Accumulation of oocytes and/or embryos by vitrification: a new strategy for managing poor responder patients undergoing pre implantation diagnosis

The impact of the embryo banking on the cumulative live birth rate in women with poor ovarian response according to the Bologna criteria

Purpose

To evaluate the impact of embryo banking on the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) and the time to live birth (TTLB) in poor ovarian responders (POR) according to the Bologna criteria.

Methods

A total of 276 infertile women undergoing IVF with POR were included in this retrospective study. They were divided into two groups with (n = 121) or without (n = 155) embryo banking at the discretion of the attending physicians. A total of 656 and 405 stimulation cycles were started in the two groups respectively during the 24 month follow-up.

Results

The biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, and live birth rate per transfer were comparable between two groups (p > 0.05). The CLBR was significantly lower in the banking group than in the non-banking group (31.4% (38/121) and 43.2% (67/151), p < 0.05). TTLB was significantly longer in the banking group (20.5 months vs. 16.0 months, p < 0.001). In the Kaplan-Meier analysis, the cumulative incidence of live birth was significantly lower in the banking group compared with the non-banking group (Log rank test, chi-square = 21.958, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Embryo banking in women undergoing IVF with POR based on the Bologna criteria reduces CLBR and lengthens TTLB when compared with no embryo banking.

Evaluating different strategies for poor ovarian response management: a retrospective cohort study and literature review

This retrospective study compares four different strategies for managing poor ovarian response (POR), namely, conventional stimulation (300 IUs) IVF-fresh embryo transfer (CONVF), mild stimulation (150 IUs) IVF-fresh embryo transfer (MILDF), mild stimulation embryo banking (MILDB), and embryo banking in natural cycles (NATB). In total, 796 POR patients were considered eligible. Statistical analysis revealed a shorter duration of stimulation and a lower required amount of gonadotropins in MILDF compared with CONVF (9.34 ± 1.17 versus 10.37 ± 1.14; 1402 ± 176 versus 3110 ± 343, P < 0.001). Comparing MILDF and MILDB, a higher number of available oocytes and embryos was observed in MILDB (2.36 ± 1.15 versus 6.58 ± 1.11; 1.72 ± 1.02 versus 3.51 ± 0.61, P < 0.001). Moreover, the MILDB presented with a lower number of required oocyte retrievals and a higher number of oocytes per oocyte retrieval compared with NATB (3.90 ± 1.56 versus 7.15 ± 1.80; 1.95 ± 0.74 versus 0.89 ± 0.20, P < 0.001). Data indicate that MILDF is equally efficient and associated with a shorter duration of stimulation and a lower required amount of gonadotropins compared with CONVF. Embryo accumulation may be more efficient compared with a fresh embryo transfer. MILDB may be a more efficient approach compared with NATB. To conclude, embryo accumulation following mild stimulation appears to form the optimal strategy for POR management. More studies are needed to verify these conclusions.

The Conundrum of Poor Ovarian Response: From Diagnosis to Treatment

Despite recent striking advances in assisted reproductive technology (ART), poor ovarian response (POR) diagnosis and treatment is still considered challenging. Poor responders constitute a heterogeneous cohort with the common denominator of under-responding to controlled ovarian stimulation. Inevitably, respective success rates are significantly compromised. As POR pathophysiology entails the elusive factor of compromised ovarian function, both diagnosis and management fuel an ongoing heated debate depicted in the literature. From the criteria employed for diagnosis to the plethora of strategies and adjuvant therapies proposed, the conundrum of POR still puzzles the practitioner. What is more, novel treatment approaches from stem cell therapy and platelet-rich plasma intra-ovarian infusion to mitochondrial replacement therapy have emerged, albeit not claiming clinical routine status yet. The complex and time sensitive nature of this subgroup of infertile patients indicates the demand for a consensus on a horizontally accepted definition, diagnosis and subsequent effective treating strategy. This critical review analyzes the standing criteria employed in order to diagnose and aptly categorize POR patients, while it proceeds to critically evaluate current and novel strategies regarding their management. Discrepancies in diagnosis and respective implications are discussed, while the existing diversity in management options highlights the need for individualized management.

