Literature DB >> 30827784

Frozen versus fresh single blastocyst transfer in ovulatory women: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

Daimin Wei1, Jia-Yin Liu2, Yun Sun3, Yuhua Shi1, Bo Zhang4, Jian-Qiao Liu5, Jichun Tan6, Xiaoyan Liang7, Yunxia Cao8, Ze Wang1, Yingying Qin1, Han Zhao1, Yi Zhou9, Haiqin Ren10, Guimin Hao11, Xiufeng Ling12, Junzhao Zhao13, Yunshan Zhang14, Xiujuan Qi15, Lin Zhang16, Xiaohui Deng17, Xiaoli Chen18, Yimin Zhu19, Xiaohong Wang20, Li-Feng Tian21, Qun Lv22, Xiang Ma2, Heping Zhang23, Richard S Legro24, Zi-Jiang Chen25.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Elective single embryo transfer (eSET) has been increasingly advocated, but concerns about the lower pregnancy rate after reducing the number of embryos transferred have encouraged transfer of multiple embryos. Extended embryo culture combined with electively freezing all embryos and undertaking a deferred frozen embryo transfer might increase pregnancy rate after eSET. We aimed to establish whether elective frozen single blastocyst transfer improved singleton livebirth rate compared with fresh single blastocyst transfer.
METHODS: This multicentre, non-blinded, randomised controlled trial was undertaken in 21 academic fertility centres in China. 1650 women with regular menstrual cycles undergoing their first cycle of in-vitro fertilisation were enrolled from Aug 1, 2016, to June 3, 2017. Eligible women were randomly assigned to either fresh or frozen single blastocyst transfer. The randomisation sequence was computer generated, with block sizes of two, four, or six, stratified by study site. For those assigned to frozen blastocyst transfer, all blastocysts were cryopreserved and a delayed frozen-thawed single blastocyst transfer was done. The primary outcome was singleton livebirth rate. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, number ChiCTR-IOR-14005405.
FINDINGS: 825 women were assigned to each group and included in analyses. Frozen single blastocyst transfer resulted in higher rates of singleton livebirth than did fresh single blastocyst transfer (416 [50%] vs 329 [40%]; relative risk [RR] 1·26, 95% CI 1·14-1·41, p<0·0001). The risks of moderate or severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (four of 825 [0·5%] in frozen single blastocyst transfer vs nine of 825 [1·1%] in fresh single blastocyst transfer; p=0·16), pregnancy loss (134 of 583 [23·0%] vs 124 of 481 [25·8%]; p=0·29), other obstetric complications, and neonatal morbidity were similar between the two groups. Frozen single blastocyst transfer was associated with a higher risk of pre-eclampsia (16 of 512 [3·1%] vs four of 401 [1·0%]; RR 3·13, 95% CI 1·06-9·30, p=0·029).
INTERPRETATION: Frozen single blastocyst transfer resulted in a higher singleton livebirth rate than did fresh single blastocyst transfer in ovulatory women with good prognosis. The increased risk of pre-eclampsia after frozen blastocyst transfer warrants further studies. FUNDING: The National Key Research and Development Program of China.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30827784     DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32843-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  84 in total

1.  Morula transfer achieves better clinical outcomes than post-thawed cleavage embryos after overnight culture in frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles.

Authors:  Dongna Hui; Xiaofang Han; Xiaocheng Wang; Wenjuan Ren; Xin Lei; Jianrong Liu; Lina Dong; Hong Li
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Delayed versus immediate frozen embryo transfer after oocyte retrieval: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jialyu Huang; Jiaying Lin; Xuefeng Lu; Renfei Cai; Ning Song; Yanping Kuang
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-06-19       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Frozen-thawed embryo transfer is an independent risk factor for third stage of labor complications.

Authors:  Avital Wertheimer; Alyssa Hochberg; Eyal Krispin; Onit Sapir; Avi Ben-Haroush; Eran Altman; Tzippy Schohat; Yoel Shufaro
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 2.344

4.  Cell number considerations for blastocyst transfer in younger patients.

Authors:  Zhiren Liu; Mingting Jiang; Linyun He; Yun Liu
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-01-03       Impact factor: 3.412

5.  Fresh versus frozen embryo transfers in assisted reproduction.

Authors:  Tjitske Zaat; Miriam Zagers; Femke Mol; Mariëtte Goddijn; Madelon van Wely; Sebastiaan Mastenbroek
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-02-04

6.  Association of Fresh Embryo Transfers Compared With Cryopreserved-Thawed Embryo Transfers With Live Birth Rate Among Women Undergoing Assisted Reproduction Using Freshly Retrieved Donor Oocytes.

Authors:  Iris G Insogna; Andrea Lanes; Malinda S Lee; Elizabeth S Ginsburg; Janis H Fox
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Timing of frozen-thawed embryo transfer after controlled ovarian stimulation in a non-elective freeze-all policy.

Authors:  Jialyu Huang; Xuefeng Lu; Qin Xie; Jiaying Lin; Renfei Cai; Yanping Kuang
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-12

8.  A freeze-all strategy does not increase live birth rates in women of advanced reproductive age.

Authors:  K Lattes; S López; M A Checa; M Brassesco; D García; R Vassena
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-09-02       Impact factor: 3.412

9.  Pregnancy Outcome Difference between Fresh and Frozen Embryos in Women without Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Xuli Jin; Guangbao Liu; Zhi Jiao; Jiali Sun; Miaomiao Yan; Xiaoyang Lv; Haozheng Zhang; Jie Chen
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 3.060

10.  Cumulative live birth rate after IVF: trend over time and the impact of blastocyst culture and vitrification.

Authors:  Zoha Saket; Karin Källén; Kersti Lundin; Åsa Magnusson; Christina Bergh
Journal:  Hum Reprod Open       Date:  2021-06-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.