Fertility treatment delays during COVID-19: Profiles, feelings and concerns of impacted patients

Effects of SARS-COV-2 infection during the frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycle on embryo implantation and pregnancy outcomes

STUDY QUESTION

Does severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection during the frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycle affect embryo implantation and pregnancy rates?

SUMMARY ANSWER

There is no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 infection of women during the FET cycle negatively affects embryo implantation and pregnancy rates.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), as a multi-systemic disease, poses a threat to reproductive health. However, the effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection on embryo implantation and pregnancy following fertility treatments, particularly FET, remain largely unknown.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This retrospective cohort study, included women who underwent FET cycles between 1 November 2022 and 31 December 2022 at an academic fertility centre.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their FET cycles were included in the COVID-19 group, while those who tested negative during the same study period were included in the non-COVID-19 group. The primary outcome was ongoing pregnancy rate. Secondary outcomes included rates of implantation, biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, early pregnancy loss, and ongoing pregnancy. Multivariate logistic regression models were applied to adjust for potential confounders including age, body mass index, gravidity, vaccination status, and endometrial preparation regimen. Subgroup analyses were conducted by time of infection with respect to transfer (prior to transfer, 1-7 days after transfer, or 8-14 days after transfer) and by level of fever (no fever, fever <39°C, or fever ≥39°C).

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

A total of 243 and 305 women were included in the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 group, respectively. The rates of biochemical pregnancy (58.8% vs 62.0%, P = 0.46), clinical pregnancy (53.1% vs 54.4%, P = 0.76), implantation (46.4% vs 46.2%, P = 0.95), early pregnancy loss (24.5% vs 26.5%, P = 0.68), and ongoing pregnancy (44.4% vs 45.6%, P = 0.79) were all comparable between groups with or without infection. Results of logistic regression models, both before and after adjustment, revealed no associations between SARS-CoV-2 infection and rates of biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, early pregnancy loss, or ongoing pregnancy. Moreover, neither the time of infection with respect to transfer (prior to transfer, 1-7 days after transfer, or 8-14 days after transfer) nor the level of fever (no fever, fever <39°C, or fever ≥39°C) was found to be related to pregnancy rates.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The retrospective nature of the study is subject to possible selection bias. Additionally, although the sample size was relatively large for the COVID-19 group, the sample sizes for certain subgroups were relatively small and lacked adequate power, so these results should be interpreted with caution.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The study findings suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection during the FET cycle in females does not affect embryo implantation and pregnancy rates including biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, early pregnancy loss, and ongoing pregnancy, indicating that cycle cancellation due to SARS-CoV-2 infection may not be necessary. Further studies are warranted to verify these findings.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This study was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2023YFC2705500, 2019YFA0802604), National Natural Science Foundation of China (82130046, 82101747), Shanghai leading talent program, Innovative research team of high-level local universities in Shanghai (SHSMU-ZLCX20210201, SHSMU-ZLCX20210200, SSMU-ZLCX20180401), Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine Affiliated Renji Hospital Clinical Research Innovation Cultivation Fund Program (RJPY-DZX-003), Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality (23Y11901400), Shanghai Sailing Program (21YF1425000), Shanghai's Top Priority Research Center Construction Project (2023ZZ02002), Three-Year Action Plan for Strengthening the Construction of the Public Health System in Shanghai (GWVI-11.1-36), and Shanghai Municipal Education Commission-Gaofeng Clinical Medicine Grant Support (20161413). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

The Perspective of Patients and Health Professionals on the Prioritization of Assisted Reproductive Techniques. The PRIOFER Study

Purpose

To determine the perspective of patients and professionals in Assisted Reproduction Units (ARU) on the importance of assisted reproductive techniques (ART) compared to other elective procedures, to highlight the relevance of ART as an elective procedure and the impact of delayed interventions on patients.

Design Patients and Methods

An observational, descriptive, cross-sectional, online survey-based study was conducted in infertility patients and partners (n=98) and ARU healthcare professionals (n=83). The survey included a best-worst scaling (BWS) experiment and an ad-hoc questionnaire to analyze the pandemic impact on ART management and infertility patients in Spain. In the BWS, each respondent established priorities choosing which patient profile should be rated as the highest and lowest priority profile on a waiting list. To understand the importance that they give to assisted reproduction compared to other procedures, three very common elective procedures involving different patient profiles were selected: cataract surgery, knee arthroplasty, and varicose vein surgery. For each procedure, three hypothetical patient profiles corresponding to three different degrees of severity on a waiting list were designed.

