Pregnancy rates after transfer of cryopreserved blastocysts cultured in a sequential media

One size does not fit all: the personal nature of completed embryo donation

PURPOSE

To assess factors associated with embryo donation among individuals interested in donation in the United States.

METHODS

An invitation to complete the 123-item survey was emailed from June to September 2022 to patients at a private practice fertility clinic with interest in donation at the time of IVF. Survey questions included disposition decision, attitudes about embryo status and genetic relatedness, donation disclosure, ideal donation arrangement, and decision satisfaction.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirty-seven completed the survey. Two hundred thirty donated to another person(s), 75 discarded embryos, 25 remained undecided, and disposition was unknown for 7 respondents. There were no demographic differences between groups based on final disposition or use of donor gametes. Few gamete recipients were interested in donation due to biological attachment to embryos. Final embryo disposition was associated with religious factors, not wanting to waste embryos, and storage fee concerns. Final disposition was also significantly associated with concern about donor-conceived children's (DCP) welfare, being denied the ability to complete donation, personal IVF outcomes, financial or legal issues, future contact with DCP, cognitive appraisal of disposition, beliefs about embryos, someone else raising their genetic child, anonymity, and beliefs about DCP not knowing genetic relationships (p < .001). Donation to others was associated with less regret and greater satisfaction with the emotional/medical aspects of donation and counseling compared to those who discarded embryos (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

The decision to donate embryos to another person(s) is complex. Counseling that considers individual circumstances, values, and evolving dynamics may facilitate informed decision-making for those navigating infertility treatment, family building, and embryo disposition.

Day 5 versus Day 6 blastocyst transfers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes

STUDY QUESTION

Is there a difference in clinical pregnancy and live birth rates (LBRs) between blastocysts developing on Day 5 (D5) and blastocysts developing on Day 6 (D6) following fresh and frozen transfers?

SUMMARY ANSWER

D5 blastocyst transfers (BTs) present higher clinical pregnancy and LBRs than D6 in both fresh and frozen transfers.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

BT is increasingly popular in assisted reproductive technology (ART) centers today. To our knowledge, no meta-analysis has focused on clinical outcomes in both fresh and frozen BT. Concerning frozen blastocysts, one meta-analysis in 2010 found no significant difference in pregnancy outcomes between D5 and D6 BT. Since then, ART practices have evolved particularly with the wide use of vitrification, and more articles comparing D5 and D6 BT cycles have been published and described conflicting results.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Systematic review and meta-analysis of published controlled studies. Searches were conducted from 2005 to February 2018 on MEDLINE and Cochrane Library and from 2005 to May 2017 on EMBASE, Eudract and clinicaltrials.gov, using the following search terms: blastocyst, Day 5, Day 6, pregnancy, implantation, live birth and embryo transfer (ET).

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

A total of 47 full-text articles were preselected from 808 references, based on title and abstract and assessed utilizing the Newcastle-Ottowa Quality Assessment Scales. Study selection and data extraction were carried out by two independent reviewers according to Cochrane methods. Random-effect meta-analysis was performed on all data (overall analysis) followed by subgroup analysis (fresh, vitrified/warmed, slow frozen/thawed).

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Data from 29 relevant articles were extracted and integrated in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis of the 23 studies that reported clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) as an outcome, including overall fresh and/or frozen ET cycles, showed a significantly higher CPR following D5 ET compared with D6 ET (risk ratio (RR) = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.15-1.39, P < 0.001). For CPR, calculated subgroup RRs were 2.38 (95% CI: 1.74-3.24, P < 0.001) for fresh BT; 1.27 (95% CI: 1.16-1.39, P < 0.001) for vitrified/warmed BT; and 1.15 (95% CI: 0.93-1.41, P = 0.20) for slow frozen/thawed BT. LBR was also significantly higher after D5 BT (overall RR = 1.50 (95% CI: 1.32-1.69), P < 0.001). The LBR calculated RRs for subgroups were 1.74 (95% CI: 1.37-2.20, P < 0.001) for fresh BT; 1.38 (95% CI: 1.23-1.56, P < 0.001) for vitrified/warmed BT; and 1.44 (95% CI: 0.70-2.96, P = 0.32) for slow frozen/thawed BT. Sensitivity analysis led to similar results and conclusions: CPR and LBR were significantly higher following D5 compared to D6 BT.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The validity of meta-analysis results depends mainly on the quality and the number of the published studies available. Indeed, this meta-analysis included no randomized controlled trial (RCT). Slow frozen/thawed subgroups showed substantial heterogeneity.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

