Comparative efficiency study of fresh and vitrified oocytes in egg donation programs for different controlled ovarian stimulation protocols

The live birth rate of vitrified oocyte accumulation for managing diminished ovarian reserve: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Vitrified M-II oocyte accumulation for later simultaneous insemination has been used for managing POR. Our study aimed to determine whether vitrified oocyte accumulation strategy improves live birth rate (LBR) for managing diminished ovarian reserve (DOR).

METHODS

A retrospective study included 440 women with DOR fulfilling Poseidon classification groups 3 and 4, defined as the presence of serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) hormone level < 1.2 ng/ml or antral follicle count (AFC) < 5, from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2019, in a single department. Patients underwent accumulation of vitrified oocytes (DOR-Accu) and embryo transfer (ET) or controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) using fresh oocytes (DOR-fresh) and ET. Primary outcomes were LBR per ET and cumulative LBR (CLBR) per intention to treat (ITT). Secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and miscarriage rate (MR).

RESULTS

Two hundred eleven patients underwent simultaneous insemination of vitrified oocyte accumulation and ET in the DOR-Accu group (maternal age: 39.29 ± 4.23 y, AMH: 0.54 ± 0.35 ng/ml), and 229 patients underwent COS and ET in the DOR-fresh group (maternal age: 38.07 ± 3.77 y, AMH: 0.72 ± 0.32 ng/ml). CPR in the DOR-Accu group was similar in the DOR-fresh group (27.5% vs. 31.0%, p = 0.418). However, MR was statistically higher (41.4% vs. 14.1%, p = 0.001), while LBR per ET was statistically lower (15.2% vs. 26.2%, p < 0.001) in the DOR-Accu group. There is no difference in CLBR per ITT between groups (20.4% vs. 27.5%, p = 0.081). The secondary analysis categorized clinical outcomes into four groups regarding patients' age. CPR, LBR per ET, and CLBR did not improve in the DOR-Accu group. In the group of 31 patients, accumulated vitrified metaphase II (M-II) oocytes reached a total number of ≥ 15, and CPR improved among the DOR-Accu group (48.4% vs. 31.0%, p = 0.054); however, higher MR (40.0% vs. 14.1%, p = 0.03) resulted in similar LBR per ET (29.0% vs. 26.2%, p = 0.738).

CONCLUSIONS

Vitrified oocyte accumulation for managing DOR did not improve LBR. Higher MR resulted in lower LBR in the DOR-Accu group. Therefore, the vitrified oocyte accumulation strategy for managing DOR is not clinically practical.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study protocol was retrospectively registered and was approved by Institutional Review Board of Mackay Memorial Hospital (21MMHIS219e) on August 26, 2021.

Factors affecting live birth rates in donor oocytes from commercial egg banks vs. program egg donors: an analysis of 40,485 cycles from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology registry in 2016-2018

OBJECTIVE

To examine the differences in live birth rates (LBRs), with single embryo transfer (SET), using oocytes from program generated egg donors vs. commercial egg bank donors and other factors affecting LBRs using donor oocytes.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 40,485 in vitro fertilization cycles using donor oocytes reported to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology registry in 2016-2018.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Live birth rate and cumulative LBR for SET using donor oocytes.

RESULT(S)

Multivariate results from the first SET from 19,128 cycles, including 15,429 from program generated egg donors and 3,699 from commercial egg banks, showed, when controlling for all other variables, the following: the LBR in the first SET cycle using commercial egg banks was 53.3% compared with 55.4% using program recruited egg donors (odds ratio [OR], 0.92); a reduction in the LBR with increasing recipient age, ages 40-44 years (OR, 0.80), 45-49 years (OR, 0.77), and >49 years (OR, 0.65); a steady decline in the LBR with increases in recipient body mass index above normal; and a steady increase in the LBR in association with >16 oocytes retrieved. Double embryo transfer increased the LBR (SET, 52%, vs. double embryo transfer, 58%) but also significantly increased the multiple pregnancy LBR, with 43% twins and 0.9% triplets. Blastocyst transfer had a higher LBR than cleavage stage embryos (52.5% vs. 39.5%). Intracytoplasmic sperm injection vs. conventional insemination when using fresh oocytes from program donors had similar LBRs.

CONCLUSION(S)

When performing in vitro fertilization using donor oocytes with SET, the LBR is affected by oocyte source, recipient age, recipient body mass index, stage of embryo at transfer, and number of oocytes retrieved.

Evidence-based outcomes after oocyte cryopreservation for donor oocyte in vitro fertilization and planned oocyte cryopreservation: a guideline

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing physicians and others regarding the efficacy of oocyte cryopreservation (OC) for donor oocyte in vitro fertilization and planned OC.

METHODS

The American Society for Reproductive Medicine conducted a literature search, which included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and prospective and retrospective comparative observational studies published from 1986 to 2018. The American Society for Reproductive Medicine Practice Committee and a task force of experts used available evidence and through consensus developed evidence-based guideline recommendations.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Outcomes of interest included live birth rate, clinical pregnancy rate, obstetrical and neonatal outcomes, and factors predicting reproductive outcomes.

RESULT(S)

The literature search identified 30 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline.

RECOMMENDATION(S)

Evidence-based recommendations were developed for predicting the likelihood of live births after planned OC, autologous OC in infertile women, and donor OC, as well as factors that may impact live birth rates. Recommendations were developed regarding neonatal outcomes after using fresh vs. cryopreserved oocytes in cases of autologous or donor oocytes.

CONCLUSION(S)

There is insufficient evidence to predict live birth rates after planned OC. On the basis of limited data, ongoing and live birth rates appear to be improved for women who undergo planned OC at a younger vs. older age. Although there are no significant differences in per transfer pregnancy rates with cryopreserved vs. fresh donor oocytes, there is insufficient evidence that the live birth rate is the same with vitrified vs. fresh donor oocytes. Neonatal outcomes appear similar with cryopreserved oocytes compared with fresh oocytes. Future studies that compare cumulative live birth rates are needed.