Results

Patients attributed greater importance to ART profiles (BWS score: patients 0.14 vs professionals -0.05; p<0.01) whereas professionals prioritized cataract surgery (patients 0.06 vs professionals 0.23; p<0.01). Concerning the profile severity, more severe profiles were prioritized in all procedures by both groups. Patients' and professionals' perspectives on the impact of the pandemic were similar, with exceptions: information received for resuming ART; health care provision in crisis situations; and reduction of parenting options. The pandemic affected patients' ability to conceive a child (70.4% of those surveyed), their psychological well-being (75.5%), and partner, social, and work relationships (69.4%).

Conclusion

Preference studies involving patients and professionals can provide important information to define framework criteria for the management of waiting lists for elective procedures, and to prioritize interventions during pandemic periods. The pandemic impact on infertility patients highlights the relevance of developing measures and strategies to cope with similar future situations in the most appropriate way.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Women's Health and Obstetric Outcomes after Assisted Reproduction: A Survey from an Italian Fertility Center

BACKGROUND

the restrictive measures that were adopted during three waves of the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on both the emotional state and lifestyle of the general population. We evaluated the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on lifestyles and emotional states of women planning assisted reproductive technology (ART), and whether these changes affected ART outcomes.

METHODS

quantitative research, using a web-based survey, was performed on 289 Caucasian women.

RESULTS

In preconception, we observed higher percentage of women with positive obstetric outcomes who reduced body weight (52.4% vs. 27.2%, p = 0.09). Over 60% of women with positive outcomes practiced physical activity vs. 47% of women with negative outcomes (p = 0.03), as well as having better quality of sleep (45% vs. 35%), and a more solid relationships with their partners (65.1% vs. 51.7%, p = 0.03). Women who increased their intake of whole grains, fruits, vegetables, and legumes (p < 0.05), according to the Mediterranean diet, showed positive outcomes. We observed that participants who experienced "very much" or "extreme" anxiety, sadness, and fear (p < 0.05) during pandemic were clearly more numerous in the group with negative pregnancy outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

healthy lifestyle together with a positive emotional state in preconception can positively influence the obstetric outcomes after ART.

SARS-CoV-2, fertility and assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND

In 2020, SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 pandemic had a huge impact on the access to and provision of ART treatments. Gradually, knowledge of the virus and its transmission has become available, allowing ART activities to resume. Still, questions on the impact of the virus on human gametes and fertility remain.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

This article summarizes published data, aiming to clarify the impact of SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 disease on human fertility and assisted reproduction, as well as the impact of vaccination, and from this, provide answers to questions that are relevant for people contemplating pregnancy and for health care professionals.

SEARCH METHODS

PUBMED/MEDLINE and the WHO COVID-19 database were searched from inception to 5 October 2022 with search terms focusing on 'SARS-CoV-2' and gametes, embryos, reproductive function, fertility and ART. Non-English studies and papers published prior to 2020 were excluded, as well as reviews and non-peer reviewed publications. Full papers were assessed for relevance and quality, where feasible.

OUTCOMES

From the 148 papers included, the following observations were made. The SARS-CoV-2-binding proteins, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and type II transmembrane serine protease (TMPRSS2), are expressed in the testis, but co-expression remains to be proven. There is some evidence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the ejaculate of COVID-19 patients with severe disease, but not in those with mild/moderate disease. SARS-CoV-2 infection can impair spermatogenesis, but this seems to resolve after one spermatogenic cycle. Testosterone levels seem to be lower during and after COVID-19, but long-term data are lacking; disease severity may be associated with testosterone levels. COVID-19 cannot be considered a sexually transmitted disease. There is no co-expression of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 in the myometrium, uterus, ovaries or fallopian tubes. Oocytes seem to have the receptors and protease machinery to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection; however, viral RNA in oocytes has not been detected so far. Women contemplating pregnancy following COVID-19 may benefit from screening for thyroid dysfunction. There is a possible (transient) impact of COVID-19 on menstrual patterns. Embryos, and particularly late blastocysts, seem to have the machinery to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most studies have not reported a significant impact of COVID-19 on ovarian reserve, ovarian function or follicular fluid parameters. Previous asymptomatic or mild SARS-CoV-2 infection in females does not seem to negatively affect laboratory and clinical outcomes of ART. There are no data on the minimum required interval, if any, between COVID-19 recovery and ART. There is no evidence of a negative effect of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on semen parameters or spermatogenesis, ovarian function, ovarian reserve or folliculogenesis. A transient effect on the menstrual cycle has been documented. Despite concerns, cross reactivity between anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies and Syncytin-1, an essential protein in human implantation, is absent. There is no influence of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine on patients' performance during their immediate subsequent ART cycle. Pregnancy rates post-vaccination are similar to those in unvaccinated patients.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

This review highlights existing knowledge on the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 on fertility and assisted reproduction, but also identifies gaps and offers suggestions for future research. The knowledge presented should help to provide evidence-based advice for practitioners and couples contemplating pregnancy alike, facilitating informed decision-making in an environment of significant emotional turmoil.

