scholarly journals 172ELECTIVE SINGLE EMBRYO TRANSFER (ESET) IN HUMANS DOES NOT AFFECT THE CHANCES OF A SUCCESSFUL PREGNANCY

2004 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 208
Author(s):  
J. Catt ◽  
T. Wood ◽  
M. Henman ◽  
R. Jansen
Keyword(s):  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Live Birth Rate ◽  
Single Embryo Transfer ◽  
Cumulative Live Birth Rate ◽  
Fresh Embryo Transfer ◽  
Birth Rates ◽  
Live Birth Rates ◽  
Cumulative Live Birth ◽  
Transfer Group

Improvements in human IVF have led to increased pregnancy rates but at the expense of increasing twinning rates. Twins are a bad outcome for the offspring, parents and the healthcare system. An obvious solution to this is to transfer only one embryo and freeze the rest for potential further treatment. This study looked at the effect of doing this on the cumulative live birth rate (when the cryopreserved embryos were thawed and transferred). Patients less than 38 years of age presenting for IVF treatment and with more than two embryos suitable for transfer were offered the chance of transferring only one embryo (elective single embryo transfer, eSET) and freezing the rest. Those patients declining a single embryo transfer had two transferred and served as the controls. Patients not achieving a pregnancy returned for a frozen embryo transfer but were not restricted on the number transferred (to a maximum of two). Cumulative live birth rates were recorded over the ensuing two years. Statistical comparisons were made using paired chi-square tests. The live birth rates from the initial fresh transfer was 41% for eSET (41/111) and significantly higher (53%, P<0.05) for the two-embryo transfer group. These differences were eliminated when the frozen embryos were factored in, both groups rising to 61% of patients treated (68 and 172 live births, respectively). The twinning rate was significantly reduced (P<0.01) from 33% in the two-embryo transfer group to 6% (arising from 4 sets of twins in the frozen embryo transfers) in the eSET group. eSET in the fresh embryo transfer cycle does not affect the chances of a live birth and reduces the twinning rate at least fivefold. Currently, 70% of patients under the age of 38 are electing to have eSET.

scholarly journals Does the Freeze-all strategy improve the cumulative live birth rate and the time to become pregnant in IVF cycles?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Johnson ◽  
J. Vandromme ◽  
A. Larbuisson ◽  
D. Raick ◽  
A. Delvigne
Keyword(s):  
Live Birth ◽  
High Efficiency ◽  
Live Birth Rate ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Cumulative Live Birth Rate ◽  
Fresh Embryo Transfer ◽  
Birth Rates ◽  
Entire Cohort ◽  
Live Birth Rates ◽  
Cumulative Live Birth

IntroductionFreezing of all good quality embryos and their transfer in subsequent cycles, named the freeze-all strategy (FAS), is widely used for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) prevention. Indeed, it increases live birth rates among high responders and prevents preterm birth and small for gestational age. Consequently, why shouldn’t we extend it to all?Materials and methodsA retrospective and monocentric study was conducted between January 2008 and January 2018 comparing the cumulative live birth rates (CLBR) between patients having undergone FAS and a control group using fresh embryo transfer (FET) and having at least one frozen embryo available. Analyses were made for the entire cohort (population 1) and for different subgroups according to confounding factors selected by a logistic regression (population 3), and to the BELRAP (Belgian Register for Assisted Procreation) criteria (population 2).Results2216 patients were divided into two groups: Freeze all (FA), 233 patients and control (C), 1983 patients. The CLBR was 50.2% vs 58.1% P=0.021 for population 1 and 53.2% vs 63.3% P=0.023 for population 2, including 124 cases and 1241 controls. The CLBR stayed in favour of the C group: 70.1% vs 55.9% P=0.03 even when confounding variables were excluded (FA and C group respectively 109 and 770 patients). The median time to become pregnant was equally in favour of the C group with a median of 5 days against 61 days.ConclusionsCLBR is significantly lower in the FA group compared to the C group with a longer time to become pregnant. Nevertheless, the CLBR in the FA group remains excellent and superior to that observed in previous studies with similar procedures and population. These results confirm the high efficiency of FAS but underline the necessity to restrict the strategy to selected cases.

