scholarly journals Impact of late-follicular phase elevated serum progesterone on cumulative live birth rates: is there a deleterious effect on embryo quality?

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 860-868 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Racca ◽  
S Santos-Ribeiro ◽  
N De Munck ◽  
S Mackens ◽  
P Drakopoulos ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 73 (8) ◽  
pp. 465-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Racca ◽  
S. Santos-Ribeiro ◽  
N. De Munck ◽  
S. Mackens ◽  
P. Drakopoulos ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
K Yakin ◽  
S Ertas ◽  
C Alatas ◽  
O Oktem ◽  
B Urman

Abstract Study question Does elevated late-follicular phase estrogen and progesterone levels have an impact on blastocyst utilization and/or cumulative live birth rates in freeze-all cycles? Summary answer High estrogen or progesterone on the day of ovulation trigger is associated with poor blastocyst utilization but comparable cumulative live birth rates in freeze-all cycles. What is known already Several studies suggest impaired clinical outcome in cycles with high estrogen (>3500 pg/ml) or progesterone (>1.5 ng/ml) levels. However, these data were derived from cycles where top-quality embryo(s) were transferred in the fresh cycle and surplus embryos were frozen. These findings might be confounded by alterations in endometrial receptivity. Freeze-all cycles might provide a better model to assess the impact of high late-follicular estrogen or progesterone levels on laboratory and clinical outcome. Study design, size, duration We performed a retrospective cohort study of all IVF cycles (n = 712) between 2016 and 2018 where the entire cohort of embryos was cryopreserved at the blastocyst stage. After excluding cases with <4 oocytes or preimplantation genetic test, the study group comprised 459 women who had 699 frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles. Participants/materials, setting, methods Women were classified into four groups by the indication for freeze-all strategy as elevated progesterone (high P, n = 61), high estrogen (high E, n = 224), elective freezing (elective, n = 114) and tubal-endometrial pathologies (TEP, n = 60). The primary outcome was the cumulative live birth rate in subsequent thaw-transfer cycles and the secondary outcome was the blastocyst utilization rate. Groups were compared using ANOVA and Cox regression analyses to adjust for confounding variables. Main results and the role of chance The mean age of the study group was 32.8 ± 5.3 years, total number of oocytes and cryopreserved blastocysts were 15.0±7.6 and 4.2±3.0, respectively. The high-E group was younger (31.5 ± 5.2 years) and had higher peak E2 levels (4078.9 ± 588.4 pg/ml), number of oocytes (19.7 ± 7.0), cryopreserved embryos (5.3 ± 3.3) and transfer cycles (2.3 ± 1.4) than the other groups. Blastocyst utilization rate was significantly lower (40.4%) compared to elective freezing (53.6%) and TEP groups (55.7%) (both p = 0.001). The high-P group had higher peak progesterone levels (2.1 ± 0.5 ng/ml, p = 0.001), number of oocytes (14.0 ± 5.2) and frozen embryos (4.1 ± 3.5) compared to elective and TEP groups (both p = 0.04). Blastocyst utilization rate was lower (45.7%) than elective freezing and TEP groups but the difference lacked statistical significance (p = 0.33 and p = 0.21, respectively). Cumulative live birth rates were 42.6% in high-P, 59.8% in high-E, 44.7% in elective freezing and 46.7% in TEP groups. Significant predictors of cumulative live birth were female age (aHR: 0.97, 95%CI:0.95–0.99, p = 0.02) and number of frozen blastocysts (aHR:1.05, 95%CI:1.01–1.10), p = 0.02). When adjusted for these confounders, the cumulative live birth rate was not associated with high-E (aHR: 0.86, 95%CI:0.56–1.31) or high-P (aHR: 0.76,95%CI:0.44–1.32). Limitations, reasons for caution This was a retrospective study with small sample size performed at a single fertility center, which may limit the generalizability of our findings. Wider implications of the findings: While lower blastocyst utilization rates are observed in women high late-follicular estradiol or progesterone levels, cumulative live birth rates in subsequent thaw-transfer cycles were not impaired. However, unfavorable outcome parameters observed in women with elevated progesterone deserve further research. Trial registration number Not applicable


2019 ◽  
Vol 71 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Panagiotis Drakopoulos ◽  
Joaquín Errázuriz ◽  
Samuel Santos-Ribeiro ◽  
Herman Tournaye ◽  
Alberto Vaiarelli ◽  
...  

