Seven Years of Vitrified Blastocyst Transfers: Comparison of 3 Preparation Protocols at a Single ART Center

Paolo Emanuele Levi Setti, Federico Cirillo, Raffaella De Cesare, Emanuela Morenghi, Valentina Canevisio, Camilla Ronchetti, Annamaria Baggiani, Antonella Smeraldi, Elena Albani, Pasquale Patrizio, Paolo Emanuele Levi Setti, Federico Cirillo, Raffaella De Cesare, Emanuela Morenghi, Valentina Canevisio, Camilla Ronchetti, Annamaria Baggiani, Antonella Smeraldi, Elena Albani, Pasquale Patrizio

Abstract

Introduction: Frozen-thawed embryo transfers (FET) have become a standard practice to increase cumulative pregnancy rates, however, the choice of the best preparation protocol remains a matter of debate. Design: Retrospective analysis of clinical pregnancy (CPR) and live birth rate (LBR) of FET in natural cycles (NC-FET), modified natural cycles with hCG-triggered ovulation (mNC-FET), and hormonal artificial replacement (AR-FET). Materials and Methods: For natural cycles, patients were monitored by ultrasound to evaluate the dominant follicle and by urinary LH kits (NC-FET). When the endometrial thickness reached at least 7 mm and the dominant follicle 16-20 mm, hCG was administered in absence of urinary LH surge (mNC-FET). Embryo thawing and transfer was planned 7 days after LH surge or hCG administration. For the AR-FET, oral estradiol valerate was administered from day 2 of menstrual cycle until endometrial thickness reached at least 7 mm and transfer was planned after 5 days of vaginal progesterone start. Only single vitrified blastocyst transfers were included. Results: In total 2,895 transfers were performed of which 561 (19.4%) carried out with NC-FET, 1,749 (60.4%) with mNC-FET and 585 (20.2%) with AR-FET. CPRs were 32.62, 43.05, and 37.26%, respectively. LBR were 24.06, 33.56, and 25.81%, respectively. A statistically significant (p < 0.001) higher LBR for mNC-FET vs. NC-FET (OR 0.49-0.78) and AR-FET (OR 0.47-0.74) was observed. A higher ectopic pregnancy rate (p = 0.002) was observed in NC-FET (3.28%) than in AR-FET (1.83%) and mNC-FET (0.40%). A higher abortion rate (p = 0.031) in pregnancies <12 weeks was observed in AR-FET (27.52%) than in NC-FET (19.67%) and in mNC-FET (19.39%). At Post hoc analysis only female age (OR 0.91-0.95), antimullerian hormone (AMH) (OR 1.01-1.07) and mNC-FET (OR 1.39-1.98) were statically significant prognostic factors for LBRs. Conclusions: These results demonstrate a superior CPR and LBR following FET in hCG-triggered ovulation cycles compared to NC and AR-FET, a higher ectopic pregnancy rate in NC-FET and a higher abortion rate in pregnancies <12 weeks in AR-FET. However, these data need to be confirmed in randomized and prospective studies before definitive conclusions can be drawn. Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT03581422.

Keywords: blastocyst warming; clinical pregnancy rate; endometrial preparation; endometrial receptivity; live birth rate.

Copyright © 2020 Levi Setti, Cirillo, De Cesare, Morenghi, Canevisio, Ronchetti, Baggiani, Smeraldi, Albani and Patrizio.