Does the prognosis after PGT for structural rearrangement differ between female and male translocation carriers?

RESEARCH QUESTION

Chromosomal translocations are known genetic causes of premature ovarian insufficiency syndrome. Are certain translocations associated with decreased capacity of small antral follicles to respond to exogenous FSH? Does the prognosis after preimplantation genetic testing for structural rearrangements differ in couples with female or male translocation carriers and according to the type of translocation?

DESIGN

A single-centre, retrospective, observational study covering a 10-year period. One hundred and thirty-nine females carrying a translocation were compared with 192 partners of male translocation carriers. To evaluate ovarian response to FSH, the follicular output rate was used, defined by ratio between the pre-ovulatory follicle count on day of HCG x 100/antral follicle count (AFC). To determine a cut-off of metaphase II oocytes and biopsied embryos as predictor of obtaining a balanced embryo transfer, receiver operator characteristic curves were plotted.

RESULT

A decreased capacity of small antral follicles to respond to exogenous FSH in female translocation carriers was found. The number of metaphase II oocytes in both groups was weakly informative as a predictor of obtaining an embryo transfer. The number of biopsied embryos had some clinical value, however, and allowed a cut-off of 6.5 to be determined for female translocation carriers versus 5.5 for the partners of male translocation carriers. Live birth rates, however, were not different between female and male translocations carriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Female translocation carriers may respond poorly to ovarian stimulation, and present a higher rate of unbalanced embryos, which means that higher gonadotrophin doses may be required to increase the number of biopsied embryos.

Ovarian stimulation for freeze-all IVF cycles: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Freeze-all IVF cycles are becoming increasingly prevalent for a variety of clinical indications. However, the actual treatment objectives and preferred treatment regimens for freeze-all cycles have not been clearly established.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

We aimed to conduct a systematic review of all aspects of ovarian stimulation for freeze-all cycles.

SEARCH METHODS

A comprehensive search in Medline, Embase and The Cochrane Library was performed. The search strategy included keywords related to freeze-all, cycle segmentation, cumulative live birth rate, preimplantation genetic diagnosis, preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy, fertility preservation, oocyte donation and frozen-thawed embryo transfer. We included relevant studies published in English from 2000 to 2018.

OUTCOMES

Our search generated 3292 records. Overall, 69 articles were included in the final review. Good-quality evidence indicates that in freeze-all cycles the cumulative live birth rate increases as the number of oocytes retrieved increases. Although the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is virtually eliminated in freeze-all cycles, there are certain risks associated with retrieval of large oocyte cohorts. Therefore, ovarian stimulation should be planned to yield between 15 and 20 oocytes. The early follicular phase is currently the preferred starting point for ovarian stimulation, although luteal phase stimulation can be used if necessary. The improved safety associated with the GnRH antagonist regimen makes it the regimen of choice for ovarian stimulation in freeze-all cycles. Ovulation triggering with a GnRH agonist almost completely eliminates the risk of OHSS without affecting oocyte and embryo quality and is therefore the trigger of choice. The addition of low-dose hCG in a dual trigger has been suggested to improve oocyte and embryo quality, but further research in freeze-all cycles is required. Moderate-quality evidence indicates that in freeze-all cycles, a moderate delay of 2–3 days in ovulation triggering may result in the retrieval of an increased number of mature oocytes without impairing the pregnancy rate. There are no high-quality studies evaluating the effects of sustained supraphysiological estradiol (E2) levels on the safety and efficacy of freeze-all cycles. However, no significant adverse effects have been described. There is conflicting evidence regarding the effect of late follicular progesterone elevation in freeze-all cycles.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

Ovarian stimulation for freeze-all cycles is different in many aspects from conventional stimulation for fresh IVF cycles. Optimisation of ovarian stimulation for freeze-all cycles should result in enhanced treatment safety along with improved cumulative live birth rates and should become the focus of future studies.