Biology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 430
Author(s):  
María Gil Juliá ◽  
Irene Hervás ◽  
Ana Navarro-Gómez Lechón ◽  
Fernando Quintana ◽  
David Amorós ◽  
...  

The application of MACS non-apoptotic sperm selection in infertility clinics is controversial since the published literature does not agree on its effect on reproductive outcomes. Therefore, it is not part of the routine clinical practice. Classical measures of reproductive success (pregnancy or live birth rates per ovarian stimulation) introduce a bias in the evaluation of a technique’s effect, since only the best embryo is transferred. This retrospective, multicenter, observational study evaluated the impact of MACS on reproductive outcomes, measuring results in classical parameters and cumulative live birth rates (CLBR). Data from ICSI cycles using autologous oocyte in Spanish IVIRMA fertility clinics from January 2008 to February 2020 were divided into two groups according to their semen processing: standard practice (reference: 46,807 patients) versus an added MACS sperm selection (1779 patients). Only when measured as CLBR per embryo transferred and per MII oocyte used was the difference between groups statistically significant. There were no significant differences between MACS and reference groups on pregnancy and live birth rates. In conclusion, results suggest that non-apoptotic sperm selection by MACS on unselected males prior to ICSI with autologous oocytes has limited clinical impact, showing a subtle increase in CLBR per embryo transferred.


2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A R Neves ◽  
S Santos-Ribeiro ◽  
S Garcí. Martínez ◽  
S Soares ◽  
J A García-Velasco ◽  
...  

Abstract Study question Is late-follicular phase progesterone elevation (PE) associated with a deleterious effect on embryo euploidy, embryo blastulation and cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs)? Summary answer Late-follicular phase PE has no impact on impact on embryo euploidy rate, embryo blastulation rate nor on the CLBR. What is known already The effect of PE in ART outcomes has been extensively studied, yielding so far conflicting results. While some authors claim it is only detrimental to endometrial receptivity, others have suggested that it may also impair oocyte/embryo quality. Moreover, little is known regarding the potential effect PE may have on embryo ploidy and, consequently, CLBR. Study design, size, duration A multicenter retrospective cross-sectional study was performed between August 2017 and December 2019. A total of 1495 ICSI cycles coupled with preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidies (PGT-A) and deferred frozen embryo transfer (FET) were analyzed. Participants/materials, setting, methods All patients underwent ovarian stimulation with GnRH antagonist protocol and performed a serum progesterone measurement at one of the participating private fertility clinics on the day of trigger. The sample was stratified according to the progesterone levels: normal (≤1.50 ng/ml) and high (>1.50 ng/ml). The primary outcome was the embryo euploidy rate. Secondary outcomes were the number of euploid blastocysts, the blastulation rate and CLBR. Main results and the role of chance Late-follicular phase PE was associated with higher late-follicular estradiol levels (2847.56±1091.10 pg/ml vs. 2240.94± 996.37 pg/ml, p < 0.001) and more oocytes retrieved (17.67±8.86 vs. 12.70±7.00, p < 0.001). The number of euploid embryos was higher in the PE group (2.32±1.74 vs. 1.86±1.42, p < 0.001), whereas the embryo euploidy rate (48.3% [44.9%–51.7%] vs. 49.1% [47.7%–50.6%] and blastulation rate (47.1% [43.7%–50.5%] vs. 51.0% [49.7%–52.4%]) were comparable between the two groups. Likewise, no significant differences were found regarding the live birth rate (LBR) after the first FET (34.1% vs. 31.1%, p = 0.427) nor the CLBRs (38.9% vs. 37.0%, p = 0.637). Mixed-model analysis was performed in order to account for the clustering of cycles in the same patient. Adjusting for patients’ age, PE and BMI, PE failed to demonstrate any effect on the embryo euploidy rate (OR 1.03 [95% CI 0.89–1.20]). Mixed-model analysis for the number of euploid embryos was also performed. After adjusting for PE, age, BMI and ovarian response, PE did not affect the number of euploid embryos (0.02 [95%CI –0.21;0.25]. Multivariate logistic regression adjusted for PE, age, BMI and ovarian response revealed that PE was not associated with the CLBR (adjOR 0.96 [95% CI 0.66–1.38]). Limitations, reasons for caution Limitations of the study include its retrospective nature. Moreover, including only GnRH antagonist protocol and ICSI does not allow the extrapolation of these results to other populations. Wider implications of the findings: Our findings question results from previous studies claiming a detrimental effect of PE on embryo implantation potential. According to our results, PE has no impact on embryo euploidy rate, blastulation rate nor on CLBRs. Trial registration number Not applicable


