trichloroethylene, and xylene; exposure occurs through inhalation, dermal absorption, and ingestion. | Increased susceptibility to testicular cancer Childhood cancers (leukemia and brain tumor) Spontaneous abortion and fetal loss Decreased fetal and birthweight Congenital malformations |
PCBs, polychlorinated biphenyls; PFAS, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances; BPA, bisphenol A; PFOS, perfluorooctane sulfonic acid; PFOA, perfluooctanoic acid; PBDEs, polybrominated diphenyl ethers.
Female reproductive potential and competence
Specific EDCs disrupt pre- and postnatal ovarian development and egg quality, and menopause timing, based on studies in multiple species and humans.3 These include bisphenol A (BPA), phthalate congeners, diethyl-stilbesterol (DES), polycyclic biphenyls (PCBs), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOAs), dioxins, parabens, and fenvalerate3,10 (Figure 3A). The well-known toxicants, first- and second-hand environmental tobacco smoke, reduce folliculogenesis, steroidogenesis, ovarian reserve, embryo transport, endometrial receptivity, endometrial angiogenesis, and uterine blood flow, increase the rate of spontaneous miscarriage and ectopic pregnant, result in poor IVF outcomes and promote early menopause by 1–4 years.30,31 EDCs also disrupt normal reproductive tract development and function, e.g., in utero exposure to DES, leading to compromised fertility, increased risk of vaginal cancer in young, exposed adults, and abnormal gamete function.3 A recent systematic review of prospective ART cohort studies between 2000 and 2016 demonstrated greater EDC exposure levels correlating with diminished ovarian reserve and peak estradiol (E2) levels during ovarian stimulation, poorer oocyte and embryo quality, and lower fertilization, implantation, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rates32 (Table 3).
A |
B |
|
BPA, bisphenol A; PCBs, polychlorinated biphenyls; PFCs, perfluoro chemicals; PGA, poly(glycolic acid).
Male reproductive potential and competence
Phthalates, estrogens, and dioxins (e.g., TCDD), are key disrupters of male external genitalia development prenatally, resulting in decreased Leydig and Sertoli cell function, INSL3, and steroidogenesis, and impaired germ cell differentiation5,6,12,33,34 (Figure 3B). Downstream effects are cryptorchidism, hypospadias, short anogenital distance, and impaired testosterone and spermatogenesis, predisposing to reduced fecundity and impaired pregnancy rates later in life.35 In adult men, EDCs, such as phthalate esters and organochlorines, are associated with abnormal sperm quality (count, morphology, motility),36 leading to possible mitigation strategies for fertility goals. Notably, some persistent EDCs (long-lived in the environment) and non-persistent (those with short half-lives) correlate with couple fecundability with gender-specific impacts and stronger associations in males versus females.37,38
Air pollution and heat
Female reproductive potential and competence
Several animal studies demonstrate that air pollutant components (e.g., diesel exhaust and PM2.5) have adverse functional and structural impacts on oocytes and granulosa cells, and decreased primordial follicle numbers, blastocyst rates, litter sizes, implantation rates, and live born.13,39,40 In humans, residential PM2.5 exposure levels correlate inversely with antral follicle count (AFC)41 and anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) levels,42 and high SO2 levels during and up to 1 year prior to an ART cycle correlate with poor ovarian reserve and response to stimulation, especially in those ≤30 years old.43 Interestingly, a 1°C residential location Taverage max increases 90 days before ovarian reserve testing correlated with a 1.6% (95% CI, −2.8, −0.4) lower AFC.44
Male reproductive potential and competence
Air pollutants can also affect testicular development and function. Animal models show air pollution constituents result in increased germline mutations, decreased sperm counts, motility, and germ cells, increased FSH, and altered seminiferous tubule morphology, especially in response to diesel exhaust.13,16 In humans, adult exposures to vehicular traffic PAH, SO2, NOx, PM10, and O3 in diesel exhaust versus nonexposed individuals correlate with decreased sperm morphology and motility, increased DNA fragmentation and sex chromosome disomy.13
Spontaneous conception
Proximity to major roadways (<200 m) correlates with decreased spontaneous conception45 and increased likelihood of pregnancy by 3% for every 200 m away from a major roadway.46 Also, exposures to high PM2.5 levels correlate with lower spontaneous fecundity, longer time-to-pregnancy, higher odds of infertility47,48 and lower live birth rates.49 However, a large web-based preconception cohort study of pregnancy planners (Pregnancy Study Online (PRESTO)) found that neither annual average, menstrual cycle-specific, nor preconception average exposure to ambient PM2.5, NO2, and O3 were appreciably associated with reduced fecundability.50 Why this study differs from most others is unclear, and comparison of study designs, patient populations, and biomonitoring approaches are warranted.
Assisted reproduction
Closer residential proximity to major roadways has been significantly associated with lower probability of implantation and live birth rates after ART.51 While most studies found that residential ambient air pollution levels (PM2.5 or 10, NO2, SO2, CO, O3) correlate with poor ART outcomes independent of when in the IVF cycle these were measured,52,53,54 other studies found greater effect sizes at specific times during ART cycles – from 90 days before cycle start, during stimulation, at oocyte retrieval, and during and 35 days beyond embryo transfer (ultrasound visit), which were more prominent in patients <35 years old.55,56 Interestingly, high PM exposures but not specific gaseous components of air pollution on cycle day 3 (before embryo transfer) had a negative impact on miscarriage rates and clinical pregnancy rates.57 In contrast to these data overall, a large retrospective study of >250,000 fresh IVF cycles in the US reported no clear evidence of significant association between cycle outcomes (implantation, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rates) and daily PM2.5 or O3 levels.58 Whether multiple air pollution components analyzed together or integrated over time would have a different outcome is yet to be determined.
Pregnancy outcomes
Endocrine-disrupting chemicals
There is a voluminous literature that supports EDC effects on pregnancy and neonatal outcomes.7,10,18,59 EDCs and routes of maternal, fetal, and placental exposures are shown in Figure 4. Associations of EDC exposures and pregnancy and neonatal outcomes depend on the EDC chemical structure, solubility, whether persistent or non-persistent, dose and duration of exposure, timing of exposure during gestation, and what compartment is evaluated for exposure levels (maternal urine, plasma/serum, placenta, cord blood, amniotic fluid) and how these are measured.7,59 Most studies evaluate data at a single gestational time point with limited attention to organ-specific differences in susceptibility windows across gestation in the fetus and that fetal sex can modulate EDC effects, and few stratify data for ethnicity, age, diet, pre-pregnancy weight, weight gain, and lifestyle factors. Important in mitigation strategies are these considerations and to follow the offspring longitudinally, as well as correlations of exposures with subsequent maternal morbidities.7 Overall, the data strongly support EDCs affecting gestational length (increased risk of preterm birth and some associated with delayed delivery), gestational fetal size (fetal intrauterine growth restriction, and small or large for gestational age), and congenital anomalies in the offspring. While maternal complications of pregnancy (spontaneous miscarriage, gestational hypertension, pre-eclampsia, and gestational diabetes) are on the rise globally, current evidence supports EDCs as contributors to the well-established demographic and lifestyle factors at play in these disorders.7 There is also substantial evidence of specific EDCs associated with poor neurodevelopmental and other adverse neonatal outcomes (Table 2). Mitigation strategies for minimizing harm to mothers and children are considered below.
