scholarly journals Seasonal variability does not impact in vitro fertilization success

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xitong Liu ◽  
Haiyan Bai ◽  
Ben W. Mol ◽  
Wenhao Shi ◽  
Ming Gao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Seasonal Variation ◽  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Seasonal Variability ◽  
Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Frozen Embryo Transfer ◽  
Fresh Embryo Transfer ◽  
Significant Difference

AbstractIt is unknown whether seasonal variation influences the outcome of in vitro fertilization (IVF). Previous studies related to seasonal variation of IVF were all small sample size, and the results were conflicting. We performed a retrospective cohort study evaluating the relationship between seasonal variability and live birth rate in the year of 2014–2017. Patients were grouped into four seasons (Winter (December-February), Spring (March-May), Summer (June-August), and Autumn (September-November)) according to the day of oocyte pick-up (OPU). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate association between seasonal variation and live birth. Models were adjusted for covariates including temperature, sunshine hour, infertility type, infertility duration, infertility factor and BMI. In total 38,476 women were enrolled, of which 25,097 underwent fresh cycles, 13,379 were frozen embryo transfer. Live birth rates of fresh embryo transfer were 50.36%, 53.14%, 51.94% and 51.33% for spring, summer, autumn and winter, respectively. Clinical pregnancy rate between the calendar months varied between 55.1% and 63.4% in fresh embryo transfer (ET) and between 58.8% and 65.1% in frozen embryo transfer (FET) (P-values 0.073 and 0.220). In the unadjusted model and adjust model, seasonal variation was not associated with live birth. In conclusion, there was no significant difference of seasonal variations in the outcome of IVF with fresh embryo transfer and frozen embryo transfer.

P–590 Women with hypothalamic hypogonadism have lower live birth rates following frozen embryo transfer

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
R Heidenberg ◽  
A Lanes ◽  
E Ginsburg ◽  
C Gordon
Keyword(s):  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Polycystic Ovary ◽  
Frozen Embryo Transfer ◽  
Fresh Embryo Transfer ◽  
Ovary Syndrome ◽  
Birth Rates ◽  
Live Birth Rates ◽  
Tubal Factor Infertility ◽  
Tubal Factor

Abstract Study question How do live birth rates differ in anovulatory women with polycystic ovary syndrome and hypothalamic hypogonadism compared to normo-ovulatory women undergoing fresh or frozen embryo transfer? Summary answer Live birth rates are similar among all groups undergoing fresh embryo transfer but are significantly lower in women with hypothalamic hypogonadism undergoing frozen embryo transfer. What is known already Conflicting data exist regarding pregnancy outcomes in patients with tubal factor infertility versus polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Some studies demonstrate higher pregnancy and live birth rates for women with PCOS undergoing fresh embryo transfer, but other studies demonstrate no difference. Women with PCOS have higher live birth rates than those with tubal factor infertility when undergoing frozen embryo transfer. Fewer data are available regarding IVF outcomes in women with hypothalamic hypogonadism (HH) and tubal factor infertility. Several studies report comparable live birth rates with fresh embryo transfer, but there are no data on frozen embryo transfer outcomes. Study design, size, duration Retrospective cohort study of all fresh and frozen autologous embryo transfers performed for patients with oligo-anovulation (PCOS, n = 380 and HH, n = 39) and normo-ovulation (tubal factor infertility, n = 315) from 1/1/2012 to 6/30/2019. A total of 734 transfers from 653 patients were analyzed. Participants/materials, setting, methods Transfer outcomes, including implantation, miscarriage, clinical pregnancy and live birth rates, were assessed in fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles. Adjusted relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated adjusting for age, BMI, stimulation protocol, number of embryos transferred, embryo quality, endometrial stripe thickness and day of transfer. Poisson regression was used for counts and with an offset for ratios. Generalized estimating equations were used to account for patients contributing multiple cycles. Main results and the role of chance For fresh embryo transfer cycles, live birth rates are similar among patients with tubal factor infertility, PCOS and HH (29.5% vs. 37.9% vs. 35.9%, respectively, aRR 1.15 95% CI: 0.91–1.44 and aRR 1.23 95% CI: 0.81–2.00, respectively). When evaluating frozen embryo transfer cycles, patients with HH have lower live birth rates than patients with tubal factor infertility (26.5% vs. 42.6%, aRR 0.54 95% CI: 0.33–0.88) and patients with PCOS (26.5% vs. 46.7%, aRR 0.55 95% CI: 0.34–0.88). Additionally, patients with HH have higher chemical pregnancy rates and miscarriage rates than patients with tubal factor infertility (26.5% vs. 13.0% and 17.7% vs. 6.5%, respectively, RR 2.71 95% CI: 1.27–5.77 and RR 2.03 95% CI: 1.05–3.80, respectively). Point biserial correlation showed no significant correlation between live birth and endometrial stripe thickness in HH patients undergoing frozen embryo transfer (r = 0.028, p-value 0.876). Limitations, reasons for caution This study is limited by its retrospective nature and the small sample size of women with hypothalamic hypogonadism. Additionally, these data represent outcomes from a single academic center, so generalizability of our findings may be limited. Wider implications of the findings: Lower live birth rates for HH patients undergoing frozen embryo transfer cycles are not correlated with endometrial stripe thickness. This may be due to absent gonadotropin signaling on endometrial receptors. A prospective randomized trial of HH patients to modified natural versus programmed frozen embryo transfer would best support this hypothesis. Trial registration number Not applicable

