Dataset Information

Endometrial compaction does not predict live birth rate in single euploid frozen embryo transfer cycles.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To evaluate whether endometrial compaction using sequential transvaginal ultrasound is associated with improved live birth rates in medicated single euploid frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles.

Methods

Prospective observational cohort study at a private fertility clinic. Patients who underwent FETs between January and December 2018 were assessed for inclusion. The change in endometrial thickness between the end of the estrogen phase and the day before embryo transfer, measured by sequential transvaginal ultrasound, was used to categorize cycles with compaction (≥ 5%), no change, or expansion (≥ 5%). FET cycle outcomes were then compared between groups. The primary outcome was live birth. Secondary outcomes include clinical pregnancy rate and rate of spontaneous abortion.

Results

Of the 259 single euploid medicated FETs performed during the study period, only 43/259 (16.6%) of the cycles demonstrated ≥ 5% compaction, whereas 152/259 (58.7%) expanded and 64/259 (24.7%) were unchanged. Live birth rates did not differ between cycles with compaction (58.1%), no change (54.7%), or expansion (58.6%), p = 0.96. Clinical pregnancy and spontaneous abortion rates were also similar between groups.

Conclusion

The vast majority of cycles did not demonstrate endometrial compaction. Endometrial compaction is not associated with live birth rate or spontaneous abortion rate in medicated single euploid FETs in this cohort.

SUBMITTER: Riestenberg C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7884553 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:In recent years, the freeze-all strategy has been widely adopted and applied. However, with the exception of age, the factors that affect the outcomes of frozen embryo transfer are still unclear. Therefore, the identification and mitigation of factors that influence the live birth rate after frozen embryo transfer is a good way to increase the "take-home-baby" rate of frozen embryo transfer. The objective of this study was to identify factors affecting the live birth rate after cleavage-stage frozen embryo transfer in young ovulatory women. This was a secondary analysis from a previously published multicenter randomized controlled trial (ChiCTR-IOR-14005406) that was originally designed to compare the live birth rate and perinatal complications after fresh embryo transfer to those after frozen embryo transfer among ovulatory women. This study was carried out using a portion of the data from the original randomized controlled trial, which included 917 young women who underwent cleavage-stage frozen embryo transfer. The 16 clinical candidate variables potentially affecting the live birth rate after frozen embryo transfer were analyzed. Univariable analysis and multivariable analysis were performed to assess the relationship between predictive factors and outcomes, with the aim of identifying independent predictors of live birth after frozen embryo transfer. In this study, the live birth rate was 53.0% (486/917). Three independent predictors were ultimately identified as the main factors affecting the live birth rate of ovulatory young women. Infertility duration [odds ratio (OR): 0.933, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.876-0.995, p = 0.033], endometrial thickness before frozen embryo transfer (OR: 3.375, 95% CI: 1.556-7.321 p = 0.002), and the number of embryos transferred (OR: 2.653, 95% CI:1.226-5,743, p = 0.013) were the major factors contributing to the live birth rate after cleavage-stage frozen embryo transfer among young women. The cut-off point for infertility duration was 4.5 years, and the cut-off point for endometrial thickness was 0.89 cm. Infertility duration, endometrial thickness and number of embryos transferred might affect the live birth rate after frozen embryo transfer among young women. This result could help inform clinical decisions and counseling to increase the live birth rate after frozen embryo transfer among young women.