Air pollution and heat
The majority of studies conclude that PM and gaseous components of air pollution, duration of exposures, and gestational windows of exposure correlate with adverse pregnancy outcomes, including spontaneous miscarriage, stillbirth, preterm birth (PTB), low birth weight (LBW), gestational hypertension (GH), very LBW, and pre-eclampsia.14,60,61,62,63 Some examples are presented below.
Spontaneous miscarriage
In a prospective cohort study of couples trying to conceive, exposure to air pollution throughout pregnancy was associated with loss, with O3 and PM<2.5mm associated with faster time to loss and sulfate compounds with increased risk of loss.64 Spontaneous pregnancy loss rates were noted to correlate with air pollution in a study in Mongolia with seasonal PM2.5, PM10.0, SO2, NO2, and CO fluctuations tracking with miscarriage rates65 (Figure 5A). Also, increased miscarriage and stillbirth rates correlate with satellite measures of PM2.5 exposures during gestation in Africa66 (Figure 5B), with similar findings in South Asia, especially among older women and in urban settings across India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh.67
Low birth weight, preterm birth, and other
Maternal exposure to fine PM air pollution is associated with increased risk of PTB and LBW.68,69 Exposure to high levels of air quality indicators (O3, PM, CO, SO2) in California was associated with increase risk of PTB at 20–27 gestational weeks,70 attributed to epigenetic modifications, functional changes, and inflammation in the placenta.71,72 A geospatial population-based cohort study using live birth records in Ohio (2007–2010) linked to average daily PM2.5 measures, revealed that high levels of airborne PM especially during the 2nd trimester are associated with PTB.73 In Florida PM2.5 had consistent correlations with adverse outcomes (LBW PTD, very PTD); whereas O3 had inconsistent effects.74 In contrast, in Kansas, consistent associations between adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes with PM2.5 exposure were not observed, although there was a positive link between increased O3 exposure during pregnancy and a higher risk of PTB, GH, and LBW.75 A large US study of 32,798,152 births revealed an association of air pollution and heat exposure with PTB, LBW, and stillbirth, across all US geographic regions, with highest risk sub-populations of patients with asthma and minority groups, especially Black mothers.76 While most US studies concur regarding exposures and air pollution levels and poor pregnancy and neonatal outcomes, some observed differences likely reflect regional differences in air pollution exposures, heat, and patient sociodemographic and economic status and other features. Notably, across the globe the number of PM2.5-associated preterm births in 2010 was estimated at 2.7 million, or 18% of total PTBs, with the highest burden in South/East Asia, North Africa, Middle East, and West sub-Saharan Africa.77
A recent systematic review determined that global heat is associated with PTB, LBW, and stillbirth.78 Direct effects of extreme heat on pregnant persons and in utero exposures79 are shown in Table 4. Increased late PTB has been attributed to altered uterine blood flow in response to exposure to heat stress.80 These effects are important to consider for maternal and neonatal health and impacts on healthcare systems79 and offer opportunities for risk mitigation.
|
Climate change has increased wildfires across the globe that bring extreme heat, particulate matter air pollution, as well as ECDs volatilized from building materials and other sources. Studies have revealed associations with poor pregnancy outcomes, including increased risk of LBW81 and PTB82 rates. Underlying mechanisms are believed to derive from placental toxicity and inflammation.83 Interestingly, in a study from the San Francisco Bay Area, exposure to wildfire specific PM2.5 during the 2nd trimester of pregnancy between 2017 and 2020 was positively associated with increased risk of large for gestational age newborns and duration of exposure.84 Notably, in California, 3.7% of preterm births between 2007 and 2012 were attributable to wildfire smoke.85
EVIDENCE THAT INTERVENTION STRATEGIES DECREASE EDC BODY BURDENS
Several interventions have been evaluated for effectiveness in altering EDC and air pollution component levels in animals and humans and whether they impact phenotypes or health outcomes. For example, epigenetic modifiers (e.g., methyl donors) administered to pregnant agouti mice exposed to BPA throughout gestation resulted in decreased obesity and change in coat color of the offspring.86 In humans, when children eating a conventional diet were changed to an organic diet, urinary metabolites of organophosphorus pesticides were non-detectable and then were elevated upon re-introduction of the conventional diet.87 In the HERMOSA study of Latina girls in California, changing personal care products to those without triclosan, BP-3/oxybenzone, parabens, and phthalates for 3 days resulted in lowered urinary levels of these compounds.88
Recently, the International federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) Committee on Impact of Pregnancy on Long-term Health and the Committee on Climate Change and Toxic Environmental Exposures published a semi-structured review, using PRISMA guidelines, to examine nutritional interventions on EDC levels in volunteers, ultimately to improve reproductive, perinatal, and obstetric outcomes.89 Sixteen studies met criteria, ranging from 15 to 355 participants; three included pregnant participants, six included young healthy participants, two included families (parents, children), two examined interventions in only school-going children, four included mixed-gender populations with type 2 diabetes, cardiac atheromatous disease, and age over 60 years. Seven studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), three were RCT cross-over studies, and six were non-randomized experimental trials. The evidence overall supports organic food consumption and avoiding plastics and canned foods and beverages reduce dietary exposures to EDCs and body burdens. Moreover, avoidance of fast foods, dietary supplementation with iodine, a vegetarian diet, fatty fish diet, altering personal care products, and removing dust are all supported by evidence to lower EDCs and some multiple EDCs.89 Using a similar approach, Park et al. conducted a scoping review90 wherein ~ 50% of studies were single arm designs (no controls). They found most interventions resulted in lowered EDC levels in blood and/or urine and some studies overlapped with the Corbett.89 Surprisingly, most volunteers did not want to change their diet even with EDC levels demonstrated to be lower with interventions – underscoring some challenges in mitigation strategies. In a 1-week study of Taiwanese girls at high risk of phthalate exposures, intervention strategies (frequent handwashing, using less shampoo and shower gel, not using plastic containers, or not eating food with plastic bag/plastic-wrap cover, microwaving food, or taking nutrition supplements, and reducing use of cosmetics/personal care products resulted in marked reduction in urinary phthalate congeners.91
Thus, while so far there is rare evidence that interventions to reduce EDCs in people lead directly to health improvements, the associations of EDCs with reproductive harm, described throughout this review, argue strongly in favor of implementing interventions that need to be acceptable, easy to do, with minimal side effects, and at low cost to practically mitigate risks. While disparities prevail in access to and affordability of some of these interventions (organic foods, glass and stainless-steel bottles and containers), empowering patients and citizens for safe environments is key. A large part of risk reduction includes governmental policies that go beyond what individuals can do for themselves, their families, and their communities. Examples include eliminating lead in gasoline that resulted in lowering blood levels of lead to <1 mg/dL in most countries,92 legislated public smoking bans in Scotland that coincided with reduced preterm birth rates,93 and the PBDE ban in California in 2005, that reduced PBDE levels by 65% in pregnant women in the state between 2007 and 2012.94 Thus, education, prevention, and advocacy, with patients as partners, are key to health and especially reproductive health.95,96,97,98,99,100
CLINICAL MANAGEMENT
Environmental toxicants affect reproductive potential and fetal development during in sensitive periods, mainly during organogenesis, in the neonatal period, and in the reproductive years.1 Thus, in utero and adult exposures to EDCs can compromise reproductive health (Table 5, summary). The question arises as to how much the public and healthcare providers know about adverse effects of environmental toxicants and reproductive health outcomes, what their personal, family, and community risks may be, and how to mitigate these risks.
