Literature DB >> 32142582

Effect of oocyte donor stimulation on recipient outcomes: data from a US national donor oocyte bank.

H S Hipp1, A J Gaskins2, Z P Nagy3, S M Capelouto4, D B Shapiro3, J B Spencer1.   

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION: How does ovarian stimulation in an oocyte donor affect the IVF cycle and obstetric outcomes in recipients? SUMMARY ANSWER: Higher donor oocyte yields may affect the proportion of usable embryos but do not affect live birth delivery rate or obstetric outcomes in oocyte recipients. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In autologous oocyte fresh IVF cycles, the highest live birth delivery rates occur when ~15-25 oocytes are retrieved, with a decline thereafter, perhaps due to the hormone milieu, with super-physiologic estrogen levels. There are scant data in donor oocyte cycles, wherein the oocyte environment is separated from the uterine environment. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This was a retrospective cohort study from 2008 to 2015 of 350 oocyte donors who underwent a total of 553 ovarian stimulations and oocyte retrievals. The oocytes were vitrified and then distributed to 989 recipients who had 1745 embryo transfers. The primary outcome was live birth delivery rate, defined as the number of deliveries that resulted in at least one live birth per embryo transfer cycle. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,
METHODS: The study included oocyte donors and recipients at a donor oocyte bank, in collaboration with an academic reproductive endocrinology division. Donors with polycystic ovary syndrome and recipients who used gestational carriers were excluded. The donors all underwent conventional ovarian stimulation using antagonist protocols. None of the embryos underwent pre-implantation genetic testing. The average (mean) number of embryos transferred to recipients was 1.4 (range 1-3). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Per ovarian stimulation cycle, the median number of oocytes retrieved was 30 (range: 9-95). Among the 1745 embryo transfer cycles, 856 of the cycles resulted in a live birth (49.1%). There were no associations between donor oocyte yield and probability of live birth, adjusting for donor age, BMI, race/ethnicity and retrieval year. The results were similar when analyzing by mature oocytes. Although donors with more oocytes retrieved had a higher number of developed embryos overall, there was a relatively lower percentage of usable embryos per oocyte warmed following fertilization and culture. In our model for the average donor in the data set, holding all variables constant, for each additional five oocytes retrieved, there was a 4% (95% CI 1%, 7%) lower odds of fertilization and 5% (95% CI 2%, 7%) lower odds of having a usable embryo per oocyte warmed. There were no associations between donor oocyte yield and risk of preterm delivery (<37 weeks gestation) and low birthweight (<2500 g) among singleton infants. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Ovarian stimulation was exclusively performed in oocyte donors. This was a retrospective study design, and we were therefore unable to ensure proportional exposure groups. These findings may not generalizable to older or less healthy women who may be vitrifying oocytes for planned fertility delay. There remain significant risks to aggressive ovarian stimulation, including ovarian hyperstimulation. In addition, long-term health outcomes of extreme ovarian stimulation are lacking. Lastly, we did not collect progesterone levels and are unable to evaluate the impact of rising progesterone on outcomes. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
FINDINGS: Live birth delivery rates remain high with varying amounts of oocytes retrieved in this donor oocyte model. In a vitrified oocyte bank setting, where oocytes are typically sent as a limited number cohort, recipients are not affected by oocyte yields. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Additional REDCap grant support at Emory was provided through UL1 TR000424. Dr. Audrey Gaskins was supported in part by a career development award from the NIEHS (R00ES026648).
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permission@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  IVF; egg donor; live birth delivery rate; obstetric outcomes; oocyte donor; ovarian stimulation

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32142582      PMCID: PMC7192536          DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deaa003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  33 in total

1.  Flexible regression models with cubic splines.

Authors:  S Durrleman; R Simon
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 2.  Are programmable freezers still needed in the embryo laboratory? Review on vitrification.

Authors:  Gábor Vajta; Zsolt Péter Nagy
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.828

3.  Donor age is paramount to success in oocyte donation.

Authors:  M A Cohen; S R Lindheim; M V Sauer
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 6.918

4.  Association between the number of eggs and live birth in IVF treatment: an analysis of 400 135 treatment cycles.

Authors:  Sesh Kamal Sunkara; Vivian Rittenberg; Nick Raine-Fenning; Siladitya Bhattacharya; Javier Zamora; Arri Coomarasamy
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2011-05-10       Impact factor: 6.918

5.  Oocyte number as a predictor for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and live birth: an analysis of 256,381 in vitro fertilization cycles.

Authors:  Ryan G Steward; Lan Lan; Anish A Shah; Jason S Yeh; Thomas M Price; James M Goldfarb; Suheil J Muasher
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2014-01-23       Impact factor: 7.329

6.  Clinical evaluation of the efficiency of an oocyte donation program using egg cryo-banking.

Authors:  Zsolt P Nagy; Ching-Chien Chang; Daniel B Shapiro; Diana Patricia Bernal; Carlene W Elsner; Dorothy Mitchell-Leef; Andrew A Toledo; Hilton I Kort
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2008-08-09       Impact factor: 7.329

Review 7.  Prevention and treatment of moderate and severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: a guideline.

Authors: 
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2016-09-24       Impact factor: 7.329

8.  Consistent high clinical pregnancy rates and low ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome rates in high-risk patients after GnRH agonist triggering and modified luteal support: a retrospective multicentre study.

Authors:  Stamatina Iliodromiti; Christophe Blockeel; Kelton P Tremellen; Richard Fleming; Herman Tournaye; Peter Humaidan; Scott M Nelson
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2013-07-19       Impact factor: 6.918

9.  Pregnancy outcomes decline with increasing recipient body mass index: an analysis of 22,317 fresh donor/recipient cycles from the 2008-2010 Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System registry.

Authors:  Meredith P Provost; Kelly S Acharya; Chaitanya R Acharya; Jason S Yeh; Ryan G Steward; Jennifer L Eaton; James M Goldfarb; Suheil J Muasher
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2015-10-30       Impact factor: 7.329

10.  Reproductive outcomes in oocyte donation cycles are associated with donor BMI.

Authors:  E R Cardozo; A E Karmon; J Gold; J C Petrozza; A K Styer
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2015-12-17       Impact factor: 6.918

View more
  4 in total

1.  More than the oocyte source, egg donors as patients: a national picture of United States egg donors.

Authors:  Jennifer F Kawwass; Patrick Ten Eyck; Patrick Sieber; Heather S Hipp; Brad Van Voorhis
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  When using donor oocytes, does embryo stage matter? An analysis of blastocyst versus cleavage stage embryo transfers using a cryopreserved donor oocyte bank.

Authors:  Sarah M Capelouto; Audrey J Gaskins; Zsolt Peter Nagy; Daniel B Shapiro; Jessica B Spencer; Heather S Hipp
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-04-05       Impact factor: 3.357

3.  Comparison of Obstetric Outcomes Between IVF cycles with Donor Oocyte and Spontaneous Conception Pregnancies: A Retrospective Cohort study.

Authors:  Yadav Vikas; Malhotra Neena; Mahey Reeta; Singh Neeta; Kriplani Alka
Journal:  J Reprod Infertil       Date:  2022 Apr-Jun

4.  Multivariate analysis of oocyte donor and recipient factors affecting cumulative live birth rate in oocyte donor IVF (OD-IVF) cycles.

Authors:  Neena Malhotra; Monica Gupta; Anshu Yadav; Parul Jaiswal; Reeta Bansiwal; Neeta Singh; Ashish Datt Upadhyay; Ashok Bhatt; Reeta Mahey
Journal:  JBRA Assist Reprod       Date:  2021-10-04
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.