P–665 Influence of premature progesterone elevation on embryo development

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
T Lefebvre ◽  
G Duval ◽  
S Loubersac ◽  
J Lammers ◽  
P Barriere ◽  
...  

Abstract Study question Does a serum progesterone level higher than 1.3 ng/mL on the day of ovulation trigger have an impact on blastocyst development? Summary answer Elevated progesterone level has no significant impact on top blastocyst rate, usable blastocyst rate and on morphokinetics. What is known already Premature elevation of progesterone level on the day of ovulation trigger prior to IVF is common and causes a decrease in endometrial receptivity. A freeze all strategy is then recommended. However, cumulative live birth rates have also been described as lower in cases of high progesterone levels. Study design, size, duration This was a retrospective bicentric cohort follow-up study, including 1150 IVF/ICSI cycles performed between 2016 and 2018 with at least 1 day–5 blastocyst available for transfer or freezing. Among these cycles, 524 were performed with use of a time-lapse system (Embryoscope). Serum Progesterone level was measured on the day of ovulation trigger, and a value >1.3 ng/ml was used to identify premature progesterone elevation. Participants/materials, setting, methods The cycles were divided into 2 groups according to serum progesterone level: 1335 cycles were allocated in the normal progesterone group (P < 1,3) and 215 in the progesterone premature elevation group (P > 1.3). Patient’s characteristics, ovarian stimulation characteristics, IVF cycles characteristics and embryology parameters were anonymously recorded and compared between the 2 groups. Main results and the role of chance Female age, smoking status, AFC and AMH levels were comparable between the 2 groups. Female BMI was significantly higher in the P < 1,3 than in the P > 1.3 group (26.1 versus 24.7 kg/m² respectively). Total FSH dose, estradiol level, number of follicles >11mm and number of retrieved oocytes were significantly higher in the P > 1.3 group than in P < 1.3 group No difference was observed between the 2 groups in terms of top blastocyst rate per mature oocyte and usable blastocyst rate per mature oocyte. When morphokinetic analysis was available, time to blastulation was the only significantly different parameter between the 2 groups (110.4 hours in P < 1.3 versus 107.9 hours in P > 1.3, p = 0.04). Cumulative live birth rate per cycle was not statistically different between the two groups (23.1% for P < 1.3 versus 28.7% for P > 1.3) (p > 0.05). Limitations, reasons for caution The retrospective design of the study should lead to careful analysis of the results. The progesterone threshold refers to a specific assay, and should not be generalized to other assays. Wider implications of the findings: Premature elevation of serum progesterone level on the day of ovulation trigger does not seem to affect embryo developmental competence. This further supports the relevance of freeze all strategy in this situation. Trial registration number Not applicable

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 ◽  
...  

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).


2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-139
Author(s):  
Se Jeong Kim ◽  
Dayong Lee ◽  
Seul Ki Kim ◽  
Byung Chul Jee ◽  
Seok Hyun Kim

Objective: In the present study, we aimed to retrospectively evaluate the cumulative live birth rate (LBR) after up to three consecutive embryo transfer (ET) cycles, either fresh or frozen, in women with expected poor ovarian response (ePOR). Methods: We selected 115 women who entered the first <i>in vitro</i> fertilization (IVF) cycle between August 2013 and July 2016. The women were divided into an ePOR group (37 women) and a non-ePOR group (78 women). All women in the ePOR group were ≥40 years old or had serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels of less than 1.1 ng/mL at the time of the first IVF cycle. Live birth outcomes were monitored until December 2017. The cumulative LBR (with both conservative and optimistic estimates) was calculated according to the serial number of ET cycles. Results: After up to three ET cycles, the overall cumulative LBR was significantly lower in the ePOR group than in the non-ePOR group (conservative estimate, 10.8% vs. 44.9%, respectively; optimistic estimate, 14.7% vs. 56.1%, respectively; log-rank test, <i>p</i>=0.003). Conclusion: Women with ePOR exhibited a lower cumulative LBR than women in the non-ePOR group, and this information should be provided to ePOR women during counseling before starting IVF.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document