Literature DB >> 36264444

Clinical outcome of planned oocyte cryopreservation at advanced age.

Avi Tsafrir1,2, Ido Ben-Ami3,4, Talia Eldar-Geva3,4, Michael Gal3,4, Nava Dekel3, Hadassah Levi3, Oshrat Schonberger3, Naama Srebnik3,4, Amir Weintraub5, Doron Goldberg6, Jordana Hyman3,4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To report outcome of planned oocyte cryopreservation (POC) in the first 8 years of this treatment in our center.
METHODS: A retrospective study in a university-affiliated medical center.
RESULTS: A total of 446 women underwent POC during 2011-2018. Fifty-seven (13%) women presented to use these oocytes during the study period (until June 2021). POC was performed at a mean age of 37.9 ± 2.0 (range 33-41). Age at thawing was 43.3 ± 2.1 (range 38-49). A total of 34 (60%) women transferred their oocytes for thawing at other units. Oocyte survival after thawing was significantly higher at our center than following shipping to ancillary sites (78 vs. 63%, p = 0.047). Forty-nine women completed their treatment, either depleting their cryopreserved oocytes without conceiving (36) or attaining a live birth (13)-27% live birth rate per woman. Only one of eleven women who cryopreserved oocytes aged 40 and older had a live birth using thawed oocytes.
CONCLUSION: Women should be advised to complete planned oocyte cryopreservation before age 40, given low success rates in women who underwent cryopreservation at advanced reproductive age. In this study, oocyte shipping was associated with lower survival rate. These findings may be relevant for women considering POC and utilization of cryopreserved oocytes.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Advanced maternal age; Age-related infertility; Elective oocyte cryopreservation; Oocyte shipping; Oocyte thawing; Oocyte transportation; Planned oocyte cryopreservation; Social egg freezing

Year:  2022        PMID: 36264444     DOI: 10.1007/s10815-022-02633-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet        ISSN: 1058-0468            Impact factor:   3.357


  26 in total

1.  A major increase in oocyte cryopreservation cycles in the USA, Australia and New Zealand since 2010 is highlighted by younger women but a need for standardized data collection.

Authors:  Molly Johnston; Nadine M Richings; Angela Leung; Denny Sakkas; Sally Catt
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2021-02-18       Impact factor: 6.918

Review 2.  Oocyte cryopreservation for donor egg banking.

Authors:  Ana Cobo; José Remohí; Ching-Chien Chang; Zsolt Peter Nagy
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2011-05-27       Impact factor: 3.828

Review 3.  A brief history of oocyte cryopreservation: Arguments and facts.

Authors:  Benedetta Iussig; Roberta Maggiulli; Gemma Fabozzi; Sara Bertelle; Alberto Vaiarelli; Danilo Cimadomo; Filippo M Ubaldi; Laura Rienzi
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2019-03-25       Impact factor: 3.636

4.  Reproductive outcomes after oocyte banking for fertility preservation.

Authors:  Eva Me Balkenende; Taghride Dahhan; Fulco van der Veen; Sjoerd Repping; Mariëtte Goddijn
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 3.828

5.  Number needed to freeze: cumulative live birth rate after fertility preservation in women with endometriosis.

Authors:  Ana Cobo; Aila Coello; María José de Los Santos; Juan Giles; Antonio Pellicer; José Remohí; Juan A García-Velasco
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2021-01-08       Impact factor: 3.828

6.  What do reproductive-age women who undergo oocyte cryopreservation think about the process as a means to preserve fertility?

Authors:  Brooke Hodes-Wertz; Sarah Druckenmiller; Meghan Smith; Nicole Noyes
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 7.329

7.  Oocyte cryopreservation for age-related fertility loss.

Authors:  W Dondorp; G de Wert; G Pennings; F Shenfield; P Devroey; B Tarlatzis; P Barri; K Diedrich
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2012-02-21       Impact factor: 6.918

8.  Over 900 oocyte cryopreservation babies born with no apparent increase in congenital anomalies.

Authors:  N Noyes; E Porcu; A Borini
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 3.828

Review 9.  Fertility preservation in women for medical and social reasons: Oocytes vs ovarian tissue.

Authors:  Marie-Madeleine Dolmans; Jacques Donnez
Journal:  Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2020-07-21       Impact factor: 5.237

Review 10.  Oocyte, embryo and blastocyst cryopreservation in ART: systematic review and meta-analysis comparing slow-freezing versus vitrification to produce evidence for the development of global guidance.

Authors:  Laura Rienzi; Clarisa Gracia; Roberta Maggiulli; Andrew R LaBarbera; Daniel J Kaser; Filippo M Ubaldi; Sheryl Vanderpoel; Catherine Racowsky
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 15.610

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.