Project description:BackgroundA number of studies have compared the clinical outcomes between the two endometrial preparation methods: natural cycles (NCs) and hormone replacement treatment (HRT) before frozen embryo transfer, but the results were conflicting. In order to mitigate the potential effect of embryos per se, several researchers have worked on this subject for euploid blastocyst transfer, but the results were still inconsistent. Therefore, the present study was aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes between HRT and NC for autologous single vitrified-warmed euploid blastocyst transfer based on our data.MethodsA total of 598 frozen-thawed single euploid blastocyst transfer cycles in the assisted reproductive center of Northwest Women's and Children's Hospital from January 2014 to May 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Women were stratified into the NC (n = 125) or HRT (n = 473) group according to the patient's preference and the physician's guidance. Multivariate regression models and subgroup analysis were constructed to analyze the association between endometrial preparation and live birth.ResultsWomen in the NC group had a higher live birth rate (68.80% versus 58.35%, P = 0.034) and a lower risk of total pregnancy loss (8.51% versus 21.14%, P = 0.005) when compared with women in the HRT group. The biochemical pregnancy rate (75.20% versus 74.00%, P = 0.784) and clinical pregnancy rate (74.40% versus 69.98%, P = 0.334) were similar between the two groups (NC versus HRT). NC was associated with an increased odds of live birth compared with HRT by different multivariable analysis models (Model 1: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57, 0.36 - 0.90; Model 2: aOR, 95%CI: 0.57, 0.35 - 0.92). In addition, the increased chance of live birth in the NC group was found in all subgroups. No major obstetrical complications and two malformation livebirths were reported.ConclusionsIn women undergoing single euploid frozen blastocyst transfers, the NC group was associated with a lower pregnancy loss rate and an ultimately higher live birth rate than the HRT group. Although HRT is convenient for both clinicians and patients, the lower live birth rate should be taken into account and NC might be the first choice of endometrial preparation method.

Project description:BackgroundWhether pretreatment with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) can improve the pregnancy outcomes in frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles is controversial. The inconsistencies in the results of different studies would be related to the characteristics of the included patients and the protocol of GnRHa use. In this study, we investigated the efficacy of pretreatment with a long-acting GnRH agonist in the early follicular phase of FET cycles and determined which population was suitable for the protocol.ResultsWe retrospectively included 630 and 1141 patients in the GnRHa FET and hormone replacement treatment (HRT) FET without GnRHa groups respectively, between October 2017 and March 2019 at a university-affiliated in vitro fertilization center. On the second or third day of menstruation, 3.75 mg of leuprorelin was administered. After 14 days, HRT was initiated for endometrial preparation. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of patient characteristics. However, the GnRHa FET group showed a higher percentage of endometrium with a triple line pattern (94.8% vs 89.6%, p < 0.001) on the day of progesterone administration, with increased implantation (35.6% vs 29.8%, p = 0.005), clinical pregnancy (49.8% vs 43.3%, p = 0.008), and live birth rate (39.4% vs 33.7%, p = 0.016), than the HRT FET cycles with similar endometrial thickness, ectopic pregnancy and early miscarriage rates. Binary logistic regression analysis showed the GnRHa FET group to be associated with an increased chance of clinical pregnancy (P=0.028, odds ratio [OR] 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.70) and live birth (P=0.013, odds ratio [OR] 1.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.70) compared to the HRT FET without GnRHa group. After subgroup analysis, we found that the GnRHa FET group showed a significantly higher live birth rate in the subgroups of age < 40 years, primary infertility, with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), and irregular menstruation.ConclusionsPretreatment with a long-acting GnRHa during the early follicular phase improved the live birth rate in FET cycles. Age < 40 years, primary infertility, PCOS, and irregular menstruation are effective indications for endometrial preparation with GnRHa pretreatment in FET cycles. However, further randomized controlled trials are required to verify these results.