The Deferred Embryo Transfer Strategy Seems Not to be a Good Option After Repeated IVF/ICSI Cycle Failures

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (9) ◽  
pp. 1210-1217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathilde Bourdon ◽  
Pietro Santulli ◽  
Yulian Chen ◽  
Catherine Patrat ◽  
Khaled Pocate-Cheriet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Birth Rate ◽  
Previous History ◽  
Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Live Birth Rate ◽  
Multivariate Logistic Regression ◽  
Icsi Cycle ◽  
Significant Difference

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess whether a deferred frozen–thawed embryo transfer (Def-ET) offers any benefits compared to a fresh ET strategy in women who have had 2 or more consecutive in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic injection (ICSI) cycle failures. Design: An observational cohort study in a tertiary referral care center including 416 cycles from women with a previous history of 2 or more consecutive IVF/ICSI failures cycles. Both Def-ET and fresh ET strategies were compared using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. The main outcome measured was the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR). Results: A total of 416 cycles were included in the analysis: 197 in the fresh ET group and 219 in the Def-ET group. The CLBR was not significantly different between the fresh and Def-ET groups (58/197 [29.4%] and 57/219 [26.0%], respectively, P = .437). In addition, after the first ET, there was no significant difference in the live birth rate between the fresh ET and Def-ET groups (50/197 [25.4%] vs 44/219 [20.1%], respectively). Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that compared to the fresh strategy, the Def-ET strategy was not associated with a higher probability of live birth. Conclusions: In cases with 2 or more consecutive prior IVF/ICSI cycle failures, a Def-ET strategy did not result in better ART outcomes than a fresh ET strategy.

P–295 Does endometriosis affect oocyte quality? An analysis of 13 627 donor oocyte recipient and autologous IVF cycles