Endocrine disrupting chemicals | Air pollution |
|
|
Patient awareness
Several biomonitoring studies, surveys and focus group reports have provided information on what individuals know and want to know about environmental toxicants. Many pregnant persons queried were unaware of environmental toxicant impacts on reproductive health, and while some were concerned about toxicants, their healthcare providers were not addressing these issues and they did not trust publicly available resources.101,102 A study on awareness and risk perceptions found that pregnant persons’ EDC risk perception was “modest”, and perceived exposure was higher than perceived susceptibility (i.e., they did not believe they were particularly susceptible to exposure but believed that exposure to EDCs was extremely dangerous.103,104 Research on biomonitoring cohorts and pregnant persons underscored that patients want information on personal exposures to EDCs and believe they have the right to know.105 Perceptions specifically about the link between exposure to EDCs and a decline in human male fertility was well received, contradicting assumptions that transparency about scientific uncertainty of EDCs elicits negative psychological effects.106 Among a focus group of 19–65 year-olds of both genders, responses revealed generally little knowledge of and awareness about EDCs, their sources and associated health effects,107 and while unaware of possible individual mitigation strategies, the majority expressed that it was the government’s responsibility to mitigate effects.107 Thus, it is likely that patients before and during pregnancy want to know risks, and the challenge to healthcare teams is to be able to converse about these issues while caring for patients and being respectful of patient goals and values.
Healthcare provider awareness
The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) performed a mixed-methods study involving a national online survey of ACOG fellows and a focus group of obstetricians to determine their attitudes beliefs and practices regarding prenatal environmental exposures.17 Notably, 100% of respondents asked pregnant patients about alcohol consumption, diet, and smoking. However, <20% inquired about environmental exposures common in pregnant women in the US108 The majority (78%) of obstetricians surveyed believed they could reduce patient exposures, but <20% reported taking an environmental health history because of competing clinical priorities, time limitations, not knowing what to say, and uncertainty about the state of the evidence, and mitigation strategies.17
Identifying risks, advising about mitigation strategies
Over the past 15 years, research organizations and professional organizations focused on reproductive health have issued statements/committee opinions/guidances to educate healthcare providers about EDC exposures and risks (and a few have focused also on climate change and heat (FIGO, Philippine Obstetrician and Gynecologist Society (POGS)) prior to and during pregnancy.18,97,98,99 Links to these resources are in Box 1. The goal has been to empower healthcare providers to answer patient questions and provide resources for trainees, staff, themselves, and patients, and know referral mechanisms for challenging inquiries.
Box 1 Resources for Clinicians: Professional Society Manuals, Policy Documents, Position Statements, Committee Opinions, Clinical Reports, Technical Reports
American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Policy manual and policy documents
- American Academy of Pediatrics Council on Environmental Health. In: Etzel RA, Balk SJ. (eds.) Pediatric Environmental Health, 4th edn. American Academy of Pediatrics, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1542/9781610022194.
- American Academy of Pediatrics Council on Environmental Health and Climate Change. Policy reports, clinical reports, technical reports. Accessed January 16, 2024. https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/collection/560/Council-on-Environmental-Health Accessed January 16, 2024.
American College of Nurse Midwives (ACNM) POSITION STATEMENT
- The Effect of Environmental Toxins on Reproductive and Developmental Health. https://www.midwife.org/acnm/files/acnmlibrarydata/uploadfilename/000000000292/2023_ps-the-effect-of-environmental-toxin-on-reproductive-and-developmental-health.pdf Accessed January 16, 2024.
- Climate Change and Maternal, Fetal, and Infant Health https://www.midwife.org/acnm/files/acnmlibrarydata/uploadfilename/000000000308/2023_ps-climate-change-and=maternal-fetal-and-infant-health.pdf.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)
- October 2013 issue of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Exposure to toxic environmental agents. Committee Opinion No. 575. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2013;122:931–5.
- ACOG Committee on Obstetric Practice. Committee Opinion #832 (updat of #575). Obstet Gynecol 2024;138(7):e40–54. https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinicalguidance/committee-opinion/articles/2021/07/reducing-prenatal-exposure-to-toxicenvironmental-agents Accessed January 16, 2024.
- ACOG Position Statement: Addressing Climate Change. 2021 https://www.acog.org/clinical-information/policy-and-position-statements/positionstatements/2021/addressing-climate-change Accessed January 16, 2024.
American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) Papers
- Exposure to toxic environmental agents. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 575. 2013, joint with ASRM and co-published in Fertility and Sterility 2013;100(4):931–4. https://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(13)03009-4/pdf Accessed January 16, 2024.
The Endocrine Society
- The Endocrine Society Impact of EDCs on Reproductive Systems https://www.endocrine.org/topics/edc/what-edcs-are/common-edcs/reproduction Valuable resource Accessed January 16, 2024.
- Gore AC, Chappell VA, Fenton SE, et al. EDC-2: The Endocrine Society's second scientific statement on endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Endocr Rev 2015;36(6):E1–150.
International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (FIGO)
- Di Renzo GC, Conry JA, Blake J, et al. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics opinion on reproductive health impacts of exposure to toxic environmental chemicals. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2015;131(3):219–25. PMID: 26433469.
