Literature DB >> 26400506

Higher clinical pregnancy rates from frozen-thawed blastocyst transfers compared to fresh blastocyst transfers: a retrospective matched-cohort study.

Kemal Özgür1, Murat Berkkanoğlu2, Hasan Bulut2, Ayhan Isikli2, Kevin Coetzee2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this matched-cohort study was to assess endometrial receptivity to blastocyst implantation in fresh embryo transfer by comparing implantation outcomes of fresh embryo transfer with frozen embryo transfer, where two blastocysts of good quality were transferred in good prognosis patients. METHOD(S): Fresh embryo transfer from intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles and artificial frozen embryo transfer cycles performed from January 2012 to December 2013 at a private clinic were retrospectively analyzed and the pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, and implantation rates statistically compared. Cycles were stratified and matched according to the blastocyst expansion grade (grade 2, 3, 4, or 5) of the two blastocysts transferred. Five hundred ninety-eight fresh embryo transfer cycles were matched with 545 frozen embryo transfer cycles across four blastocyst cohorts. RESULT(S): In this study of 1143 blastocyst transfer cycles, fresh embryo transfer resulted in reduced pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, and fetal heart implantation rates in all four blastocyst cohorts. The fetal heart implantation rates for fresh embryo transfer ranged from 16.7 % in the grade 2 to 47.3 % in the grade 5 cohort, compared to 23.1 % in the grade 2 to 57.4 % in the grade 5 cohort for frozen embryo transfer. The trends in increasing pregnancy outcomes relative to increasing blastocyst expansion were similar in fresh embryo transfer and frozen embryo transfer. CONCLUSION(S): Blastocysts of good quality transferred in frozen embryo transfer had a significantly greater chance of implantation and clinical pregnancy compared to blastocysts of matched quality transferred in fresh embryo transfer, suggesting reduced endometrial receptivity in fresh embryo transfer.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Blastocyst; Endometrium; Fresh; Frozen-thawed; Implantation

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26400506      PMCID: PMC4615923          DOI: 10.1007/s10815-015-0576-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet        ISSN: 1058-0468            Impact factor:   3.412


  26 in total

1.  Circulating progesterone levels and ongoing pregnancy rates in controlled ovarian stimulation cycles for in vitro fertilization: analysis of over 4000 cycles.

Authors:  E Bosch; E Labarta; J Crespo; C Simón; J Remohí; J Jenkins; A Pellicer
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2010-06-10       Impact factor: 6.918

2.  Revealing the enigmas of implantation: what is the true impact of ovarian hyperstimulation?

Authors:  Sergio Oehninger
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2007-08-06       Impact factor: 7.329

3.  Evidence of impaired endometrial receptivity after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a prospective randomized trial comparing fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfers in high responders.

Authors:  Bruce S Shapiro; Said T Daneshmand; Forest C Garner; Martha Aguirre; Cynthia Hudson; Shyni Thomas
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2011-07-06       Impact factor: 7.329

4.  Evidence of impaired endometrial receptivity after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a prospective randomized trial comparing fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfer in normal responders.

Authors:  Bruce S Shapiro; Said T Daneshmand; Forest C Garner; Martha Aguirre; Cynthia Hudson; Shyni Thomas
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2011-07-06       Impact factor: 7.329

Review 5.  Fresh versus frozen embryo transfer: backing clinical decisions with scientific and clinical evidence.

Authors:  Jemma Evans; Natalie J Hannan; Tracey A Edgell; Beverley J Vollenhoven; Peter J Lutjen; Tiki Osianlis; Lois A Salamonsen; Luk J F Rombauts
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2014-06-10       Impact factor: 15.610

6.  Vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer cycles yield higher pregnancy and implantation rates compared with fresh blastocyst transfer cycles--time for a new embryo transfer strategy?

Authors:  Dandan Zhu; Juanjuan Zhang; Shanren Cao; Junqiang Zhang; Boon Chin Heng; Meiling Huang; Xiufeng Ling; Tao Duan; Guo Qing Tong
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 7.329

7.  Endometrial receptivity is affected in women with high circulating progesterone levels at the end of the follicular phase: a functional genomics analysis.