P–660 Impact of elevated late-follicular phase serum estrogen and progesterone levels on blastocyst utilization and cumulative live birth rates in freeze-all cycles

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
K Yakin ◽  
S Ertas ◽  
C Alatas ◽  
O Oktem ◽  
B Urman
Keyword(s):  
Live Birth ◽  
Birth Rate ◽  
Live Birth Rate ◽  
Follicular Phase ◽  
Utilization Rate ◽  
Cumulative Live Birth Rate ◽  
Birth Rates ◽  
Live Birth Rates ◽  
Cumulative Live Birth ◽  
Late Follicular Phase

Abstract Study question Does elevated late-follicular phase estrogen and progesterone levels have an impact on blastocyst utilization and/or cumulative live birth rates in freeze-all cycles? Summary answer High estrogen or progesterone on the day of ovulation trigger is associated with poor blastocyst utilization but comparable cumulative live birth rates in freeze-all cycles. What is known already Several studies suggest impaired clinical outcome in cycles with high estrogen (>3500 pg/ml) or progesterone (>1.5 ng/ml) levels. However, these data were derived from cycles where top-quality embryo(s) were transferred in the fresh cycle and surplus embryos were frozen. These findings might be confounded by alterations in endometrial receptivity. Freeze-all cycles might provide a better model to assess the impact of high late-follicular estrogen or progesterone levels on laboratory and clinical outcome. Study design, size, duration We performed a retrospective cohort study of all IVF cycles (n = 712) between 2016 and 2018 where the entire cohort of embryos was cryopreserved at the blastocyst stage. After excluding cases with <4 oocytes or preimplantation genetic test, the study group comprised 459 women who had 699 frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles. Participants/materials, setting, methods Women were classified into four groups by the indication for freeze-all strategy as elevated progesterone (high P, n = 61), high estrogen (high E, n = 224), elective freezing (elective, n = 114) and tubal-endometrial pathologies (TEP, n = 60). The primary outcome was the cumulative live birth rate in subsequent thaw-transfer cycles and the secondary outcome was the blastocyst utilization rate. Groups were compared using ANOVA and Cox regression analyses to adjust for confounding variables. Main results and the role of chance The mean age of the study group was 32.8 ± 5.3 years, total number of oocytes and cryopreserved blastocysts were 15.0±7.6 and 4.2±3.0, respectively. The high-E group was younger (31.5 ± 5.2 years) and had higher peak E2 levels (4078.9 ± 588.4 pg/ml), number of oocytes (19.7 ± 7.0), cryopreserved embryos (5.3 ± 3.3) and transfer cycles (2.3 ± 1.4) than the other groups. Blastocyst utilization rate was significantly lower (40.4%) compared to elective freezing (53.6%) and TEP groups (55.7%) (both p = 0.001). The high-P group had higher peak progesterone levels (2.1 ± 0.5 ng/ml, p = 0.001), number of oocytes (14.0 ± 5.2) and frozen embryos (4.1 ± 3.5) compared to elective and TEP groups (both p = 0.04). Blastocyst utilization rate was lower (45.7%) than elective freezing and TEP groups but the difference lacked statistical significance (p = 0.33 and p = 0.21, respectively). Cumulative live birth rates were 42.6% in high-P, 59.8% in high-E, 44.7% in elective freezing and 46.7% in TEP groups. Significant predictors of cumulative live birth were female age (aHR: 0.97, 95%CI:0.95–0.99, p = 0.02) and number of frozen blastocysts (aHR:1.05, 95%CI:1.01–1.10), p = 0.02). When adjusted for these confounders, the cumulative live birth rate was not associated with high-E (aHR: 0.86, 95%CI:0.56–1.31) or high-P (aHR: 0.76,95%CI:0.44–1.32). Limitations, reasons for caution This was a retrospective study with small sample size performed at a single fertility center, which may limit the generalizability of our findings. Wider implications of the findings: While lower blastocyst utilization rates are observed in women high late-follicular estradiol or progesterone levels, cumulative live birth rates in subsequent thaw-transfer cycles were not impaired. However, unfavorable outcome parameters observed in women with elevated progesterone deserve further research. Trial registration number Not applicable

P–780 The increase of single embryo transfers does not impair pregnancy and live birth rates, although it lowers twin rate

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Stimpfel ◽  
L Bacer-Kermavner ◽  
T Fevzer ◽  
P Petric ◽  
N Jancar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Birth Rate ◽  
Culture Media ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Live Birth Rate ◽  
Single Embryo Transfer ◽  
Favorable Effect ◽  
Birth Rates ◽  
Live Birth Rates