- From the University of California Program for Reproductive Health and the Environment (UCSF PRHE; www.ucsf.prhe.edu). “The FIGO Opinion concludes with four recommendations to reduce and prevent exposure to toxic chemicals globally, which are: (1) Advocate for policies to prevent exposure to toxic environmental chemicals; (2) work to ensure a healthy food system for all; (3) make environmental health part of health care; and (4) champion environmental justice. The FIGO Opinion has been formally endorsed or supported by 12 reproductive health professional organizations worldwide.”
- Giudice LC, Llamas-Clark EF, DeNicola N, et al. the FIGO Committee on Climate Change, Toxic Environmental Exposures. Climate change, women’s health, and the role of obstetricians and gynecologists in leadership. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2021;155:345–56. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.13958.
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG)
- RCOG Scientific Impact Paper No. 37. Chemical exposures during pregnancy Dealing with Potential, but Unproven, Risks to Child Health. 2013:1–7. https://www.rcog.org.uk/media/axjhtyzw/sip_37.pdf Accessed January 16, 2024.
Philippine Obstetrician and Gynecologist Society (POGS)
- Reproductive and Developmental Health Environment Primer Advocacy Primer. Octavio, BR, Decena DCD, Llamas-Clark EF. https://www.scribd.com/document/543545423/POGS-Handbook-Primer-110718 http://www.pogsinc.org Accessed January 16, 2024.
Project Targeting Environmental Neuro-Developmental Risks (Project TENDR)
- Targeting Environmental Neuro-Developmental Risks: The TENDR Consensus Statement. Bennett D, Bellinger DC, Birnbaum LS, et al. Project TENDR: targeting environmental neuro-developmental risks the TENDR consensus statement. Environ Health Perspect 2016;124(7):A118–22.
UCSF Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment
- Many practical and up-to-date resources. www.ucsf.prhe.edu Accessed January 16, 2024.
World Health Organization
- World Health Organization. Climate Change Fact Sheet. https://www.who.int/newsroom/fact-sheets/detail/climate-change-and-health Accessed January 17, 2023.
Clinicians do not need to be experts in environmental and occupational reproductive health to prevent adverse health outcomes.18 They can, e.g., provide information and discuss areas of uncertainty about environmental chemicals so patients can make informed choices based on their values and preferences. Complementary approaches requiring minimal time on the part of the busy clinician include ancillary staff putting information brochures in packets given to patients on entry to pre-conception and/or prenatal care and/or making brochures available in the waiting or exam rooms and on-line. In addition, staff can provide patients with information on nutritional counseling or other relevant health education regarding avoidance of toxic chemicals.10,18,98
Taking an environmental exposure history
Key to capturing patient exposures in their home and work environments and resulting from lifestyle choices is taking an environmental exposure history.18 Examples of environmental toxicant exposure history forms are available at http://prhe.ucsf.edu/clinical-practice-resources. When counseling patients about exposures, important considerations include routes of exposures, toxicity, dose, frequency, duration, and timing (especially during developmental windows of vulnerability). Individual patient vulnerabilities warrant consideration including underlying health conditions and sociodemographic status.10,109 It is also important to identify if patients have exposures to substances with reproductive toxicity, as they are at high risk for adverse reproductive outcomes,110 and legal workplace limits are not always designed to protect pregnant women.111 Hobbies can also pose risk if they involve EDCs (e.g., solvents, heavy metals), and while exposures may be lower than those employed using similar products (e.g., jewelry making), those with hobbies likely have less training in safety, thus underscoring the importance of counseling.10
Risk mitigating strategies for patients and communities
Reducing or eliminating environmental toxic exposures prior to conception in males and females and throughout pregnancy are the most effective strategies to prevent adverse reproductive health consequences. An exposure history and advising patients on how to prevent exposures at home, work, and in the community, and with appropriate resources and referrals are critical to this process. Also, environmental injustice with disproportional exposures of socio-demographically disadvantaged communities that can exacerbate the impact of environmental exposures underscore the need for rigorous evaluations and thoughtful and supportive counseling of high-risk groups.10 Box 2 lists summary of practice points regarding mitigation strategies, most at low cost, recommended by several professional societies.4,9,10,89,98,99,100
Box 2 Mitigation Strategies to Minimize Exposures to Environmental Toxicants and Climate Change that Pose Risks to Reproduction
Food and Water
- Eat fresh food and minimize processed and canned foods that contain plastic liners.
- Wash all fruits and vegetables and hands thoroughly and eat organic foods, if possible, to minimize exposures to pesticides.
- Trim fat from meat and skin from fish to minimize exposure to fat-soluble chemicals.
- Choose fish low in methyl mercury.
- Store food in glass or stainless-steel containers.
- Avoid plastic contains labeled #3, #6, #7 and use BPA-free baby formula bottles and toys.
- Avoid heating or microwaving food in plastic containers or plastic bottles.
- Avoid non-stick pans. And cook with cast iron or stainless-steel pots and pans.
Around the Home
- Remove shoes before entering the home.
- Clean floors with a wet mop or wet cloth. Avoid dry cloths and sweeping. Get rid of dust that contains many EDCs.
- Use alternative household cleaning products (ammonia, soap, vinegar (1 cup white vinegar + 1 cup water), baking soda and fresh air.
- No home pesticides. Use insect baits, not sprays, dusts or bombs.
- Avoid toxic flame retardants (furniture foam (prior to2005), dry cleaned clothing). Check labels on foam products, clothing, and furniture.
- Avoid handling digital receipts.
- Minimize burning wood and trash.
- Ask for volatile organic compounds (VOC)-free and water-based materials for home improvements.
- Recycle e-waste at proper recycling centers.
Personal Habits and Products
- No smoking, even second hand. Avoid places where people are smoking.
- Phthalate-free make up and other personal care products and fragrances (use fragrance free rather than “unscented”).
- Avoid hand sanitizers, digital paper receipt handling.
- Avoid lead (some lipsticks, ethnic products: azarcon and greta, bali goli, Ayurvedic treatments).
Air Pollution
- Check local air quality if data are available (e.g., https://airnow.gov).
- Avoid high particulate matter (PM) air pollution.
- Exercise away from high traffic areas, especially away from buses, cars, trucks.
- In high PM conditions, wear a mask and/or use a home air purifier (HEPA filter).
- Avoid idling cars and other vehicles.
- On high pollution days (monitor AQI):
- Avoid outdoor activities.
- Close windows.
- Exercise >300 meters from high traffic areas.
- During extreme heat:
- Limit outdoor activities to morning or evening.
- Increase fluid intake to lower risk of heat stroke.
- Avoid sun for long periods, seek shade, take breaks, drink water regularly.
- Access air conditioning, if possible.
