scholarly journals Fertility-Sparing Treatment and Assisted Reproductive Technology In Patients With Endometrial Carcinoma And Endometrial Hyperplasia: Pregnancy Outcomes After Embryo Transfer

Author(s):  
Hilary Friedlander ◽  
Jennifer Blakemore ◽  
David McCulloh ◽  
M. Fino

Abstract Purpose: To evaluate pregnancy outcomes following embryo transfer in patients with endometrial carcinoma (EMCA) or endometrial hyperplasia (EH) who elected for fertility-sparing treatment (FST). Methods: This retrospective cohort study at a large urban university-affiliated fertility center included all patients who underwent embryo transfer after fertility-sparing treatment for EMCA or EH between January 2003 and December 2018. Primary outcomes included embryo transfer results and a live birth rate (defined as number of live births per number of transfers).Results: There were 14 patients, 3 with EMCA and 11 with EH, who met criteria for inclusion with a combined total of 40 embryo transfers. An analysis of observed outcomes by sub-group, compared to the expected outcomes at our center (patients without EMCA/EH matched for age, embryo transfer type and number, and utilization of PGT-A) showed that patients with EMCA/EH after FST had a significantly lower live birth rate than expected (Z = -5.04, df =39, p < 0.01). A sub-group analysis of the 14 euploid embryo transfers resulted in a live birth rate of 21.4% compared to an expected rate of 62.8% (Z = -3.32, df = 13, p < 0.001).Conclusions: Among patients with EMCA/EH who required assisted reproductive technology, live birth rates were lower than expected following embryo transfer when compared to patients without EMCA/EH at our center. Further evaluation of the impact of the diagnosis, treatment and repeated cavity instrumentation for FST is necessary to create an individualized and optimized approach for this unique patient population

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Junan Meng ◽  
Mengchen Zhu ◽  
Wenjuan Shen ◽  
Xiaomin Huang ◽  
Haixiang Sun ◽  
...  

Abstract Background It is still uncertain whether surgical evacuation adversely affects subsequent embryo transfer. The present study aims to assess the influence of surgical evacuation on the pregnancy outcomes of subsequent embryo transfer cycle following first trimester miscarriage in an initial in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) cycle. Methods A total of 645 patients who underwent their first trimester miscarriage in an initial IVF cycle between January 2013 and May 2016 in Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital were enrolled. Surgical evacuation was performed when the products of conception were retained more than 8 h after medical evacuation. Characteristics and pregnancy outcomes were compared between surgical evacuation patients and no surgical evacuation patients. The pregnancy outcomes following surgical evacuation were further compared between patients with ≥ 8 mm or < 8 mm endometrial thickness (EMT), and with the different EMT changes. Results The EMT in the subsequent embryo transfer cycle of surgical evacuation group was much thinner when compared with that in the no surgical evacuation group (9.0 ± 1.6 mm vs. 9.4 ± 1.9 mm, P = 0.01). There was no significant difference in implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate or miscarriage rate between surgical evacuation group and no surgical evacuation group (P > 0.05). The live birth rate was higher in EMT ≥ 8 mm group when compared to < 8 mm group in surgical evacuation patients (43.0% vs. 17.4%, P < 0.05). Conclusions There was no significant difference in the pregnancy outcomes of subsequent embryo transfer cycle between surgical evacuation patients and no surgical evacuation patients. Surgical evacuation led to the decrease of EMT, especially when the EMT < 8 mm was association with a lower live birth rate.


2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (7) ◽  
pp. 1630-1636 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phillip A Romanski ◽  
Pietro Bortoletto ◽  
Zev Rosenwaks ◽  
Glenn L Schattman

