Yanan Chang1, Minghong Shen1,2, Sha Wang1, Xiao Li1, Hua Duan3. 1. Department of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, No. 17 Qihelou Street, Dong Cheng District, Beijing, 100006, China. 2. Department of Gynecology, Shengli Clinical Medical College of Fujian Medical University, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, 350001, Fujian Province, China. 3. Department of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, No. 17 Qihelou Street, Dong Cheng District, Beijing, 100006, China. Duanhua@ccmu.edu.cn.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The study aims to evaluate whether frozen embryo transfer can restore optimal receptivity leading to better assisted reproductive technology outcomes in women with endometriosis. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis, conducted from January 10, 2021 to July 1, 2021, searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, OVID, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases from inception to January 10, 2021. The search strategy combined search terms as follows: ("endometriosis" OR "deep endometriosis" OR "endometrioma") AND ("frozen-thawed embryo transfer" OR "frozen embryo transfer" OR "freeze-all strategy") AND ("pregnancy outcome" OR "live birth rate" OR "clinical pregnancy rate" OR "miscarriage rate"). No publication time or language limits were set during the searches. In addition, references of the related articles were searched by hand. Patients were included if they had a history of endometriosis and had received fresh or frozen embryo transfer. Only the first transfer cycle was included. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to express outcomes, and data synthesis was conducted using RevMan, version 5.4 software. RESULTS: A total of six studies with moderate methodologic quality were retrieved in the meta-analysis. The studies included 3010 women with endometriosis who wanted to conceive; 1777 (59.0%) had frozen embryo transfer, and 1233 (41.0%) had fresh embryo transfer. There was a significantly higher frequency of live births in the frozen embryo group than in the fresh embryo group (OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.13-2.08; P = .007). Despite a similar clinical pregnancy rate in the two groups (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.95-1.69; P = .11), the difference in miscarriage rate was significant (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.97; P = .03). Evidence quality was considered moderate. CONCLUSION: Cryopreserved embryo transfer has resulted in preferable reproduction outcomes when compared with fresh embryo transfer in patients with endometriosis, but the evidence is not yet abundant. More strictly designed research is needed to evaluate whether frozen embryo transfer leads to better reproductive outcomes in women with endometriosis compared with those receiving fresh embryo transfer. REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42021248313.
PURPOSE: The study aims to evaluate whether frozen embryo transfer can restore optimal receptivity leading to better assisted reproductive technology outcomes in women with endometriosis. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis, conducted from January 10, 2021 to July 1, 2021, searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, OVID, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases from inception to January 10, 2021. The search strategy combined search terms as follows: ("endometriosis" OR "deep endometriosis" OR "endometrioma") AND ("frozen-thawed embryo transfer" OR "frozen embryo transfer" OR "freeze-all strategy") AND ("pregnancy outcome" OR "live birth rate" OR "clinical pregnancy rate" OR "miscarriage rate"). No publication time or language limits were set during the searches. In addition, references of the related articles were searched by hand. Patients were included if they had a history of endometriosis and had received fresh or frozen embryo transfer. Only the first transfer cycle was included. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to express outcomes, and data synthesis was conducted using RevMan, version 5.4 software. RESULTS: A total of six studies with moderate methodologic quality were retrieved in the meta-analysis. The studies included 3010 women with endometriosis who wanted to conceive; 1777 (59.0%) had frozen embryo transfer, and 1233 (41.0%) had fresh embryo transfer. There was a significantly higher frequency of live births in the frozen embryo group than in the fresh embryo group (OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.13-2.08; P = .007). Despite a similar clinical pregnancy rate in the two groups (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.95-1.69; P = .11), the difference in miscarriage rate was significant (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.97; P = .03). Evidence quality was considered moderate. CONCLUSION: Cryopreserved embryo transfer has resulted in preferable reproduction outcomes when compared with fresh embryo transfer in patients with endometriosis, but the evidence is not yet abundant. More strictly designed research is needed to evaluate whether frozen embryo transfer leads to better reproductive outcomes in women with endometriosis compared with those receiving fresh embryo transfer. REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42021248313.
Authors: Ernest Hung Yu Ng; Carina Chi Wai Chan; Oi Shan Tang; William Shu Biu Yeung; Pak Chung Ho Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2004-08-19 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Justin Tan; Maria Cerrillo; Maria Cruz; Gustavo Nardini Cecchino; Juan Antonio Garcia-Velasco Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-01-18 Impact factor: 4.241