Also, some helpful resources for healthcare providers and patients include:
- https://www.hormone.org/your-health-and-hormones/endocrine-disrupting-chemicals-edcs
- https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-air-pollution-and-health
- https://prhe.ucsf.edu/info
- Toxic Matters: Protecting Our Families from Toxic Substances
- Work Matters: When You Work with or Around Toxic Chemicals, What You Know Really Matters
- Pesticides Matter: Steps to Reduce Exposure and Protect Your Health
- What to Eat: A Guide to Your Daily Food Choices
- http://www.ewg.org/skindeep
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, the data to date strongly support a deleterious impact of EDCs and climate change (air pollution and heat) on female and male reproductive capacity and pregnancy and neonatal outcomes. It is key that health care professionals are educated about these issues and can converse with their patients, families, and communities, as well as policy makers about mitigation strategies. There is too much at risk for the current and future generations to do otherwise.
PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS
- Become familiar with environmental impacts on women's reproductive health using resources in Box 1 as a guide.
- Advise patients about how to minimize exposures to environmental toxicants and climate change that pose risks to reproduction, reproductive health, and children's health as in Box 2.
- Take an environmental exposure history that includes questions about exposures in the home and work environments, hobbies, lifestyle, personal care products, diet, cookware, proximity to heavily trafficked roads, airports, and industrial plants, use of pesticides, and use of household chemicals. See http://pthe.ucsf.deu/clinical-practice-resources, for exposure history forms and reference 18 and Box 2 for specific topics, questions and advice.
- Advocate for policies to prevent toxic environmental chemical exposures, work to ensure a healthy food system for all, make environmental health part of healthcare, and champion for environmental justice.4
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The author(s) of this chapter declare that they have no interests that conflict with the contents of the chapter.
Feedback
Publishers’ note: We are constantly trying to update and enhance chapters in this Series. So if you have any constructive comments about this chapter please provide them to us by selecting the "Your Feedback" link in the left-hand column.
REFERENCES
Craine DA, Janssen SJ, Edwards TM, et al. Female reproductive disorders: the roles of endocrine-disrupting compounds and developmental timing. Fertil Steril 2008;90:911–40. | |
Bergman A, Heindel JJ, Kasten T, et al. The impact of endocrine disruption: a consensus statement on the state of the science. Environ Health Perspect 2013;121(4):A104–6. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1205448. PMID: 23548368; PMCID: PMC3620733. | |
Gore AC, Chappell VA, Fenton SE, et al. : EDC-2: The Endocrine Society's second scientific statement on endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Endocr Rev 36(6):e1–e150, 2015. | |
Di Renzo GC, Conry JA, Blake J, et al. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics opinion on reproductive health impacts of exposure to toxic environmental chemicals. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2015;131(3):219–25. PMID: 26433469. | |
Skakkebaek NE, Rajpert-De Meyts E, Buck Louis GM, et al. Male reproductive disorders and fertility trends: influences of environment and genetic susceptibility. Physiol Rev 2016;96:55–97; doi: 10.1152/physrev.00017.2015. | |
Rehman S, Usman Z, Rehman S, et al. Endocrine disrupting chemicals and impact on male reproductive health. Transl Androl Urol 2018;7(3):490–503. doi: 10.21037/tau.2018.05.17. PMID: 30050807; PMCID: PMC6043754. | |
Padmanabhan V, Song W, Puttabyatappa M. Praegnatio Perturbatio – impacts of endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Endocr Revs 2021;42:295–353. | |
Giudice LC. Environmental toxicants: hidden players on the reproductive stage. Fertil Steril 2016;106:791–4. | |
Giudice LC, Llamas-Clark EF, DeNicola N, et al. Climate change, women's health, and the role of obstetricians and gynecologists in leadership. Int J Gynecol Obstetrics 2021;155:345–56. | |
Giudice LC, Zlatnik MG, Segal TR, et al. Environmental factors and reproduction. In: Strauss JF III, Barbieri R, Dokras A, et al. (eds.) Yen & Jaffe's Reproductive Endocrinology: Physiology, Pathophysiology, and Clinical Management, 9th edn. Philadelphia: Elsevier, 2023;20:461–74. | |
Silva ABP, Carreir F, Ramos F, et al. The role of endocrine disruptors in female infertility. Molec Biol Reports 2023;50:7069–88. | |
Martínez MA, Marquès M, Salas-Huetos A, et al. Lack of association between endocrine disrupting chemicals and male fertility: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Environ Res 2023;217:114942, ISSN: 0013-9351. | |
Carré J, Gatimel N, Moreau J, et al. Does air pollution play a role in infertility?: A systematic review. Environ Health 2017;16:82–98. | |
Klepac P, Locatelli I, Korošec S, et al. Ambient air pollution and pregnancy outcomes: A comprehensive review and identification of environmental public health challenges. Environ Res 2018;167:144–59. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.07.008. Epub 2018 Jul 5. PMID: 30014896. | |
Segal TR, Giudice LC. Before the beginning: environmental exposures and reproductive and obstetric outcomes. Fertil Steril 2019;112(4):613–21. PMID: 31561863. | |
Segal TR, Giudice LC. Systematic review of climate change effects on reproductive health. Fertil Steril 2022;118:215–23. | |
Stotland NE, Sutton P, Trowbridge J, et al. Counseling patients on preventing prenatal environmental exposures; a mixed-methods study of obstetricians. PLOS One 2014;9(6):e98771. | |
Zlatnik MG. Endocrine-disrupting chemicals and reproductive health. J Midwifery Women's Health 61(4):442–455, 2016. | |
Watts N, Amann M, Arnell N, et al. The 2020 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: responding to converging crises. Lancet 2021;397:129–70. | |
Erlich S, Calafat AM, Humblet O, et al. Handling of thermal receipts as a source of exposure to bisphenol A. JAMA 2014;311:859–60. | |
Zoeller RT, Heindel JJ. Endocrine-disrupting chemicals and human health. In: Robertson RP, Giudice LC, Grossman AB, et al. (eds.) DeGroot’s Endocrinology: Basic Science and Clinical Practice, 8th edn. Philadelphia: Elsevier, 2023;137:2305–2322. | |
Yilmaz B, Terekeci H, Sandal S, et al. Endocrine disrupting chemicals: exposure, effects on human health, mechanism of action, models for testing and strategies for prevention. Rev Endocrine Metab Disorders 2020;21:127–47. | |
Woodruff TJ, Sutton P. The Navigation Guide systematic review methodology: a rigorous and transparent method for translating environmental health science into better health outcomes. Environ Health Perspect 2014;122(10):1007–101. PMID: 24968373; PMCID: PMC4181919. | |