References

    1. Martikainen H, Tiitinen A, Tomás C, Tapanainen J, Orava M, Tuomivaara L et al. One vs. two embryo transfer after IVF and ICSI: a randomized study. Hum Reprod. (2001) 16:1900–3. 10.1093/humrep/16.9.1900
    1. Veleva Z, Karinen P, Tomás C, Tapanainen JS, Martikainen H. Elective single embryo transfer with cryopreservation improves the outcome and diminishes the costs of IVF/ICSI. Hum Reprod. (2009) 24:1632–9. 10.1093/humrep/dep042
    1. De Neubourg D, Peeraer K, Debrock S, D'Hooghe T. Belgium model of coupling reimbursement of ART costs to restriction in number of embryos transferred. BMJ. (2014) 348:g1559. 10.1136/bmj.g1559
    1. Maheshwari A, Pandey S, Shetty A, Hamilton M, Bhattacharya S. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies resulting from the transfer of frozen thawed vs. fresh embryos generated through in vitro fertilization treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. (2012) 98:368–77.e1-9. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.05.019
    1. Gera PS, Tatpati LL, Allemand MC, Wentworth MA, Coddington CC. Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: steps to maximize success and minimize effect for assisted reproductive outcome. Fertil Steril. (2010) 94:173–8. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.02.049
    1. D'Angelo A, Amso NN. Embryo freezing for preventing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: a cochrane review. Hum Reprod. (2002) 17:2787–94. 10.1093/humrep/17.11.2787
    1. El-Toukhy T, Coomarasamy A, Khairy M, Sunkara K, Seed P, Khalaf Y et al. The relationship between endometrial thickness and outcome of medicated frozen embryo replacement cycles. Fertil Steril. (2008) 89:832–9. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.04.031
    1. Tiitinen A, Halttunen M, Härkki P, Vuoristo P, Hyden-Granskog C. Elective single embryo transfer: the value of cryopreservation. Hum Reprod. (2001) 16:1140–4. 10.1093/humrep/16.6.1140
    1. Ubaldi FM, Cimadomo D, Capalbo A, Vaiarelli A, Buffo L, Trabucco E et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy testing in women older than 44 years: a multicenter experience. Fertil Steril. (2017) 107:1173–80. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.03.007
    1. Sacchi L, Albani E, Cesana A, Smeraldi A, Parini V, Fabiani M et al. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy improves clinical, gestational, and neonatal outcomes in advanced maternal age patients without compromising cumulative live-birth rate. J Assist Reprod Genet. (2019) 36:2493–504. 10.1007/s10815-019-01609-4
    1. Balaban B, Urman B, Ata B, Isiklar A, Larman MG, Hamilton R et al. A randomized controlled study of human day 3 embryo cryopreservation by slow freezing or vitrification: vitrification is associated with higher survival, metabolism and blastocyst formation. Hum Reprod. (2008) 23:1976–82. 10.1093/humrep/den222
    1. Loutradi KE, Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, Papanikolaou EG, Pados G, Bontis I et al. Cryopreservation of human embryos by vitrification or slow freezing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. (2008) 90:186–93. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.06.010
    1. Ghobara T, Vandekerckhove P. Cycle regimens for frozen-thawed embryo transfer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. (2008) 2008:CD003414 10.1002/14651858.CD003414.pub2
    1. Glujovsky D, Pesce R, Fiszbajn G, Sueldo C, Hart RJ, Ciapponi A. Endometrial preparation for women undergoing embryo transfer with frozen embryos or embryos derived from donor oocytes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. (2010) 2010:CD006359 10.1002/14651858.CD006359.pub2
    1. Groenewoud ER, Cantineau AE, Kollen BJ, Macklon NS, Cohlen BJ. What is the optimal means of preparing the endometrium in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. (2013) 19:458–70. 10.1093/humupd/dmt030
    1. Weissman A, Levin D, Ravhon A, Eran H, Golan A, Levran D. What is the preferred method for timing natural cycle frozen-thawed embryo transfer? Reprod Biomed Online. (2009) 19:66–71. 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60048-X
    1. Montagut M, Santos-Ribeiro S, De Vos M, Polyzos NP, Drakopoulos P, Mackens S et al. Frozen-thawed embryo transfers in natural cycles with spontaneous or induced ovulation: the search for the best protocol continues. Hum Reprod. (2016) 31:2803–10. 10.1093/humrep/dew263
    1. Groenewoud ER, Cohlen BJ, Macklon NS. Programming the endometrium for deferred transfer of cryopreserved embryos: hormone replacement vs. modified natural cycles. Fertil Steril. (2018) 109:768–74. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.02.135
    1. Yarali H, Polat M, Mumusoglu S, Yarali I, Bozdag G. Preparation of endometrium for frozen embryo replacement cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Assist Reprod Genet. (2016) 33:1287–304. 10.1007/s10815-016-0787-0
    1. Byrd W. Cryopreservation, thawing, and transfer of human embryos. Semin Reprod Med. (2002) 20:37–43. 10.1055/s-2002-23518
    1. Chang EM, Han JE, Kim YS, Lyu SW, Lee WS, Yoon TK. Use of the natural cycle and vitrification thawed blastocyst transfer results in better in-vitro fertilization outcomes: cycle regimens of vitrification thawed blastocyst transfer. J Assist Reprod Genet. (2011) 28:369–74. 10.1007/s10815-010-9530-4
    1. Tomás C, Alsbjerg B, Martikainen H, Humaidan P. Pregnancy loss after frozen-embryo transfer–a comparison of three protocols. Fertil Steril. (2012) 98:1165–9. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.07.1058