In regards to the results of this original meta-analysis, ART practitioners should preferably transfer D5 rather than D6 blastocysts in both fresh and frozen cycles. Further RCTs are needed to address the question of whether D6 embryos should be transferred in a fresh or a frozen cycle.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This work was sponsored by an unrestricted grant from GEDEON RICHTER France. The authors have no competing interests to declare.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018080151.

The effects of blastocyst morphological score and blastocoele re-expansion speed after warming on pregnancy outcomes

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate associations between the morphology score of blastocysts and blastocoele re-expansion speed after warming with clinical outcomes, which could assist in making correct and cost-effective decisions regarding the appropriate time to vitrify blastocysts and to transfer vitrified-warmed blastocysts.

METHODS

A total of 327 vitrified-warmed two-blastocyst transfer cycles in women 38 years old and younger were included in this retrospective study.

RESULTS

The clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and implantation rate (IR) of transfers of two good-morphology grade 4 blastocysts vitrified on day 5 (64.1% and 46.8%, respectively) were significantly higher than the CPR and IR associated with the transfers of two good-morphology grade 3 blastocysts vitrified on day 5 (46.7% and 32.2%, respectively). No significant differences were found in the CPR and IR among the transfers of two good-morphology grade 4 blastocysts regardless of the day of cryopreservation. Logistic regression analysis showed that blastocoele re-expansion speed after warming was associated with the CPR.

CONCLUSION

The selection of a good-morphology grade 4 blastocyst to be vitrified could be superior to the choice of a grade 3 blastocyst. Extending the culture of grade 3 blastocysts and freezing grade 4 or higher blastocysts on day 6 could lead to a greater likelihood of pregnancy. Since re-expansion was shown to be a morphological marker of superior blastocyst viability, blastocysts that quickly re-expand after warming should be prioritized for transfer.

Chemotherapy for gynaecological malignancies and fertility preservation

Infertility is an increasingly important issue for patients surviving cancer. Significant improvements in cancer management have led to greater numbers of patients living healthy and fulfilling lives for many years after a diagnosis of cancer, and the ability to bear children is a major component of well-being. Infertility is particularly challenging in gynaecological cancer, where multiple treatment modalities are often employed. Surgery may involve the removal of reproductive organs and subsequent chemotherapy may also lead to infertility. Mitigation of this through the use of cryopreservation of embryos, oocytes or ovarian tissue before chemotherapy may enable subsequent pregnancy in the patient or a surrogate mother. Suppression of ovarian function during chemotherapy is less well established, but promises a reduction in infertility without the risks associated with surgery. Similarly, evolving chemotherapy regimens with replacement of alkylating agents will reduce the incidence of infertility. With a combination of these techniques, an increasing proportion of patients may be able to conceive after completion of treatment, and there is no evidence of an increase in congenital abnormalities. This review discusses chemotherapy-induced infertility, interventions and success rates, and demonstrates that individualisation of management is required for optimum outcome.

Fertility preservation for cancer patients: a review

Infertility can arise as a consequence of treatment of oncological conditions. The parallel and continued improvement in both the management of oncology and fertility cases in recent times has brought to the fore-front the potential for fertility preservation in patients being treated for cancer. Oncologists must be aware of situations where their treatment will affect fertility in patients who are being treated for cancer and they must also be aware of the pathways available for procedures such as cryopreservation of gametes and/or embryos. Improved cancer care associated with increased cure rates and long term survival, coupled with advances in fertility treatment means that it is now imperative that fertility preservation is considered as part of the care offered to these patients. This can only be approached within a multidisciplinary setting. There are obvious challenges that still remain to be resolved, especially in the area of fertility preservation in prepubertal patients. These include ethical issues, such as valid consent and research in the area of tissue retrieval, cryopreservation, and transplantation.