Lee WC, Fisher M, Davis K, et al. Identification of chemical mixtures to which Canadian pregnant women are exposed: The MIREC Study. Environ Int 2017;99:321–30. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2016.12.015. PMID: 28040263. | |
Luijten M, Vlaanderen J, Kortenkamp A, et al. Mixture risk assessment and human biomonitoring: Lessons learnt from HBM4EU. Int J Hygiene Environ Health 2023;249:114135, ISSN: 1438-4639. | |
van Tongeren M. A job-exposure matrix for potential endocrine-disrupting chemicals developed for a study into the association between maternal occupational exposure and hypospadias. Annals Occup Hygeine 2002;46:465–77. | |
Brouwers MM, van Tongeren M, Hirst AA, et al. Occupational exposure to potential endocrine disruptors: further development of a job exposure matrix. Occup Environ Med 2009;66(9):607–14. doi: 10.1136/oem.2008.042184. PMID: 19286684. | |
Brehm E Flaws JA. Transgenerational effects of endocrine-disrupting chemicals on male and female reproduction. Endocrinology 2019;160(6):1421–35. | |
Wang A, Padula A, Sirota M, et al. Environmental influences on reproductive health: the importance of chemical exposures. Fertil Steril 2016;106:905–29. | |
ASRM Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Smoking and infertility. Fertil Steril 2008;90:S254–9. https://www.fertstert.org/issue/S0015-0282(08)X0016-0. | |
Dechanet C, Anahory T, Mathieu Daude JC, et al. Effects of cigarette smoking on reproduction, Hum Reprod Update, 2100;17(1) 76–95, https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmq033. | |
Karwacka A, Zamkowska D, Radwan M, et al. Exposure to modern, widespread environmental endocrine disrupting chemicals and their effect on the reproductive potential of women: an overview of current epidemiological evidence. Hum Fertil (Camb) 2019;22(1):2–25. doi: 10.1080/14647273.2017.1358828. Epub 2017 Jul 31. PMID: 28758506. | |
Scott HM, Mason JI, Sharpe RM. Steroidogenesis in the fetal testis and its susceptibility to disruption by exogenous compounds. Endocr Rev 2009;30(7):883–925. doi: 10.1210/er.2009-0016. Epub 2009 Nov 3. PMID: 19887492. | |
Jeng HA. Exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals and male reproductive health. Front Public Health 2014;2:55. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2014.00055. PMID: 24926476; PMCID: PMC4046332. | |
Lahimer M, Diwan MA, Montjean D, et al. Endocrine disrupting chemicals and male fertility: from physiological to molecular effects. Front Public Health, 10 October 2023 Sec. Environmental health and Exposome | |
Wang C, Yang Y, Wang S, et al. The classic EDCs, phthalate esters and organochlorines, in relation to abnormal sperm quality” a systematic review with meta-analysis. Sci Rep 2016;6:19982. | |
Buck Louis G, Sundaram R, Schisterman E, et al. Persistent environmental pollutants and couple fecundity: the LIFE study. Environ Health Perspect 2013;121(2):231–6. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1205301. | |
Buck Louis G, Sundaram R, Sweeney A, et al. Urinary bisphenol A, phthalates, and couple fecundity: the Longitudinal Investigation of Fertility and the Environment (LIFE) Study. Fertil Steril 2014;101(5):1359–66. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.01.022. | |
Mohallem SV, de Araújo Lobo DJ, et al. Decreased fertility in mice exposed to environmental air pollution in the city of Sao Paulo. Environ Res 2005;98(2):196–202. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2004.08.007. PMID:. | |
Liao B-Q, Liu C-B, Xie S-J, et al. Effects of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) on ovarian function and embryo quality in mice, Environ Int 2020;125:105338. ISSN: 0160-4120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.105338. | |
Gaskins AJ, Mínguez-Alarcón L, Fong KC, et al. Exposure to fine particulate matter and ovarian reserve among women from a fertility clinic. Epidemiology 2019;30(4):486–91. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000001029. PMID: 31162281; PMCID: PMC6550330. | |
La Marca A, Spaggiari G, Domenici D, et al. Elevated levels of nitrous dioxide are associated with lower AMH levels: a real-world analysis. Hum Reprod 2020;35(11):2589–97. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deaa214. PMID: 32951044. | |
Wu S, Hao G, Zhang Y, et al. Poor ovarian response is associated with air pollutants: A multicentre study in China. EBioMedicine 2022;81:104084. doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2022.104084. PMID: 35660784; PMCID: PMC9163489. | |
Gaskins AJ, Tang Z, Hood RB, et al. Periconception air pollution, metabolomic biomarkers, and fertility among women undergoing assisted reproduction. Environ Int 2021;155:106666. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106666. PMID: 34116378; PMCID: PMC8292230. | |
Mahalingaiah S, Hart JE, Laden F, et al. Adult air pollution exposure and risk of infertility in the Nurses' Health Study II. Hum Reprod 2016;31(3):638–647. | |
Mendola P, Sundaram R, Louis GMB, et al. Proximity to major roadways and prospectively-measured time-to-pregnancy and infertility. Sci Total Environ 2017;576:172–7. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.038. PMID: 27783935; PMCID: PMC5164942. | |
Li Q, Zheng D, Wang Y, et al. Association between exposure to airborne particulate matter less than 2.5 m, and human fecundity in China. Environ International 2021;146:106231. | |
Xue T, Zhu T. Increment of ambient exposure to fine particles and the reduced human fertility rate in China, 2000–2010. Science Total Environment 2018;642:497–504. | |
Nieuwenhuijsen MJ, Basagaña X, Dadvand P, et al. Air pollution and human fertility rates. Environ Int 2014;70:9–14. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2014.05.005. Epub 2014 May 28. PMID: 24879367. | |
Wesselink AK, Hystad P, Kirwa K, et al. Air pollution and fecundability in a North American preconception cohort study. Environ Int 2023;181:108249. ISSN: 0160-4120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2023.108249. | |
Gaskins AJ, Hart JE, Minguez-Alarcon L, et al. Residential proximity to major roadways and traffic in relation to outcomes of in vitro fertilization. Environ Int 2018;115:239–46. | |
Legro RS, Sauer MV, Mottla GL, et al. Effect of air quality on assisted human reproduction. Hum Reprod 2010;25:1317–1324 10.1093/humrep/deq021. | |
Gaskins AJ, Fong KC, Abu Awad Y, et al. Time-varying exposure to air pollution and outcomes of in vitro fertilization among couples from a fertility clinic. Environ Health Perspect 2019;127(7):77002. doi: 10.1289/EHP4601. PMID: 31268361; PMCID: PMC6792363. | |
Zeng X, Jin S, Chen X, et al. Association between ambient air pollution and pregnancy outcomes in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization in Chengdu, China: A retrospective study, Environmental Res 2020;184:109304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.109304. | |