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M S Kamath ◽  
B Antonisamy ◽  
S K Sunkara
Keyword(s):  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Oocyte Quality ◽  
Pregnancy Rates ◽  
Frozen Embryo Transfer ◽  
In Vitro Fertilisation ◽  
Donor Oocyte ◽  
Human Fertilization ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Study question Does endometriosis affect live birth following donor oocyte recipient versus autologous in vitro fertilisation (IVF) cycle. Summary answer There was no significant difference in the live birth rate (LBR) in women with endometriosis undergoing donor oocyte recipient versus autologous IVF cycle. What is known already For infertile women with endometriosis, IVF is often considered as a treatment option. Lower implantation and pregnancy rates have been observed following IVF in women with endometriosis when compared to tubal factor infertility. It has been debated that lower pregnancy rates following IVF in endometriosis is due to both oocyte quality and the endometrium. To delineate whether endometriosis affects oocyte quality or the endometrium, we planned a study using donor oocyte recipient model where the recipient were women with endometriosis. We compared the LBR after oocyte recipient cycle with autologous IVF in women with endometriosis Study design, size, duration We obtained anonymised dataset of all the IVF cycles performed in the UK since 19991 from the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA). Data from 1996 to 2016 comprising a total of 13 627 donor oocyte recipient and autologous IVF cycles with endometriosis and no other cause of infertility were analysed. Participants/materials, setting, methods Data on all women with endometriosis undergoing fresh or frozen IVF treatment cycles were analysed to compare the LBR between donor oocyte recipient and autologous treatment cycles. Logistic regression analysis was performed adjusting for number of previous IVF cycles, previous live birth, period of treatment, day of embryo transfer, number of embryo transferred, fresh and frozen cycle. Main results and the role of chance There was no significant difference in the LBR in women with endometriosis undergoing donor oocyte recipient fresh cycles compared to women undergoing fresh autologous IVF cycles (31.6% vs. 31.0%; odds ratio, OR 1.03, 99% CI 0.79 – 1.35). After adjusting for confounders listed above, there was no significant difference in LBR in women undergoing donor oocyte recipient fresh cycles versus fresh autologous ART cycles (aOR 1.06, 99% CI 0.79 – 1.42). There was no significant difference in the LBR in women with endometriosis undergoing frozen donor oocyte recipient cycles compared to women undergoing autologous frozen embryo transfer cycles (19.6% vs. 24.0%; OR 0.77, 99% CI 0.47 - 1.25). After adjusting for potential confounders, there was no significant difference in the LBR in women undergoing frozen donor oocyte recipient cycles compared with autologous frozen embryo transfer cycles (aOR 0.84, 99% CI 0.50 - 1.41). Limitations, reasons for caution Although the analysis was adjusted for several potential confounders, there was no information on classification of endometriosis to allow adjustment. Wider implications of the findings: The current study design does not indicate endometriosis has an impact on oocyte quality given that the outcomes in donor oocyte recipient cycles are comparable with autologous IVF cycles. These findings need to be further studied and validated. Trial registration number Not applicable

P–318 Short (seven days) versus conventional (fourteen days) estrogen priming in an artificial frozen embryo transfer cycle: a randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Racca ◽  
S Santos-Ribeiro ◽  
D Panagiotis ◽  
L Boudry ◽  
S Mackens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pregnancy Rate ◽  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Transvaginal Ultrasound ◽  
Clinical Pregnancy ◽  
Frozen Embryo Transfer ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Study question What is the impact of seven days versus fourteen days’ estrogen (E2) priming on the clinical outcome of frozen-embryo-transfer in artificially prepared endometrium (FET-HRT) cycles? Summary answer No significant difference in clinical/ongoing pregnancy rate was observed when comparing 7 versus 14 days of estrogen priming before starting progesterone (P) supplementation. What is known already One (effective) method for endometrial preparation prior to frozen embryo transfer is hormone replacement therapy (HRT), a sequential regimen with E2 and P, which aims to mimic the endocrine exposure of the endometrium in a physiological cycle. The average duration of E2 supplementation is generally 12–14 days, however, this protocol has been arbitrarily chosen whereas, the optimal duration of E2 implementation remains unknown. Study design, size, duration This is a single-center, randomized, controlled, open-label pilot study. All FET-HRT cycles were performed in a tertiary centre between October 2018 and December 2020. Overall, 150 patients were randomized of whom 132 were included in the analysis after screening failure and drop-out. Participants/materials, setting, methods The included patients were randomized into one of 2 groups; group A (7 days of E2 prior to P supplementation) and group B (14 days of E2 prior to P supplementation). Both groups received blastocyst stage embryos for transfer on the 6th day of vaginal P administration. Pregnancy was assessed by an hCG blood test 12 days after FET and clinical pregnancy was confirmed by transvaginal ultrasound at 7 weeks of gestation. Main results and the role of chance Following the exclusion of drop-outs and screening failures, 132 patients were finally included both in group A (69 patients) or group B (63 patients). Demographic characteristics for both groups were comparable. The positive pregnancy rate was 46.4% and 53.9%, (p 0.462) for group A and group B, respectively. With regard to the clinical pregnancy rate at 7 weeks, no statistically significant difference was observed (36.2% vs 36.5% for group A and group B, respectively, p = 0.499). The secondary outcomes of the study (biochemical pregnancy, miscarriage and live birth rate) were also comparable between the two arms for both PP and ITT analysis. Multivariable logistic regression showed that the HRT scheme is not associated with pregnancy rate, however, the P value on the day of ET is significantly associated with the pregnancy outcome. Limitations, reasons for caution This study was designed as a proof of principle trial with a limited study population and therefore underpowered to determine the superiority of one intervention over another. Instead, the purpose of the present study was to explore trends in outcome differences and to allow us to safely design larger RCTs. Wider implications of the findings: The results of this study give the confidence to perform larger-scale RCTs to confirm whether a FET-HRT can be performed safely in a shorter time frame, thus, reducing the TTP, while maintaining comparable pregnancy and live birth rates. Trial registration number NCT03930706