Fertility and reproductive disorders in female solid organ transplant recipients

Solid organ transplantation can prolong the life of individuals with end-stage diseases that affect the kidney, liver, lung, heart, and pancreas. The improved survival of transplant recipients has led to increased attention on quality of life issues, including controlling fertility and having children. Perturbations of the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis in women with chronic renal failure or severe hepatic dysfunction result in anovulation and reduced fertility. Most often, fertility is restored with successful organ transplantation and good overall health. Although there are case reports of children born subsequent to assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in female transplant recipients, the approach to infertility in this population has not been described. Recognizing the unique medical, ethical, and psycho-social concerns involved in treating infertile female transplant recipients, reproductive endocrinologists must work with a multi-disciplinary team to ensure a successful pregnancy outcome without compromising graft function or maternal health. The primary goal of ART is a singleton pregnancy without complications, such as ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, that pose greater risks in transplant recipients.

Fertility preservation in young women undergoing breast cancer therapy

Breast cancer accounts for one third of all neoplasms seen in reproductive-age women and affects tens of thousands of women each year in that age group. The adjuvant chemotherapy regimens used for the treatment commonly affect fertility and cause premature ovarian failure. There have been recent advances in the field of fertility preservation, which can allow many of these breast cancer survivors to have children in the future. The most established option is embryo cryopreservation; oocyte cryopreservation can be considered in single women. Both of these approaches require approximately 2 weeks of ovarian stimulation beginning with the onset of the patient's menstrual cycle. Thus, it is crucial that these patients are referred to appropriate assisted reproduction centers as soon as they are diagnosed with breast cancer. Recently developed ovarian stimulation protocols using tamoxifen and letrozole can be used to increase the margin of safety in these patients. When and if a breast cancer patient does not have time to undergo ovarian stimulation prior to chemotherapy, ovarian cryopreservation for future autotransplantation can be offered as the last resort. The benefit of ovarian protection by gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues is unproven and unlikely, and thus this treatment should not be offered as the sole method of fertility preservation.

Comparison of vitrification and conventional cryopreservation of day 5 and day 6 blastocysts during clinical application

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate implantation of day 5 and day 6 vitrified and slow-frozen blastocysts.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis comparing two cryopreservation techniques.

SETTING

Private IVF clinic.

PATIENT(S)

Five hundred eight cryopreserved embryo transfer candidates.

INTERVENTION(S)

Supernumerary day 5 and day 6 blastocysts were vitrified or slow-frozen and transfered after warming or thawing.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Comparison of two cryopreservation techniques with respect to survival rate, implantation, and pregnancy rates of day 5 and day 6 blastocysts.

RESULT(S)

In 254 vitrified transfer cycles, survival, embryonic implantation, and clinical pregnancy rates for day 5 blastocysts were 95.9%, 33.4%, 48.7%, respectively, and for day 6 blastocysts 97.5%, 25.9%, 42.8%. In 254 slow-frozen transfer cycles, survival, embryonic implantation, and clinical pregnancy rates for day 5 blastocysts were 91.4%, 29.6%, 42.8%, respectively, and for day 6 blastocysts 94.8%, 28.2%, 43.1%. Overall there was a slightly, but not significantly, higher outcome regarding implantation and clinical pregnancy with the use of day 5 blastocysts (31.3% and 45.4%, respectively) versus day 6 blastocysts (26.7, and 42.9%, respectively).

CONCLUSION(S)

Vitrification technique yields the same implantation and pregnancy rate as slow-frozen blastocyst transfers. Slow growing embryos can be cryopreserved on day 6, because they yield a satisfactory survival, implantation, and pregnancy rate.