COVID-19-related uncertainty: fertility staff experiences of its sources, processing, responses, and consequences

STUDY QUESTION

What are fertility staff experiences of managing COVID-19-related uncertainty after fertility clinics re-opened?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Staff identified many COVID-19-related uncertainty sources, the main being the COVID-19 health threat, to which most clinics and staff responded effectively by implementing safety protocols and building strong collaborative environments that facilitated the acquisition and application of information to guide organizational responses during a rapidly changing situation, but with costs for staff and patients.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

COVID-19 created significant disruption in fertility care delivery, including temporary clinic closure and treatment delay. Patients experienced significant distress, including concerns regarding the impact of COVID-19 and its vaccine on fertility and pregnancy. Multiple studies show that COVID-19-related uncertainty is a major threat and burden for healthcare staff, but this has not been investigated in reproductive medicine.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A cross-sectional, online mixed-method bilingual (English, Spanish) survey (active 25 January-23 May 2021) was distributed to fertility staff across the UK, Latin America, and Africa.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Eligibility criteria were being a healthcare worker at a fertility clinic that had re-opened since its COVID-19-related closure, 18 years of age or older and ability to respond in English or Spanish. The survey was created in English, translated to Spanish, made available using Qualtrics, and consisted of four parts: (i) background and physical and mental wellbeing, (ii) open-ended questions regarding COVID-19 uncertainty, (iii) appraisal items regarding perceptions and impact of uncertainty, and (iv) changes in the workplace. The British Fertility Society and the African Network and Registry of Assisted Reproduction circulated the survey across the UK and Africa via email hyperlinks and social media platforms. The Argentinian Society of Reproductive Medicine and the Latin American Network of Assisted Reproduction distributed the survey across Latin America in the same manner. Thematic analysis was performed on responses from open-ended question to produce basic codes. Deductive coding grouped sub-themes across questions into themes related to the theory of uncertainty management. Descriptive statistics and repeated measures analysis of variance were used on the quantitative data.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

In total, 382 staff consented to the survey, 107 did not complete (28% attrition), and 275 completed. Sixty-three percent were women, 69% were physicians, and 79% worked at private clinics. Thematic analysis produced 727 codes, organized in 92 sub-themes, and abstracted into 18 themes and one meta-theme reflecting that uncertainty is stressful but manageable. The types of uncertainties related to the threat of COVID-19 (20.6%), unpredictability of the future (19.5%), failure of communication (11.4%), and change in the workplace (8.4%). Staff appraisals of negative and positive impact of uncertainty were significantly lower (P < 0.001) than appraisals of stress, controllability, and having what it takes to cope with uncertainty. To process uncertainty, clinics focused on information dissemination (30.8%) and building a collaborative work environment (5.8%), while staff employed proactive coping (41.8%) and emotional and cognitive processing (9.6%). Main organizational responses consisted on work restructuring (41.3%, e.g. safety protocols), adapting to adversity (9.5%, e.g. supplies, preparation), and welfare support (13.8%), though staff perceived lack of support (17.5%). Negative consequences of uncertainty were worse self- and patient welfare (12.1%) and worse communication due to virtual medicine and use of mask (9.6%). Positive consequences were work improvements (8.3%), organizational adaptation (8.3%), improved relationships (5.6%), and individual adaptation (3.2%). Ninety-two percent of participants thought changes experienced in the workplace due to COVID-19 were negative, 9.1% nor negative nor positive, and 14.9% positive. Most staff thought that their physical (92.4%) and mental health (89.5%) were good to excellent.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Participants were self-selected, and most were physicians and embryologists working at private clinics based in Latin America. The study did not account for how variability in national and regional COVID-19 policy shaped staff experiences of uncertainty.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

To address COVID-19 uncertainty, clinics need to promote collaborative (clinic, staff, patients) processing of uncertainty, clear team coordination and communication, organizational flexibility, and provision of support to staff and patients, with an emphasis on cognitive coping to decrease threat of and increase tolerance to uncertainty. Uncertainty management interventions bespoke to fertility care that integrate these components may increase clinics resilience to COVID-19-related and other types of uncertainty.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