scholarly journals The Impact of Laparoscopic Treated Endometrioma on the Live Birth Rate in IVF/ICSI Cycles Compared with Unexplained Infertility: A Prospective Randomized Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (B) ◽  
pp. 160-165
Author(s):  
Snezhana Stojkovska ◽  
Gligor Dimitrov ◽  
Jane Stojkovski ◽  
Stefan Saltirovski ◽  
Makuli Hadzi-Lega
Keyword(s):  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Birth Rate ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Live Birth Rate ◽  
Unexplained Infertility ◽  
Fresh Embryo Transfer ◽  
Vitro Fertilization ◽  
The Impact

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that 30–70% of patients who undergo treatment for infertility are afflicted with endometriosis. AIM: The objectives of this study are to evaluate the impact of laparoscopic treated endometrioma compared to unexplained subfertility on the live birth rate in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). METHODS: This randomized prospective study included 120 women who contacted the department of IVF in the period from 2010 to 2015. Women were divided into two groups according to the findings obtained by laparoscopy. The treated endometrioma group (n = 60) with unilateral ovarian endometriomas and the non-endometriosis group (n = 60) with unexplained infertility undergoing the first cycle of IVF-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) were included in the study. In all participants, ICSI was used and all had fresh embryo transfer per cycle. The primary outcome was to live birth. RESULTS: Our results demonstrated that clinical pregnancy rates (p = 0.54) and live birth rate (p = 0.63) are similar. The preservation of a good ovarian response to stimulation by gonadotropins after laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy was presented. Laparoscopic cystectomy is followed by good IVF/ICSI outcome into the level expected in women with unexplained subfertility. CONCLUSION: Therefore, operative treatment is justified by not altering the live birth rate. Additional study is needed to be considered cystectomy before IVF as an effective approach for managing endometriosis-associated infertility.

scholarly journals Estimating the causal effect of embryo transfer day on clinical in vitro fertilization outcomes using propensity score matching

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Han-Chih Hsieh ◽  
Chun-I Lee ◽  
En-Yu Lai ◽  
Jia-Ying Su ◽  
Yi-Ting Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pregnancy Rate ◽  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Implantation Rate ◽  
Clinical Pregnancy ◽  
Clinical Pregnancy Rate ◽  
Vitro Fertilization ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Day 5 Transfer

Abstract Background For women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF), the clinical benefit of embryo transfer at the blastocyst stage (Day 5) versus cleavage stage (Day 3) remains controversial. The purpose of this study is to compare the implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate and odds of live birth of Day 3 and Day 5 embryo transfer, and more importantly, to address the issue that patients were chosen to receive either transfer protocol due to their underlying clinical characteristics, i.e., confounding by indication. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 9,090 IVF cycles collected by Lee Women’s Hospital in Taichung, Taiwan from 1998 to 2014. We utilized the method of propensity score matching to mimic a randomized controlled trial (RCT) where each patient with Day 5 transfer was matched by another patient with Day 3 transfer with respect to other clinical characteristics. Implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, and odds of live birth were compared for women underwent Day 5 transfer and Day 3 transfer to estimate the causal effects. We further investigated the causal effects in subgroups by stratifying age and anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH). Results Our analyses uncovered an evidence of a significant difference in implantation rate (p=0.04) favoring Day 5 transfer, and showed that Day 3 and Day 5 transfers made no difference in both odds of live birth (p=0.27) and clinical pregnancy rate (p=0.11). With the increase of gestational age, the trend toward non-significance of embryo transfer day in our result appeared to be consistent for subgroups stratified by age and AMH, while all analyses stratified by age and AMH were not statistically significant. Conclusions We conclude that for women without strong indications for Day 3 or Day 5 transfer, there is a small significant difference in implantation rate in favor of Day 5 transfer. However, the two protocols have indistinguishable outcomes on odds of live birth and clinical pregnancy rate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document