Journal article
Cryopreserved oocyte versus fresh oocyte assisted reproductive technology cycles, United States, 2013
Fertility and sterility, Vol.107(1), pp.110-118
01/01/2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.10.002
PMCID: PMC5590714
PMID: 27842997
Abstract
Objective: To compare characteristics, explore predictors, and compare assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycle, transfer, and pregnancy outcomes of autologous and donor cryopreserved oocyte cycles with fresh oocyte cycles.
Design: Retrospective cohort study from the National ART Surveillance System.
Setting: Fertility treatment centers.
Patient(s): Fresh embryo cycles initiated in 2013 utilizing embryos created with fresh and cryopreserved, autologous and donor oocytes.
Intervention(s): Cryopreservation of oocytes versus fresh.
Main Outcomes Measure(s): Cancellation, implantation, pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth rates per cycle, transfer, and/or pregnancy.
Result(s): There was no evidence of differences in cancellation, implantation, pregnancy, miscarriage, or live birth rates between autologous fresh and cryopreserved oocyte cycles. Donor cryopreserved oocyte cycles had a decreased risk of cancellation before transfer (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-0.96) as well as decreased likelihood of pregnancy (aRR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81-0.95) and live birth (aRR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.95); however, there was no evidence of differences in implantation, pregnancy, or live birth rates when cycles were restricted to those proceeding to transfer. Donor cryopreserved oocyte cycles proceeding to pregnancy had a decreased risk of miscarriage (aRR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58-0.97) and higher live birth rate (aRR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.09) with the transfer of one embryo, but higher miscarriage rate (aRR 1.28, 95% CI 1.07-1.54) and lower live birth rate (aRR 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.99) with the transfer of two or more.
Conclusion(s): There was no evidence of differences in ART outcomes between autologous fresh and cryopreserved oocyte cycles. There was evidence of differences in per-cycle and per-pregnancy outcomes between donor cryopreserved and fresh oocyte cycles, but not in per-transfer outcomes. (C) 2016 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.
Details
- Title: Subtitle
- Cryopreserved oocyte versus fresh oocyte assisted reproductive technology cycles, United States, 2013
- Creators
- Sara Crawford - National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health PromotionSheree L. Boulet - National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health PromotionJennifer F. Kawwass - National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health PromotionDenise J. Jamieson - National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health PromotionDmitry M. Kissin - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Publication Details
- Fertility and sterility, Vol.107(1), pp.110-118
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.10.002
- PMID
- 27842997
- PMCID
- PMC5590714
- NLM abbreviation
- Fertil Steril
- ISSN
- 0015-0282
- eISSN
- 1556-5653
- Publisher
- Elsevier
- Number of pages
- 9
- Grant note
- CC999999 / Intramural CDC HHS
- Language
- English
- Date published
- 01/01/2017
- Academic Unit
- Obstetrics and Gynecology; VPMA - Administration
- Record Identifier
- 9984446437502771
Metrics
2 Record Views