2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Cobo

Abstract text The challenge of cryopreserve, store for prolonged period, and successfully implant the female gamete is nowadays feasible thanks to vitrification. The technology that was initially validated in oocyte recipients is currently applied to a vast population, including women at risk of losing their ovarian function due either to iatrogenic causes as occurs in cancer patients, or due to the natural depletion of the ovarian reserve as a result of age related fertility decline. That is the case of a growing population of women who wish to postpone childbearing and decide on oocyte vitrification as a means of fertility preservation (FP). At present, there is a growing body of evidence regarding the use of vitrified oocytes by many women under different indications, which makes it possible to evaluate the approach from different scenarios. So that vitrification can be evaluated in terms on survival rates, embryo development and the rate at which vitrified oocytes develop into live-born children in IVF cycles using vitrified oocytes which were initially stored due to different reasons. The effects of vitrification at the subcellular level and its impact on oocyte competence is of interest in the evaluation of the efficacy of the technology. Some studies have indicated that vitrification may affect ultrastructure, reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation, gene expression, and epigenetic status. However, it is still controversial whether oocyte vitrification could induce DNA damage in the oocytes and the resulting early embryos. Recent studies show that oocytes survival and clinical outcome after vitrification can be impaired by patients’ age and the clinical indication or the reason for vitrification. These studies show that age at oocyte retrieval strongly affects the survival and reproductive prognosis. In our experience, oocyte survival, pregnancy and cumulative live birth rates are significantly higher when patients are aged 35 years or younger versus patients older than 35 years at oocyte retrieval. Therefore, elective-FP patients should be encouraged to decide at young ages to significantly increase their chances of success. There is also evidence that the reason for vitrification is associated to the success rates. Poorer reproductive outcome was reported in cancer patients, low responders and endometriosis patients when compared to healthy women in age matching groups. Moreover, there are certain individualities linked to specific populations, as occurs when endometriosis patients had cystectomy earlier than the oocyte retrieval for FP. These women achieved lower success rates as compared to non-operated age matching counterparts. In this case, the lower cumulative live birth rates observed in operated women are, most probably, due to the smaller number of oocytes available, as a consequence of the detrimental effect of the surgery on the ovarian reserve. In this regard, several reports show that the number of oocytes available per patient is another variable closely related to the outcome in all populations using vitrified oocytes after FP. Thus, a significant improvement in the cumulative live birth rates can be achieved by adding a few oocytes, especially in healthy young patients. Different populations using vitrified oocytes under several indications achieve differential results in terms of pregnancy rates, when calculated in overall. Nonetheless, when the calculations for the cumulative probability of achieving a baby are made according the number of oocytes used per patient belonging to the same group of age, the results become comparable between different populations, as shown by the comparison between elective freezers versus endometriosis patients. Undoubtedly, vitrification can be recognized as one of the latest brakethrough in the ART field, but certainly the next step forward would be the successfull automatization of the vitrification and warming processes to achieve fully consistency among different laboratories.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document