| Literature DB >> 32038083 |
Reeta Biliangady1, Rubina Pandit1, Nutan Kumari Tudu2, Poornima Kinila1, Uma Maheswari1, Indu S T Gopal1, Ambika G Swamy2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cryopreservation of all embryos followed by transfer in subsequent cycles has emerged as an effective alternative to fresh embryo transfer (ET) in order to overcome the negative effect of superovulation on endometrial receptivity. AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare the reproductive outcomes between fresh ET and first frozen ET (FET) from "freeze-all" group of embryos.Entities:
Keywords: Endometrial receptivity; first frozen embryo transfer; fresh embryo transfer
Year: 2019 PMID: 32038083 PMCID: PMC6937765 DOI: 10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_146_18
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Hum Reprod Sci ISSN: 1998-4766
Causes of infertility in both the groups
| Infertility diagnosis | ET cycles | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh ET, | Frozen ET, | ||
| Anovulatory | 52 (13.4) | 17 (14.5) | 0.696 |
| Endometriosis | 10 (2.6) | 4 (3.4) | 0.633 |
| Idiopathic | 77 (19.9) | 27 (23.1) | 0.464 |
| Male factor | 81 (21) | 24 (20.5) | 0.919 |
| Multiple (female) | 64 (16.5) | 22 (18.8) | 0.364 |
| Multiple (male and female) | 59 (15.3) | 12 (10.3) | 0.171 |
| Others | 4 (1) | 1 (0.9) | 0.863 |
| Tubal | 39 (10.1) | 10 (8.5) | 0.287 |
| Total | 386 | 117 | |
ET=Embryo transfer
Comparison of baseline characteristics in both the groups
| Baseline characteristics | Mean±SD | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh ET | FET | ||
| Age of female (years) | 30.98±3.86 | 30.57±3.58 | 0.311 |
| Total number of oocytes retrieved | 13.75±5.84 | 15.82±6.9 | 0.001 |
| Total number of mature oocytes | 11.76±4.77 | 12.24±4.8 | 0.065 |
| Number of fertilized embryos | 10.13±4.65 | 10.74±5.75 | 0.244 |
| Number of cleaved embryos | 9.7±4.53 | 10.28±5.57 | 0.250 |
| Number of blastocysts formed | 5.57±3.65 | 5.02±3.80 | 0.384 |
| Serum E2 levels on trigger day (pg/ml) | 2140.28±695.45 | 3773.3±403.34 | 0.001 |
| Serum P4 levels on trigger day (ng/ml) | 0.79±0.32 | 1.27±0.86 | <0.001 |
| Endometrial thickness on the day of transfer (mm) | 9.21±1.35 | 9.41±1.43 | 0.473 |
| Number of embryos transferred | 622 | 173 | |
| Single blastocyst | 150 | 61 | 0.01 |
| Double blastocyst | 236 | 56 | |
| Average number of embryos transferred per patient | 1.61 | 1.47 | 0.01 |
ET=Embryo transfer, FET=Frozen ET, SD=Standard deviation, E2=Estradiol, P4=Progesterone
Figure 1Cluster bar graph for comparison of various outcome parameters between two groups
Comparison of various outcome parameters between the two groups (n=503)
| Parameter | ET cycles | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh ET ( | FET ( | ||
| CPR | 149/386 (38.6) | 67/117 (57.26) | <0.001 |
| IR | 188/622 (30.22) | 78/173 (45.08) | <0.001 |
| Miscarriage rate | 45/386 (11.65) | 15/117 (12.82) | 0.477 |
| LBR | 129/386 (33.41) | 52/117 (44.44) | 0.029 |
| Birth weight at delivery (g), mean±SD | 2812.88±458.12 | 3011.25±354.73 | 0.159 |
ET=Embryo transfer, FET=Frozen ET, SD=Standard deviation, LBR=Live birth rate, CPR=Clinical pregnancy rate, IR=Implantation rate