scholarly journals Endometriosis Lowers the Cumulative Live Birth Rates in IVF by Decreasing the Number of Embryos but Not Their Quality

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 2478
Author(s):  
Lisa Boucret ◽  
Pierre-Emmanuel Bouet ◽  
Jérémie Riou ◽  
Guillaume Legendre ◽  
Léa Delbos ◽  
...  

Endometriosis and infertility are closely linked, but the underlying mechanisms are still poorly understood. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of endometriosis on in vitro fertilization (IVF) parameters, especially on embryo quality and IVF outcomes. A total of 1124 cycles with intracytoplasmic sperm injection were retrospectively evaluated, including 155 cycles with endometriosis and 969 cycles without endometriosis. Women with endometriosis had significantly lower ovarian reserve markers (AMH and AFC), regardless of previous ovarian surgery. Despite receiving significantly higher doses of exogenous gonadotropins, they had significantly fewer oocytes, mature oocytes, embryos, and top-quality embryos than women in the control group. Multivariate analysis did not reveal any association between endometriosis and the proportion of top-quality embryo (OR = 0.87; 95% CI [0.66–1.12]; p = 0.3). The implantation rate and the live birth rate per cycle were comparable between the two groups (p = 0.05), but the cumulative live births rate was significantly lower in in the endometriosis group (32.1% versus 50.7%, p = 0.001), as a consequence of the lower number of frozen embryos. In conclusion, endometriosis lowers the cumulative live birth rates by decreasing the number of embryos available to transfer, but not their quality.

2019 ◽  
Vol 71 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Panagiotis Drakopoulos ◽  
Joaquín Errázuriz ◽  
Samuel Santos-Ribeiro ◽  
Herman Tournaye ◽  
Alberto Vaiarelli ◽  
...  

2005 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cynthia Witsenburg ◽  
Sandra Dieben ◽  
Lucette Van der Westerlaken ◽  
Harjo Verburg ◽  
Nico Naaktgeboren

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Johnson ◽  
J. Vandromme ◽  
A. Larbuisson ◽  
D. Raick ◽  
A. Delvigne

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.


2009 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
pp. 315-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beth A. Malizia ◽  
Michele R. Hacker ◽  
Alan S. Penzias

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document