Abstract Study question How does significant increase of the proportion of single embryo transfer over 10 years period affect pregnancy, live birth and twin rate. Summary answer Increase in single embryo transfer doesn’t change pregnancy and live birth rate, although it significantly lowers twin rate. What is known already Due to widely used approach in IVF of transferring multiple embryos to improve the pregnancy and birth rate, multiple pregnancies, mostly twin, are quite common. But because they are more often associated with adverse neonatal and perinatal outcomes as singleton pregnancies, they are not desirable. Therefore, more and more often the transfer of single embryo is encouraged. Furthermore, in the last years with improvements in cryopreservation techniques leading to effective cryopreservation of supernumerary embryos, there is more options for performing repeated single embryo transfers. Study design, size, duration We retrospectively collected the data of all fresh embryo transfers in couples treated in our centre from January 2010 to December 2019. We excluded embryo transfer where embryos were derived from cryopreserved oocytes and analysed the outcome of fresh embryo transfer regarding to the number of transferred embryos. Participants/materials, setting, methods In our analysis we included 10583 fresh embryo transfers. We tried to evaluate how the proportion of single embryo transfer has changed through analysed period of time and if this led to any differences in pregnancy, live birth, and twin rate. To determine the differences between the groups, the data were analysed with one-way ANOVA and Pearson’s chi-square, as appropriate. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. Main results and the role of chance The analysis revealed that the proportion of single embryo transfers significantly increased from year 2010 to year 2019 (from 28% to 73%; P < 0.001). The proportion increased every year, minimum increase was 1% whereas maximum increase was 16%. This increase over the years did not negatively affect the pregnancy (32% in 2010 vs. 34% in 2019: p = 0.317) and live birth rates (24% vs. 25%; p = 0.584), although it had favorable effect on twin rate (16% vs. 7%; p = 0.002). If we separately analyzed only single and double embryo transfer, we observed that pregnancy (24% in 2010 and 34% in 2019; p = 0.001) and live birth rates (17% vs. 26%, p = 0.001) significantly increased after single embryo transfers, but no difference was observed in double embryo transfers (pregnancy rate: 35% vs. 35%, p = 1; live birth rate: 27% vs. 22%, p = 0.097; twins rate: 20% vs. 27%, p = 0.244). Additionally, we observed that female mean age value significantly increased over analyzed period (34.2±4.5 years in 2010 vs. 35.7±4.7 years in 2019, p < 0.001), although there was no difference in mean number of retrieved oocytes (8.2±5.4 vs. 8.1±4.9, p = 1) and obtained embryos (4.5±3.3 vs. 4.2±2.9; p = 0.684). Limitations, reasons for caution The limitation of the study is retrospective design, and not evaluating the influence of elective single embryo transfer. Also, the IVF laboratory methods and IVF culture media improved over the years meaning they could be partly responsible for observed differences. Wider implications of the findings: Single embryo transfer could probably be performed in even higher proportion without lowering the chances for pregnancy. Trial registration number not applicable’

scholarly journals Endometriosis and Cumulative Live Birth Rate After Fresh and Frozen IVF Cycles With Single Embryo Transfer in Young Women

2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-36
Author(s):  
Michael Feichtinger ◽  
Emelie Nordenhök ◽  
Jan I. Olofsson ◽  
Nermin Hadziosmanovic ◽  
Kenny A. Rodriguez-Wallberg
Keyword(s):  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Young Women ◽  
Birth Rate ◽  
Live Birth Rate ◽  
Single Embryo Transfer ◽  
Cumulative Live Birth Rate ◽  
Cumulative Live Birth

scholarly journals Comparing the cumulative live birth rate of cleavage-stage versus blastocyst-stage embryo transfers between IVF cycles: a study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled superiority trial (the ToF trial)

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e042395
Author(s):  
Simone Cornelisse ◽  
Liliana Ramos ◽  
Brigitte Arends ◽  
Janneke J Brink-van der Vlugt ◽  
Jan Peter de Bruin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Birth Rate ◽  
Live Birth Rate ◽  
Oocyte Retrieval ◽  
Blastocyst Stage ◽  
Cleavage Stage ◽  
Cumulative Live Birth Rate ◽  
Cumulative Live Birth ◽  
Superiority Trial

IntroductionIn vitro fertilisation (IVF) has evolved as an intervention of choice to help couples with infertility to conceive. In the last decade, a strategy change in the day of embryo transfer has been developed. Many IVF centres choose nowadays to transfer at later stages of embryo development, for example, transferring embryos at blastocyst stage instead of cleavage stage. However, it still is not known which embryo transfer policy in IVF is more efficient in terms of cumulative live birth rate (cLBR), following a fresh and the subsequent frozen–thawed transfers after one oocyte retrieval. Furthermore, studies reporting on obstetric and neonatal outcomes from both transfer policies are limited.Methods and analysisWe have set up a multicentre randomised superiority trial in the Netherlands, named the Three or Fivetrial. We plan to include 1200 women with an indication for IVF with at least four embryos available on day 2 after the oocyte retrieval. Women are randomly allocated to either (1) control group: embryo transfer on day 3 and cryopreservation of supernumerary good-quality embryos on day 3 or 4, or (2) intervention group: embryo transfer on day 5 and cryopreservation of supernumerary good-quality embryos on day 5 or 6. The primary outcome is the cLBR per oocyte retrieval. Secondary outcomes include LBR following fresh transfer, multiple pregnancy rate and time until pregnancy leading a live birth. We will also assess the obstetric and neonatal outcomes, costs and patients’ treatment burden.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol has been approved by the Central Committee on Research involving Human Subjects in the Netherlands in June 2018 (CCMO NL 64060.000.18). The results of this trial will be submitted for publication in international peer-reviewed and in open access journals.Trial registration numberNetherlands Trial Register (NL 6857).

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

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document