Jin HX, Guo YH, Song WY, et al. Effect of ambient air pollutants on in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer pregnancy outcome in Zhengzhou, China. Environ Toxicol Pharmacol 2022;90:103807. doi: 10.1016/j.etap.2021.103807. PMID: 34990867. | |
Zhang C, Yao N, Lu Y,, et al. Ambient air pollution on fecundity and live birth in women undergoing assisted reproductive technology in the Yangtze River Delta of China. Environ Int 2022;162:107181. ISSN: 0160-4120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2022.107181. | |
González-Comadran M, Jacquemin B, Cirach M, et al. The effect of short-term exposure to outdoor air pollution on fertility. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2021;19(1):151. doi: 10.1186/s12958-021-00838-6. PMID: 34615529; PMCID: PMC8493680. | |
Boulet SL, Zhou Y, Shriber J, et al. Ambient air pollution and in vitro fertilization treatment outcomes. Hum Reprod 2019;34(10):2036–43. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dez128. PMID: 31504508; PMCID: PMC10088473. | |
Haggerty DK, Upson K, Pacyga DC, et al. Pregnancy exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals: implications for women’s health. Reprod 2021;162:F169–80. | |
Weber KA, Yang W, Lyons E, et al. Greenspace, Air pollution, neighborhood factors, and preeclampsia in a population-based case-control study in California. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021;18(10):5127. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18105127. PMID: 34066190; PMCID: PMC8151979. | |
Rani P, Dhok A. Effects of Pollution on Pregnancy and Infants. Cureus 2023;18;15(1):e33906. doi: 10.7759/cureus.33906. PMID: 36819435; PMCID: PMC9937639. | |
Mitku AA, Zewotir T, North D, et al. Impact of ambient air pollution exposure during pregnancy on adverse birth outcomes: generalized structural equation modeling approach. BMC Public Health 2023;23:45–53. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-14971-3. | |
Soesanti F, Uiterwaal CSPM, Meliefste K, et al. The effect of exposure to traffic related air pollutants in pregnancy on birth anthropometry: a cohort study in a heavily polluted low-middle income country. Environ Health 2023;22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-023-00973-0. | |
Ha S, Sundaram R, Buck Louis GM, et al. Ambient air pollution and the risk of pregnancy loss: a prospective cohort study. Fertil Steril 2018;109(1):148–53. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.09.037. PMID: 29153729. | |
Enkhmaa D, Warburton N, Javzandulam B, et al. Seasonal ambient air pollution correlates strongly with spontaneous abortion in Mongolia. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2014;14:146–52. | |
Xue T, Zhu T, Geng G, et al. Association between pregnancy loss and ambient PM2·5 using survey data in Africa: a longitudinal case-control study, 1998–2016. Lancet Planet Health 2019;3(5):e219–25. doi: 10.1016/S2542-5196(19)30047-6. PMID: 31128767. | |
Xue T, Guan T, Geng G, et al. Estimation of pregnancy losses attributable to exposure to ambient fine particles in south Asia: an epidemiological case-control study. Lancet Planet Health 2021;5(1):e15–24. doi: 10.1016/S2542-5196(20)30268-0. PMID: 33421406. | |
Li X, Huang S, Jiao A, et al. Association between ambient fine particulate matter and preterm birth or term low birth weight: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ Pollut 2017;227:596–605. | |
Padula AM, Mortimer K, Hubbard A, et al. Exposure to traffic-related air pollution during pregnancy and term low birth weight: estimation of causal associations in a semiparametric model. Am J Epidemiol 2012;176(9):815–24. PMID: 23045474; PMCID: PMC3571254. | |
Padula AM, Mortimer KM, Tager IB, et al. Traffic-related air pollution and risk of preterm birth in the San Joaquin Valley of California. Ann Epidemiol 2014;24(12):888–95e4. PMID: 25453347; PMCID: PMC4355392. | |
Veras MM, Damaceno-Rodrigues NR, Caldini EG, et al. Particulate urban air pollution affects the functional morphology of mouse placenta. Biol Reprod 2008;79(3):578–84. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod.108.069591. PMID: 18509159. | |
Saenen ND, Martens DS, Neven KY, et al. Air pollution-induced placental alterations: an interplay of oxidative stress, epigenetics, and the aging phenotype? Clin Epigenet 2019;11:124–32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13148-019-0688-z.. | |
DeFranco E, Moravec W, Xu F, et al. Exposure to airborne particulate matter during pregnancy is associated with preterm birth: a population-based cohort study. Environ Health 2016;15:6–14. | |
Ha S, Hu H, Roussos-Ross D, et al. The effects of air pollution on adverse birth outcomes. Environ Res 2014;134:198–204. | |
Hao H, Yoo SR, Strickland, MJ. et al. Effects of air pollution on adverse birth outcomes and pregnancy complications in the U.S. state of Kansas (2000–2015). Sci Rep 2023;13:21476. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-48329-5. | |
Bekkar B, Pacheco S, BAsu R, et al. Association of air pollution and heat exposure with preterm birth, low birth weight, and stillbirth in the U.S. JAMA Network Open 2020;3(6):e208242 PMID: 32556259; PMCID: PMC7303808. | |
Malley CS, Kuylenstierna JCI, Vallack HW, et al. Preterm birth associated with maternal fine particulate matter exposure: a global, regional and national assessment. Environ Int 2017;101:173–82. PMID: 28196630. | |
Chersich MF, Pham MD, Area A, et al. Associations between high temperatures in pregnancy and risk of preterm birth, low birth weight, and stillbirths: systematic review and meta-analysis on behalf of the Climate Change and Heat-Health. Study Group. BMJ 2020;371:m3811 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3811. | |
Kim J, Lee A, Rossin-Slater M. What to expect when it gets hotter: the impacts of prenatal exposure to extreme heat on maternal health. National Bur Economic Res 2020. Working paper 26384. doi: 10.3386/w26384 https://www.nber.org/papers/w26384 Accessed January 19, 2023. | |
Yüzen D, Graf I, Tallarek AC, et al. Increased late preterm birth risk and altered uterine blood flow upon exposure to heat stress. EBioMedicine 2023;93:104651. PMID: 37355458; PMCID: PMC10363435. | |
Holstius DM, Reid CE, Jesdale BM, et al. Birth weight following pregnancy during the 2003 Southern California wildfires. Environ Health Perspect 2012;120(9):1340–5. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1104515. PMID: 22645279; PMCID: PMC3440113. | |
Abdo M, Ward I, O'Dell K, et al. Impact of wildfire smoke on adverse pregnancy outcomes in Colorado, 2007–2015. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019;16(19):3720. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16193720. PMID: 31581673; PMCID: PMC6801422. | |