    1. Weissman A, Horowitz E, Ravhon A, Steinfeld Z, Mutzafi R, Golan A et al. Spontaneous ovulation vs. HCG triggering for timing natural-cycle frozen-thawed embryo transfer: a randomized study. Reprod Biomed Online. (2011) 23:484–9. 10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.06.004
    1. Fatemi HM, Kyrou D, Bourgain C, Van den Abbeel E, Griesinger G, Devroey P. Cryopreserved-thawed human embryo transfer: spontaneous natural cycle is superior to human chorionic gonadotropin-induced natural cycle. Fertil Steril. (2010) 94:2054–8. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.11.036
    1. Levi-Setti PE, Zerbetto I, Baggiani A, Zannoni E, Sacchi L, Smeraldi A et al. An observational retrospective cohort trial on 4,828 IVF cycles evaluating different low prognosis patients following the POSEIDON criteria. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). (2019) 10:282. 10.3389/fendo.2019.00282
    1. Bonilla-Musoles F, Pardo G, Perez-Gil M, Serra V, Pellicer A. Abdominal ultrasonography vs. transvaginal scanning: accuracy in follicular development evaluation and prediction for oocyte retrieval in stimulated cycles. J Clin Ultrasound. (1989) 17:469–73. 10.1002/jcu.1870170703
    1. Levi Setti PE, Albani E, Cavagna M, Bulletti C, Colombo GV, Negri L. The impact of embryo transfer on implantation–a review. Placenta. (2003) 24(Suppl. B):S20–6. 10.1016/S0143-4004(03)00187-5
    1. Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, de Mouzon J, Ishihara O, Mansour R, Nygren K et al. The International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary on ART terminology 2009. Hum Reprod. (2009) 24:2683–7. 10.1093/humrep/dep343
    1. De Geyter C, Calhaz-Jorge C, Kupka MS, Wyns C, Mocanu E, Motrenko T et al. ART in Europe, 2014: results generated from European registries by ESHRE: the European IVF-monitoring Consortium (EIM) for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). Hum Reprod. (2018) 33:1586–601. 10.1093/humrep/dey242
    1. Gandhi G, Allahbadia G, Kagalwala S, Allahbadia A, Ramesh S, Patel K et al. Embryology. Hum Reprod. (2013) 28:i149–206. 10.1093/humrep/det210
    1. Aflatoonian N, Pourmasumi S, Aflatoonian A, Eftekhar M. Duration of storage does not influence pregnancy outcome in cryopreserved human embryos. Iran J Reprod Med. (2013) 11:843–6.
    1. Scaravelli G, Levi-Setti PE, Livi C, La Sala G, Ubaldi FM, Greco E et al. Contribution of cryopreservation to the cumulative live birth rate: a large multicentric cycle-based data analysis from the Italian National Registry. J Assist Reprod Genet. (2019) 36:2287–95. 10.1007/s10815-019-01566-y
    1. Arav A, Natan Y, Kalo D, Komsky-Elbaz A, Roth Z, Levi-Setti PE et al. A new, simple, automatic vitrification device: preliminary results with murine and bovine oocytes and embryos. J Assist Reprod Genet. (2018) 35:1161–8. 10.1007/s10815-018-1210-9
    1. Levi-Setti PE, Menduni F, Smeraldi A, Patrizio P, Morenghi E, Albani E. Artificial shrinkage of blastocysts prior to vitrification improves pregnancy outcome: analysis of 1028 consecutive warming cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. (2016) 33:461–6. 10.1007/s10815-016-0655-y
    1. Gianaroli L, Ferraretti AP, Magli MC, Sgargi S. Current regulatory arrangements for assisted conception treatment in European countries. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. (2016) 207:211–3. 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.10.002
    1. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Practice Committee of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology . Guidance on the limits to the number of embryos to transfer: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. (2017). 107:901–3. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.02.10
    1. Poletto KQ, Lobo MP, Giovanucci M, Approbato MS, Castro EC. Pregnancy rates from natural and artificial cycles of women submitted to frozen embryo transfers: a metanalysis. JBRA Assist Reprod. (2019) 23:268–72. 10.5935/1518-0557.20190018
    1. Liu X, Shi W, Shi J. Natural cycle frozen-thawed embryo transfer in young women with regular menstrual cycles increases the live-birth rates compared with hormone replacement treatment: a retrospective cohort study. Fertil Steril. (2020)113:811–7. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.11.023
    1. Kolibianakis EM, Zikopoulos K, Devroey P. Implantation potential and clinical impact of cryopreservation–a review. Placenta. (2003) 24(Suppl. B):S27–33. 10.1016/S0143-4004(03)00133-4
    1. Sathanandan M, Macnamee MC, Rainsbury P, Wick K, Brinsden P, Edwards RG. Replacement of frozen-thawed embryos in artificial and natural cycles: a prospective semi-randomized study. Hum Reprod. (1991) 6:685–7. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137407
    1. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine in collaboration with the Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility . Optimizing natural fertility: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. (2017) 107:52–8. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.09.029
    1. Irani M, Robles A, Gunnala V, Reichman D, Rosenwaks Z. Optimal parameters for determining the LH surge in natural cycle frozen-thawed embryo transfers. J Ovarian Res. (2017) 10:70. 10.1186/s13048-017-0367-7
    1. Singh B, Reschke L, Segars J, Baker VL. Frozen-thawed embryo transfer: the potential importance of the corpus luteum in preventing obstetrical complications. Fertil Steril. (2020) 113:252–7. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.12.007
    1. Meldrum DR, Su HI. There's no difference-are you sure? Fertil Steril. (2017) 108:231–2. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.06.022

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi