Jialyu Huang1, Jiaying Lin1, Xuefeng Lu1, Renfei Cai1, Ning Song2, Yanping Kuang3. 1. Department of Assisted Reproduction, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 639 Zhizaoju Rd, Shanghai, 200011, China. 2. Department of Histology, Embryology, Genetics and Developmental Biology, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Reproductive Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200025, China. 3. Department of Assisted Reproduction, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 639 Zhizaoju Rd, Shanghai, 200011, China. kuangyp9hospital@126.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare pregnancy outcomes between immediate frozen embryo transfer (FET) performed within the first menstrual cycle after oocyte retrieval and delayed FET following subsequent cycles. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched for eligible studies through January 2020. The main outcome measures were clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), live birth rate (LBR), and pregnancy loss rate (PLR). The effect size was estimated as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random effects model. Inter-study heterogeneity was assessed by the I2 statistic. RESULTS: Twelve retrospective cohort studies involving 18,230 cycles were included. The pooled results revealed no significant differences between delayed and immediate FET in CPR (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.87-1.03; I2 = 67.9%), LBR (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.85-1.03; I2 = 67.5%), and PLR (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.87-1.26; I2 = 42.7%). Subgroup analyses of freeze-all cycles showed a marginal decrease of CPR in delayed FET (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86-1.00; I2 = 53.6%), but no significant changes were observed regarding LBR (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.85-1.02; I2 = 65.2%) and PLR (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.84-1.41; I2 = 59.1%). No statistical differences were found in effect estimates among other subgroup analyses by ovarian stimulation protocol, trigger agent, endometrial preparation regimen, and embryo stage. CONCLUSION: Timing of the first FET after oocyte retrieval was not significantly associated with pregnancy outcomes. This finding refutes the current common practice to delay FET after oocyte retrieval and reassures patients who wish to proceed with FET at their earliest convenience. Due to the high heterogeneity and observational nature of included studies, further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the results.
PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare pregnancy outcomes between immediate frozen embryo transfer (FET) performed within the first menstrual cycle after oocyte retrieval and delayed FET following subsequent cycles. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched for eligible studies through January 2020. The main outcome measures were clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), live birth rate (LBR), and pregnancy loss rate (PLR). The effect size was estimated as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random effects model. Inter-study heterogeneity was assessed by the I2 statistic. RESULTS: Twelve retrospective cohort studies involving 18,230 cycles were included. The pooled results revealed no significant differences between delayed and immediate FET in CPR (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.87-1.03; I2 = 67.9%), LBR (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.85-1.03; I2 = 67.5%), and PLR (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.87-1.26; I2 = 42.7%). Subgroup analyses of freeze-all cycles showed a marginal decrease of CPR in delayed FET (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86-1.00; I2 = 53.6%), but no significant changes were observed regarding LBR (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.85-1.02; I2 = 65.2%) and PLR (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.84-1.41; I2 = 59.1%). No statistical differences were found in effect estimates among other subgroup analyses by ovarian stimulation protocol, trigger agent, endometrial preparation regimen, and embryo stage. CONCLUSION: Timing of the first FET after oocyte retrieval was not significantly associated with pregnancy outcomes. This finding refutes the current common practice to delay FET after oocyte retrieval and reassures patients who wish to proceed with FET at their earliest convenience. Due to the high heterogeneity and observational nature of included studies, further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the results.
Authors: Alexander Volodarsky-Perel; Talia Eldar-Geva; Hananel E G Holzer; Oshrat Schonberger; Orna Reichman; Michael Gal Journal: Reprod Biomed Online Date: 2016-12-16 Impact factor: 3.828
Authors: Kemal Ozgur; Hasan Bulut; Murat Berkkanoglu; Peter Humaidan; Kevin Coetzee Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2017-09-22 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: Mathilde Bourdon; Pietro Santulli; Chloé Maignien; Khaled Pocate-Cheriet; Asim Alwohaibi; Louis Marcellin; Sarah Blais; Charles Chapron Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-10-19 Impact factor: 3.240