PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes for a supplemented natural cycle with a programmed cycle protocol for frozen blastocyst transfer. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of frozen autologous blastocyst transfers, at a single academic fertility center (519 supplemented natural cycles and 106 programmed cycles). Implantation, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth and birth weight were compared using Pearson's Chi-squared test, T-test, or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between natural and programmed frozen embryo transfers with respect to implantation (21.9 vs. 18.1 %), clinical pregnancy (35.5 vs. 29.2 %), and live birth rates (27.7 vs. 23.6 %). Mean birth weights were also similar between natural and programmed cycles for singletons (3354 vs. 3340 g) and twins (2422 vs. 2294 g) CONCLUSION: Frozen blastocyst embryo transfers using supplemented natural or programmed protocols experience similar success rates. Patient preference should be considered in choosing a protocol.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes for a supplemented natural cycle with a programmed cycle protocol for frozen blastocyst transfer. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of frozen autologous blastocyst transfers, at a single academic fertility center (519 supplemented natural cycles and 106 programmed cycles). Implantation, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth and birth weight were compared using Pearson's Chi-squared test, T-test, or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between natural and programmed frozen embryo transfers with respect to implantation (21.9 vs. 18.1 %), clinical pregnancy (35.5 vs. 29.2 %), and live birth rates (27.7 vs. 23.6 %). Mean birth weights were also similar between natural and programmed cycles for singletons (3354 vs. 3340 g) and twins (2422 vs. 2294 g) CONCLUSION: Frozen blastocyst embryo transfers using supplemented natural or programmed protocols experience similar success rates. Patient preference should be considered in choosing a protocol.
Authors: Bruce S Shapiro; Said T Daneshmand; Forest C Garner; Martha Aguirre; Cynthia Hudson Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2014-05-17 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Tarek A Gelbaya; Luciano G Nardo; Helen R Hunter; Cheryl T Fitzgerald; Greg Horne; Elizabeth E H Pease; Daniel R Brison; Brian A Lieberman Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Human Mousavi Fatemi; Dimitra Kyrou; Claire Bourgain; Etienne Van den Abbeel; Georg Griesinger; Paul Devroey Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2010-01-25 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Snigdha Alur-Gupta; Margaret Hopeman; Dara S Berger; Clarisa Gracia; Kurt T Barnhart; Christos Coutifaris; Suneeta Senapati Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 7.329