Literature DB >> 26604065

Successful elective and medically indicated oocyte vitrification and warming for autologous in vitro fertilization, with predicted birth probabilities for fertility preservation according to number of cryopreserved oocytes and age at retrieval.

Joseph O Doyle1, Kevin S Richter2, Joshua Lim2, Robert J Stillman2, James R Graham2, Michael J Tucker2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a single treatment center's experience with autologous IVF using vitrified and warmed oocytes, including fertilization, embryonic development, pregnancy, and birth outcomes, and to estimate the likelihood of live birth of at least one, two, or three children according to the number of mature oocytes cryopreserved by elective fertility preservation patients.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.
SETTING: Private practice clinic. PATIENT(S): Women undergoing autologous IVF treatment using vitrified and warmed oocytes. Indications for oocyte vitrification included elective fertility preservation, desire to limit the number of oocytes inseminated and embryos created, and lack of available sperm on the day of oocyte retrieval. INTERVENTION(S): Oocyte vitrification, warming, and subsequent IVF treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Post-warming survival, fertilization, implantation, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rates. RESULT(S): A total of 1,283 vitrified oocytes were warmed for 128 autologous IVF treatment cycles. Postthaw survival, fertilization, implantation, and birth rates were all comparable for the different oocyte cryopreservation indications; fertilization rates were also comparable to fresh autologous intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles (70% vs. 72%). Implantation rates per embryo transferred (43% vs. 35%) and clinical pregnancy rates per transfer (57% vs. 44%) were significantly higher with vitrified-warmed compared with fresh oocytes. However, there was no statistically significant difference in live birth/ongoing pregnancy (39% vs. 35%). The overall vitrified-warmed oocyte to live born child efficiency was 6.4%. CONCLUSION(S): Treatment outcomes using autologous oocyte vitrification and warming are as good as cycles using fresh oocytes. These results are especially reassuring for infertile patients who must cryopreserve oocytes owing to unavailability of sperm or who wish to limit the number of oocytes inseminated. Age-associated estimates of oocyte to live-born child efficiencies are particularly useful in providing more explicit expectations regarding potential births for elective oocyte cryopreservation.
Copyright © 2016 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Autologous oocyte vitrification; fertility preservation; live birth; warming

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26604065     DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.10.026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fertil Steril        ISSN: 0015-0282            Impact factor:   7.329


  46 in total

1.  A comparison of live birth rates and perinatal outcomes between cryopreserved oocytes and cryopreserved embryos.

Authors:  Jacqueline R Ho; Irene Woo; Kristin Louie; Wael Salem; Sami I Jabara; Kristin A Bendikson; Richard J Paulson; Karine Chung
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  [Causes of oocyte vitrification and its value in assisted reproductive technology].

Authors:  Jing Zhe; Jun Zhang; Shiling Chen; Weiqing Zhang; Chen Luo; Xingyu Zhou; Xin Chen; Zhuolin Qiu; Huixi Li; Xiaomin Wu
Journal:  Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao       Date:  2019-07-30

3.  Is employer coverage of elective egg freezing coercive?: a survey of medical students' knowledge, intentions, and attitudes towards elective egg freezing and employer coverage.

Authors:  Deborah E Ikhena-Abel; Rafael Confino; Nirali J Shah; Angela K Lawson; Susan C Klock; Jared C Robins; Mary Ellen Pavone
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-06-02       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Likelihood of achieving a 50%, 60%, or 70% estimated live birth rate threshold with 1 or 2 cycles of planned oocyte cryopreservation.

Authors:  Bat-Sheva L Maslow; Michael M Guarnaccia; Leslie Ramirez; Joshua U Klein
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-05-16       Impact factor: 3.412

5.  Vitrification of in vitro matured oocytes collected from surplus ovarian medulla tissue resulting from fertility preservation of ovarian cortex tissue.

Authors:  Huiqun Yin; Hong Jiang; Stine Gry Kristensen; Claus Yding Andersen
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-03-17       Impact factor: 3.412

6.  Oocyte cryopreservation for women with GATA2 deficiency.

Authors:  Jessica R Zolton; Toral P Parikh; Dennis D Hickstein; Steven M Holland; Micah J Hill; Alan H DeCherney; Erin F Wolff
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 3.412

7.  Medical and elective fertility preservation: impact of removal of the experimental label from oocyte cryopreservation.

Authors:  Samantha B Schon; Maren Shapiro; Clarisa Gracia; Suneeta Senapati
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 3.412

8.  Decision making processes of women who seek elective oocyte cryopreservation.

Authors:  Ran Kim; Tae Ki Yoon; Inn Soo Kang; Mi Kyoung Koong; Yoo Shin Kim; Myung Joo Kim; Yubin Lee; Jayeon Kim
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2018-07-13       Impact factor: 3.412

9.  Ovarian stimulation is a safe and effective fertility preservation option in the adolescent and young adult population.

Authors:  Sharrόn L Manuel; Molly B Moravek; Rafael Confino; Kristin N Smith; Angela K Lawson; Susan C Klock; Mary Ellen Pavone
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2019-12-11       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 10.  Fertility Options for the Transgender and Gender Nonbinary Patient.

Authors:  Allison C Mayhew; Veronica Gomez-Lobo
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 5.958

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.