Advanced Maternal Age in IVF: Still a Challenge? The Present and the Future of Its Treatment

Advanced maternal age (AMA; >35 year) is associated with a decline in both ovarian reserve and oocyte competence. At present, no remedies are available to counteract the aging-related fertility decay, however different therapeutic approaches can be offered to women older than 35 year undergoing IVF. This review summarizes the main current strategies proposed for the treatment of AMA: (i) oocyte cryopreservation to conduct fertility preservation for medical reasons or "social freezing" for non-medical reasons, (ii) personalized controlled ovarian stimulation to maximize the exploitation of the ovarian reserve in each patient, (iii) enhancement of embryo selection via blastocyst-stage preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies and frozen single embryo transfer, or (iv) oocyte donation in case of minimal/null residual chance of pregnancy. Future strategies and tools are in the pipeline that might minimize the risks of AMA through non-invasive approaches for embryo selection (e.g., molecular analyses of leftover products of IVF, such as spent culture media). These are yet challenging but potentially ground-breaking perspectives promising a lower clinical workload with a higher cost-effectiveness. We also reviewed emerging experimental therapeutic approaches to attempt at restoring maternal reproductive potential, e.g., spindle-chromosomal complex, pronuclear or mitochondrial transfer, and chromosome therapy. In vitro generation of gametes is also an intriguing challenge for the future. Lastly, since infertility is a social issue, social campaigns, and education among future generations are desirable to promote the awareness of the impact of age and lifestyle habits upon fertility. This should be a duty of the clinical operators in this field.

Novel approaches for diagnosis and management of low prognosis patients in assisted reproductive technology: the POSEIDON concept

The management of patients with a poor ovarian response (POR) to ovarian stimulation represents a challenging issue in reproductive medicine. Apart from economic burdens, the patient with POR has poor prognosis in assisted reproductive technology (ART), which represents a common cause of drop-out from treatment. To introduce a more nuanced picture of POR, the POSEIDON group developed novel criteria to identify and classify patients with low prognosis who undergo ART. The primary goal of POSEIDON criteria is to offer clinicians a pragmatic system to guide therapeutic management with the mindset to obtain the number of oocytes needed for improving ART success. A novel marker of ART success, namely, the ability to obtain the number of oocytes required for achieving at least one euploid embryo for transfer in each patient, is aligned with the POSEIDON criteria. A novel prediction model (ART Calculator) is developed to help clinicians estimate the POSEIDON marker of success. Furthermore, the POSEIDON criteria can also be used to identify more homogeneous populations to test in interventional trials.

Embryo pooling: a promising strategy for managing insufficient number of embryos in preimplantation genetic diagnosis

This retrospective study evaluated the embryo pooling strategy for managing insufficient number of embryos in preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) through serial vitrification of cleavage-stage embryos from consecutive cycles, and simultaneous blastocysts biopsy in combination with blastocysts obtained in ultimate fresh cycle. A retrospective analysis of the cumulative pregnancy rate of 68 patients underwent cleavage-stage embryos accumulation (Embryo Pooling Group) and 94 patients underwent one stimulation cycle (Control Group) over a 2-year period were conducted. The blastocyst formation rate was comparable between the consecutive cycles and the ultimate cycle in embryo pooling group (56.0 versus 62.0%, p = .078). No significant difference existed between twice-vitrified and once-vitrified warmed blastocysts with respect to implantation rate (50.8 versus 46.3%, p = .658). The implantation rate and cumulative pregnancy rate of embryo pooling group were 49.0 and 67.6%, respectively, which were statistically comparable to the corresponding values of 48.9 and 73.4% obtained in control group. Our study suggests that in patients undergoing ICSI-PGD who do not reach enough embryos in a single stimulation cycle, pooling embryos from consecutive ovarian stimulation cycles is a promising strategy, which can render a cumulative pregnancy rate comparable to those patients who only require one stimulation cycle.