Basilio E, Chen R, Fernandez AC, et al. Wildfire smoke exposure during pregnancy: a review of potential mechanisms of placental toxicity, impact on obstetric outcomes, and strategies to reduce exposure. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022;19(21):13727. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192113727. PMID: 36360613; PMCID: PMC9657128. | |
Fernández ACG, Basilio E, Benmarhnia T, et al. Retrospective analysis of wildfire smoke exposure and birth weight outcomes in the San Francisco Bay Area of California. Environ Res Health 2023;1(2):025009. doi: 10.1088/2752-5309/acd5f5. Epub 2023 Jun 13. PMID: 37324234; PMCID: PMC10261910. | |
Heft-Neal S, Driscoll A, Yang W, et al. Associations between wildfire smoke exposure during pregnancy and risk of preterm birth in California. Environ Res 2022;203:111872. | |
Dolinoy DC, Huang D, Jirtle RL. Maternal nutrient supplementation counteracts bisphenol A-induced DNA hypomethylation in early development. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2007;104(32):13056–61. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0703739104. PMID: 17670942; PMCID: PMC1941790. | |
Lu C, Toepel K, Irish R, et al. Organic diets significantly lower children’s dietary exposure to organophosphorus pesticides. Envion Health 2015;114:260–9. | |
Harley KG, Kogut C, Madrigal DS, et al. Reducing phthalate, paraben, and phenol exposure from personal care products in adolescent girls: findings from the HERMOSA intervention study. Environ Health Perspec 2016;124(10):1600–7. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1510514. | |
Corbett GA, Lee S, Woodruff TJ, et al. Nutritional interventions to ameliorate the effect of endocrine disruptors on human reproductive health: A semi-structured review from FIGO. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2022;157(3):489–501. PMID: 35122246. PMCID: PMC9305939. | |
Park J, Lee H, Lee S, et al. Interventions on reducing exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals in human health care context: a scoping review. Risk Manage Healthcare Policy 2022;15:779–91. | |
Chen CY, Chou YY, Lin SJ, et al. Developing an intervention strategy to reduce phthalate exposure in Taiwanese girls. Sci Total Environ 2015;517:125–31. | |
Angrand RC, Collins G, Landrigan PJ, et al. Relation of blood lead levels and lead in gasoline: an updated systematic review. Environ Health 2022;21:138–48. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-022-00936-x. | |
Mackay DF, Nelson SM, Haw SJ, et al. Impact of Scotland's smoke-free legislation on pregnancy complications: retrospective cohort study. PLoS Med 2012;9(3):e1001175. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001175. | |
Zota AR, Linderholm L, Park J-S, et al. Temporal comparison of PBDEs, OH-PBDEs, PCBs, and OH-PCBs in the serum of second trimester Pregnant Women Recruited from San Francisco General Hospital, California. Environ Sci Technol 2013, 47, 11776−11784. | |
Sutton PM, Woodruff TJ, Perron J, et al. Toxic environmental chemicals: the role of reproductive health professionals in preventing harmful exposures. AJOG Sept 2012;207;164–73. | |
Sutton PM, Giudice LC, Woodruff TJ. Moving from awareness to action on preventing patient exposure to toxic environmental chemicals. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016;214(5):555–8. | |
Sweeney E. The role of healthcare professionals in environmental health and fertility decision-making. J Environ Occup Health 2017;17(1):28–50. | |
Giudice LC. Talking with patients and the public about endocrine-disrupting chemicals. In: Marci R. (ed.) Environment Impact on Reproductive Health. A Translational Approach. Springer Nature Switzerland: AG, 2023;11:233–41. | |
Giudice LC. Environmental impact on reproductive health and risk mitigating strategies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2021;33(4):343–9. PMID: 34039883. | |
Giudice LC. Commentary on the climate crisis and women’s health: time for action. Intl J Gynecol Obstet 2022:4. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.14235. | |
Crighton EJ, Brown C, Baxter J, et al. Perceptions and experiences of environmental health risks among new mothers: a qualitative study in Ontario, Canada. Health Risk Soc 2013;15(4):295–312. doi: 10.1080/13698575.2013.796345. | |
Barrett ES, Sathyanarayana S, Janssen SS, et al. Environmental health attitudes and behaviours: findings from a large pregnancy cohort study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014;176:119–25; doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.02.029. | |
Rouillon S, Deshayes-Morgand C, Enjalbert L, et al. Endocrine disruptors and pregnancy: knowledge, attitudes and prevention behaviors of French women. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2017;14(9):1021. doi: 10.3390/ijerph14091021. PMID: 28878198; PMCID: PMC5615558. | |
Rouillon S, El Ouazzani H, Rabouan S, et al. Determinants of Risk Perception Related to Exposure to Endocrine Disruptors during Pregnancy: A Qualitative and Quantitative Study on French Women. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2018;11;15(10):2231. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15102231. PMID: 30314384; PMCID: PMC6210258. | |
Morello-Frosch R, Brody JG, Brown P, et al. Toxic ignorance and right-to-know in biomonitoring results communication: a survey of scientists and study participants. Environ Health 2008;9:6–13. | |
Maxim P, Mansier P, Grabar N. Public reception of scientific uncertainty in the endocrine disrupter controversy: The case of male fertility. J Risk Res 2013;16(6):677–95. doi: 10.1080/13669877.2012.726245. | |
Kelly M, Connolly L, Dean M. Public awareness and risk perceptions of endocrine disrupting chemicals: a qualitative study. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17(21):7778. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17217778. | |
Woodruff TJ, Zota AR, Schwartz JM. Environmental chemicals in pregnant women in the United States: NHANES 2003–2004. Environ Health Perspect 2011;119(6):878–85. | |
Hoffman JB, Hennig B. protective influences of healthful nutrition on mechanisms of environmental pollutant toxicity and disease risk. Annals NYAS 2017;1398(1):99–107. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13365. | |
Zachek CM, Schwartz JM, Glasser M, et al. A screening questionnaire for occupational and hobby exposures during pregnancy. Occup Med (Lond) 2019;69(6)428–35. | |
Grajewski B, Rocheleau CM, Lawson CC, et al. Will my work affect my pregnancy? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016;214(5)597–602. |
Online Study Assessment Option
All readers who are qualified doctors or allied medical professionals can now automatically receive 2 Continuing Professional Development credits from FIGO plus a Study Completion Certificate from GLOWM for successfully answering 4 multiple choice questions (randomly selected) based on the study of this chapter.
Medical students can receive the Study Completion Certificate only.
(To find out more about FIGO’s Continuing Professional Development awards programme CLICK HERE)