Cardiff University funded this research. S.G. reports consultancy fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals A/S, speaker fees from Access Fertility, SONA-Pharm LLC, Meridiano Congress International, and Gedeon Richter, and grants from Merck Serono Ltd. F.Z.-H. reports speaker fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals A/S and that he is a chair of the Latin American Registry of ART, Committee of Ethic and Public Policies, and Chilean Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology and a vice chair of the International Committee for monitoring ART. K.A., N.C., G.B., and J.B. report no conflict in relation to this work.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Assessment of patients' perceptions towards embryo disposition after donation of embryos to a research biobank

PURPOSE

To explore perceptions towards embryo disposition among patients donating excess embryos to a research biobank.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study of survey responses collected as part of enrollment in a research biobank. Patients are asked questions regarding the difficulty of their disposition decision, their alternative disposition choice if donation to research was not available, quality of the counseling they received, and if additional counseling throughout their treatment would have been beneficial. Survey responses use 5-point Likert scales, with "1" being lowest/least and "5" being highest/most.

RESULTS

A total of 157 men and 163 women enrolled in the biobank. Median scores for difficulty of disposition decision were 3 for females and 2 for males, and for quality of counseling, the median scores were 4 for females and 3 for males. Seventy percent of patients would have chosen to discard their excess embryos had donation to research not been an option. Statistical analyses showed no significant difference in responses based on variations in race, religion, sexual orientation, and infertility diagnoses. Concordance of responses within heterosexual couples was tested and found to be poor to moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessing patients' perceptions towards embryo disposition after donation of their excess embryos to a research biobank affords a unique perspective. The difficulty of the disposition decision, the tendency to discard embryos in the absence of a means for donation to research, and the poor agreement between heterosexual partners highlight the importance of donation to research as an accessible disposition option and the need for a personalized approach to counseling and consenting for embryo disposition.

An online survey of UK women's attitudes to having children, the age they want children and the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic

STUDY QUESTION

What are women's views on having children, including the age they want to have them and other influences such as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Women's views on having children, at their preferred age of 30 years, included their maternal urge and concerns about their biological clock and stability, while 19% said COVID-19 had affected their views.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Women globally are delaying the birth of their first child, with the average age of first birth approaching 32 years in some countries. The average age women have their first child in the UK is 30.7 years and over 50% of women aged 30 years are childless. The fertility rate stands at 1.3 in several European Union countries. Some people are not having their desired family size or are childless by circumstance. It is essential to understand people's attitudes to having children in different countries to identify trends so we can develop educational resources in an age-appropriate manner.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

We conducted an anonymous, online survey of multiple choice and open-ended questions. The survey was live for 32 days from 15 May 2020 to 16 June 2020 and was promoted using social media.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

A total of 887 women from 44 countries participated in the survey. After filtering out women who did not consent, gave blank or incomplete responses, and those not in the UK, 411 responses remained. From the data, three areas of questioning were analysed: their views on having children, the ideal age they want to have children and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Qualitative data were analysed by thematic analysis.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The average age (±SD) of the women who completed the survey was 32.2 years (±5.9), and they were mainly heterosexual (90.8%) and 84.8% had a university education. One-third of women were married/in a civil partnership (37.7%) and 36.0% were cohabitating. In relation to their views on having children, the main themes identified were: the maternal urge, the ticking of the biological clock, why did no one teach us this?, the need for stability and balance in their life, pressure to start a family and considering other ways to have a family. When asked 'In an ideal world, at what age approximately would you like to have had or have children?' a normal distribution was observed with a mean age of 29.9 (±3.3) years. When asked 'What factors have led you to decide on that particular age?' the most frequent choice was 'I am developing my career'. Three themes emerged from the qualitative question on why they chose that age: the need for stability and balance in their life, the importance of finding the right time and life experiences. The majority of women felt that the COVID-19 pandemic had not affected their decision to have children (72.3%), but 19.1% said it had. The qualitative comments showed they had concerns about instability in their life, such as finances and careers, and delays in fertility treatment.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The survey was promoted on social media only and the women who answered the survey were highly educated.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The women surveyed ideally want children at age 30 years but there are obstacles in their way, such as the need to develop their career. Global tailored fertility education is essential to ensure people make informed reproductive choices. In addition, it is essential for supportive working environments and affordable childcare to be in place in every country.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

J.C.H. is founder of www.globalwomenconnected.com and Reproductive Health at Work, and author of the book Your Fertile Years. This project was funded by the Institute for Women's Health, UCL.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.