Abstract STUDY QUESTION Will a delay in initiating IVF treatment affect pregnancy outcomes in infertile women with diminished ovarian reserve? SUMMARY ANSWER A delay in IVF treatment up to 180 days does not affect the live birth rate for women with diminished ovarian reserve when compared to women who initiate IVF treatment within 90 days of presentation. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY In clinical practice, treatment delays can occur due to medical, logistical or financial reasons. Over a period of years, a gradual decline in ovarian reserve occurs which can result in declining outcomes in response to IVF treatment over time. There is disagreement among reproductive endocrinologists about whether delaying IVF treatment for a few months can negatively affect patient outcomes. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A retrospective cohort study of infertile patients in an academic hospital setting with diminished ovarian reserve who started an IVF cycle within 180 days of their initial consultation and underwent an oocyte retrieval with planned fresh embryo transfer between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2018. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Diminished ovarian reserve was defined as an anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) &lt;1.1 ng/ml. In total, 1790 patients met inclusion criteria (1115 immediate and 675 delayed treatment). Each patient had one included cycle and no subsequent data from additional frozen embryo transfer cycles were included. Since all cycle outcomes evaluated were from fresh embryo transfers, no genetically tested embryos were included. Patients were grouped by whether their cycle started 1–90 days after presentation (immediate) or 91–180 days (delayed). The primary outcome was live birth (≥24 weeks of gestation). A subgroup analysis of more severe forms of diminished ovarian reserve was performed to evaluate outcomes for patients with an AMH &lt;0.5 and for patients &gt;40 years old with an AMH &lt;1.1 ng/ml (Bologna criteria for diminished ovarian reserve). Logistic regression analysis, adjusted a priori for patient age, was used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) with a 95% CI. All pregnancy outcomes were additionally adjusted for the number of embryos transferred. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE The mean ± SD number of days from presentation to IVF start was 50.5 ± 21.9 (immediate) and 128.8 ± 25.9 (delayed). After embryo transfer, the live birth rate was similar between groups (immediate: 23.9%; delayed: 25.6%; OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.85–1.38). Additionally, a similar live birth rate was observed in a subgroup analysis of patients with an AMH &lt;0.5 ng/ml (immediate: 18.8%; delayed: 19.1%; OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.65–1.51) and in patients &gt;40 years old with an AMH &lt;1.1 ng/ml (immediate: 12.3%; delayed: 14.7%; OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.77–1.91). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION There is the potential for selection bias with regard to the patients who started their IVF cycle within 90 days compared to 91–180 days after initial consultation. In addition, we did not include patients who were seen for initial evaluation but did not progress to IVF treatment with oocyte retrieval; therefore, our results should only be applied to patients with diminished ovarian reserve who complete an IVF cycle. Finally, since we excluded patients who started their IVF cycle greater than 180 days from their first visit, it is not known how such a delay in treatment affects pregnancy outcomes in IVF cycles. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS A delay in initiating IVF treatment in patients with diminished ovarian reserve up to 180 days from the initial visit does not affect pregnancy outcomes. This observation remains true for patients who are in the high-risk categories for poor response to ovarian stimulation. Providers and patients should be reassured that when a short-term treatment delay is deemed necessary for medical, logistic or financial reasons, treatment outcomes will not be affected. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) No financial support, funding or services were obtained for this study. The authors do not report any potential conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER Not applicable.


Author(s):  
David B. Seifer ◽  
Burcin Simsek ◽  
Ethan Wantman ◽  
Alexander M. Kotlyar

Abstract Background Numerous studies have demonstrated substantial differences in assisted reproductive technology outcomes between black non-Hispanic and white non-Hispanic women. We sought to determine if disparities in assisted reproductive technology outcomes between cycles from black non-Hispanic and white non-Hispanic women have changed and to identify factors that may have influenced change and determine racial differences in cumulative live birth rates. Methods This is a retrospective cohort study of the SARTCORS database outcomes for 2014–2016 compared with those previously reported in 2004–2006 and 1999/2000. Patient demographics, etiology of infertility, and cycle outcomes were compared between black non-hispanic and white non-hispanic patients. Categorical values were compared using Chi-squared testing. Continuous variables were compared using t-test. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess confounders. Results We analyzed 122,721 autologous, fresh, non-donor embryo cycles from 2014 to 2016 of which 13,717 cycles from black and 109,004 cycles from white women. The proportion of cycles from black women increased from 6.5 to 8.4%. Cycles from black women were almost 3 times more likely to have tubal and/or uterine factor and body mass index ≥30 kg/m2. Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that black women had a lower live birth rate (OR 0.71;P < 0.001) and a lower cumulative live birth rate for their initial cycle (OR 0.64; P < 0.001) independent of age, parity, body mass index, etiology of infertility, ovarian reserve, cycle cancellation, past spontaneous abortions, use of intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection or number of embryos transferred. A lower proportion of cycles in black women were represented among non-mandated states (P < 0.001) and cycles in black women were associated with higher clinical live birth rates in mandated states (P = 0.006). Conclusions Disparities in assisted reproductive technology outcomes in the US have persisted for black women over the last 15 years. Limited access to state mandated insurance may be contributory. Race has continued to be an independent prognostic factor for live birth and cumulative live birth rate from assisted reproductive technology in the US.


2018 ◽  
Vol 103 (7) ◽  
pp. 2735-2742 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daimin Wei ◽  
Yunhai Yu ◽  
Mei Sun ◽  
Yuhua Shi ◽  
Yun Sun ◽  
...  

Abstract Context Supraphysiological estradiol exposure after ovarian stimulation may disrupt embryo implantation after fresh embryo transfer. Women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), who usually overrespond to ovarian stimulation, have a better live birth rate after frozen embryo transfer (FET) than after fresh embryo transfer; however, ovulatory women do not. Objective To evaluate whether the discrepancy in live birth rate after fresh embryo transfer vs FET between these two populations is due to the variation in ovarian response (i.e., peak estradiol level or oocyte number). Design, Setting, Patients, Intervention(s), and Main Outcome Measure(s) This was a secondary analysis of data from two multicenter randomized trials with similar study designs. A total of 1508 women with PCOS and 2157 ovulatory women were randomly assigned to undergo fresh or FET. The primary outcome was live birth. Results Compared with fresh embryo transfer, FET resulted in a higher live birth rate (51.9% vs 40.7%; OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.22 to 2.03) in PCOS women with peak estradiol level &gt;3000pg/mL but not in those with estradiol level ≤3000 pg/mL. In women with PCOS who have ≥16 oocytes, FET yielded a higher live birth rate (54.8% vs 42.1%; OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.20 to 2.31), but this was not seen in those with &lt;16 oocytes. In ovulatory women, pregnancy outcomes were similar after fresh embryo transfer and FET in all subgroups. Conclusions Supraphysiological estradiol after ovarian stimulation may adversely affect pregnancy outcomes in women with PCOS but not in ovulatory women.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document