Project description:Study questionDoes supplementation with vaginal tablets of progesterone after frozen-thawed embryo transfer in natural cycles improve the live birth rate?Summary answerSupplementation with vaginal tablets of progesterone after frozen-thawed embryo transfer in natural cycles significantly improves the number of live births.What is known alreadyProgesterone supplementation during luteal phase and early pregnancy may improve the number of live births after frozen-thawed embryo transfer. However, due to the limited number of previous studies, being mainly retrospective, evidence is still limited.Study design, size, durationThis is a prospective randomized controlled trial, performed at two university clinics. In total, 500 subjects were randomized with a 1:1 allocation into two groups, during the period February 2013 to March 2018. Randomization was performed after a frozen embryo transfer in a natural cycle by use of opaque sealed envelopes. The primary outcome was live birth rate; secondary outcomes were pregnancy, biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy and miscarriage rate, and if there was a possible association between the serum progesterone concentration on the day of embryo transfer and live birth rate.Participants/materials, setting, methodsWomen, receiving embryo transfer in natural cycles participated in the study. The embryos were frozen on Day 2, 3, 5 or 6. In total, 672 women having regular menstrual cycles were invited to participate in the study; of those, 500 agreed to participate and 488 were finally included in the study. Half of the study subjects received progesterone supplementation with progesterone vaginal tablets, 100 mg twice daily, starting from the day of embryo transfer. The other half of the subjects were not given any treatment. Blood samples for serum progesterone measurements were collected from all subjects on the day of embryo transfer.Main results and the role of chanceThere were no differences in background characteristics between the study groups. In the progesterone supplemented group, 83 of 243 patients (34.2%) had a live birth, compared to 59 of 245 patients (24.1%) in the control group (odds ratio 1.635, 95% CI 1.102-2.428, P = 0.017*). The number of pregnancies was 104 of 243 (42.8%) and 83 of 245 (33.9%), respectively (odds ratio 1.465, 95% CI 1.012-2.108, P = 0.049*) and the number of clinical pregnancies was 91 of 243 (37.4%) and 70 of 245 (28.6%), respectively (odds ratio 1.497, 95% CI 1.024-2.188, P = 0.043*). There were no significant differences in biochemical pregnancy rate or miscarriage rate. There was no correlation between outcome and serum progesterone concentration.Limitations, reasons for cautionThe study was not blinded because placebo tablets were not available. Supplementation started on embryo transfer day, regardless of the age of the embryos, which resulted in a shorter supplementation time for Day 5/6 embryos compared to Day 2/3 embryos.Wider implications of the findingsSupplementation with progesterone in natural cycles improved the number of live births after frozen-thawed embryo transfer and should therefore be considered for introduction in clinical routine.Study funding/competing interest(s)The study was funded by Uppsala University, the Uppsala-Family Planning Foundation, and Ferring Pharmaceuticals AB, Malmö, Sweden. The authors have no personal conflicting interests to declare.Trial registration numberNL4152.Trial registration date5 December 2013.Date of first patient’s enrolment18 February 2013.

Project description:PurposeThe goal of this study was to compare pregnancy outcomes between natural frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles in ovulatory women and programmed FET cycles in anovulatory women after undergoing in vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening (IVF-PGS).MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study performed at an academic medical center. Patients undergoing single FET IVF-PGS cycles between October 2011 and December 2014 were included. Patients were stratified by type of endometrial replacement: programmed cycles with estrogen/progesterone replacement and natural cycles. IVF-PGS with 24-chromosome screening was performed on all included patients. Those patients with euploid embryos had single embryo transfer in a subsequent FET. The primary study outcome was live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate. Secondary outcomes included implantation, biochemical pregnancy, and miscarriage rates.ResultsOne hundred thirteen cycles met inclusion criteria: 65 natural cycles and 48 programmed cycles. The programmed FET group was younger (35.9 ± 4.5 vs. 37.5 ± 3.7, P = 0.03) and had a higher AMH (3.95 ± 4.2 vs. 2.37 ± 2.4, P = 0.045). The groups were similar for BMI, gravidity, parity, history of uterine surgery, and incidence of Asherman's syndrome. There was also no difference in embryo grade at biopsy or transfer, and proportion of day 5 and day 6 transfers. Implantation rates were higher in the natural FET group (0.66 ± 0.48 vs. 0.44 ± 0.50, P = 0.02). There was no difference in the rates of biochemical pregnancy or miscarriage. After controlling for age, live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate was higher in natural FETs with an adjusted odds ratio of 2.68 (95% CI 1.22-5.87).ConclusionsNatural FET in ovulatory women after IVF-PGS is associated with increased implantation and live birth rates compared to programmed FET in anovulatory women. Further investigation is needed to determine whether these findings hold true in other patient cohorts.