Authors:  E Labarta; J A Martínez-Conejero; P Alamá; J A Horcajadas; A Pellicer; C Simón; E Bosch
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2011-05-02       Impact factor: 6.918

8.  Steroid receptor expression in late follicular phase endometrium in GnRH antagonist IVF cycles is already altered, indicating initiation of early luteal phase transformation in the absence of secretory changes.

Authors:  Evangelos G Papanikolaou; Claire Bourgain; Efstratios Kolibianakis; Herman Tournaye; Paul Devroey
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2005-02-10       Impact factor: 6.918

9.  In GnRH antagonist/rec-FSH stimulated cycles, advanced endometrial maturation on the day of oocyte retrieval correlates with altered gene expression.

Authors:  Inge Van Vaerenbergh; Leentje Van Lommel; Vanessa Ghislain; Peter In't Veld; Frans Schuit; Human Mousavi Fatemi; Paul Devroey; Claire Bourgain
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2009-01-27       Impact factor: 6.918

10.  Casting for determinants of blastocyst yield and of rates of implantation and of pregnancy after blastocyst transfers.

Authors:  Bronte A Stone; Charles M March; Guy E Ringler; Kelly J Baek; Richard P Marrs
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2014-08-06       Impact factor: 7.329

View more
  8 in total

1.  Frozen embryo transfer can be performed in the cycle immediately following the freeze-all cycle.

Authors:  Kemal Ozgur; Hasan Bulut; Murat Berkkanoglu; Peter Humaidan; Kevin Coetzee
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-09-22       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Embryo stage of development is not decisive for reproductive outcomes in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles.

Authors:  Bruno R de Carvalho; Marina W Paes Barbosa; Helena Bonesi; David B Gomes; Íris O Cabral; Antônio C Paes Barbosa; Adelino A Silva; José R Iglesias; Hitomi M Nakagawa
Journal:  JBRA Assist Reprod       Date:  2017-02-01

3.  Single best euploid versus single best unknown-ploidy blastocyst frozen embryo transfers: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Kemal Ozgur; Murat Berkkanoglu; Hasan Bulut; Gonul Didem Akay Yoruk; Nevrah Nal Candurmaz; Kevin Coetzee
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2019-01-07       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Optimal embryo transfer strategy in poor response may include freeze-all.

Authors:  Murat Berkkanoglu; Kevin Coetzee; Hasan Bulut; Kemal Ozgur
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-11-10       Impact factor: 3.412

5.  Thawing day 3 embryos and culturing to day 5 may be a better method for frozen embryo transfer.

Authors:  Roni Rahav-Koren; Shmuel Inbar; Netanella Miller; Amir Wiser; Yael Yagur; Chen Berkowitz; Sivan Farladansky-Gershnabel; Adrian Shulman; Arie Berkowitz
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-09-22       Impact factor: 3.412

6.  The effect of frozen-thawed embryo transfer performed concurrently with hysteroscopy on the reproductive outcomes during assisted reproductive treatments.

Authors:  Xiuxian Zhu; Hongjuan Ye; Yonglun Fu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-09-19       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  A Comparative Analysis of Outcomes Between Two Different Intramuscular Progesterone Preparations in Women Undergoing Frozen Embryo Transfer Cycles.

Authors:  Srividya Seshadri; Rabi Odia; Ozkan Ozturk; Wiam Saab; Ali AlChami; Xavier Viñals Gonzalez; Saba Salim; Wael Saab; Paul Serha
Journal:  J Reprod Infertil       Date:  2022 Jan-Mar

8.  Effects of immediate versus delayed frozen embryo transfer in high responder patients undergoing freeze-all cycles.

Authors:  Na Zuo; Yingzhuo Gao; Ningning Zhang; Da Li; Xiuxia Wang
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2021-06-28       Impact factor: 3.007

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.