Efficiency of assisted reproductive technology programs in stimulated-cycle embryo transfer versus cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Objective. To carry out a systems analysis of the data available in the current literature on the efficiency of unstimulated-cycle cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer versus stimulated-cycle native embryo transfer in the assisted reproductive technology (ART) programs. Material and methods. The review included the data of randomized clinical trials comparing the results obtained in the IVF cycles during native and cryopreserved/thawed embryo transfer, which have been found in the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library and published in the past 10 years. Results. Analysis of the data has shown that in the unstimulated superovulation cycle cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer, the clinical pregnancy rate is higher and pregnancy outcomes are also better than those in the stimulated-cycle native embryo transfer. This may be associated with a more precise hit into the implantation window and with the optimal level of inflammation in the endometrium for embryo implantation. Conclusion. The findings give grounds to revise standard tactics for implementing an ART program in favor of cryopreservation of embryos for natural-cycle transfer.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Zokhra Mokhamad Sami Naimi

Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: naimi-zohra@mail.ru
graduate student of department of assisted reproductive technology in treating sterility

Elena Anatolievna Kalinina

Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: e_kalinina@oparina4.ru
MD, The chief of department of assisted reproductive technology in treating sterility

Andrey Evgenievich Donnikov

Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: a_donnikov@oparina4.ru
PhD, Senior Researcher of molecul-genetical laboratory

Kamila Ullubievna Alieva

Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: kaya79@mail.ru
PhD, Researcher of department of assisted reproductive technology in treating sterility

Alina Khasanovna Dudarova

Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: kanshaov85@mail.ru
graduate student of department of assisted reproductive technology in treating sterility

Yana Albertovna Tukhvatullina

I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University

Email: janytuk@gmail.com
student, Faculty of Medicine

References

  1. Кулаков В.И., Леонов Б.В., Кузьмичев Л.Н. Лечение женского и мужского бесплодия. М.: МИА; 2005: 125-35. [Kulakov V.I., Leonov B.V., Kuzmichev L.N. Treatment of female and male infertility. Moscow: MIA; 2005: 125-35. (in Russian)]
  2. Evans J., Hannan N.J., Hincks C., Rombauts L.J., Salamonsen L.A. Defective soil for a fertile seed? Altered endometrial development is detrimental to pregnancy success. PLoS One. 2012; 7(12): e53098.
  3. Achache H., Revel A. Endometrial receptivity markers, the journey to successful embryo implantation. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2006; 12(6): 731-46.
  4. Shapiro B.S., Daneshmand S.T., Garner F.C., Aguirre M., Hudson C., Shyni T. Evidence of impaired endometrial receptivity after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a prospective randomized trial comparing fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfer in normal responders. Fertil. Steril. 2011; 96(2): 344-8.
  5. Щербаков В.И., Рябиченко Т.И., Скосырева Г.А., Трунов А.Н. Роль локального воспаления при овуляции и имплантации. Цитокины и воспаление. 2014; 13(4): 16-22. [Scherbakov V.I., Ryabichenko T.I., Skosyireva G.A., Trunov A.N. The role of local inflammation in ovulation and implantation. Tsitokinyi i vospalenie. 2014; 13(4): 16-22. (in Russian)]
  6. Хонина Н.А., Айзикович И.В., Шевела Е.Я., Тихонова М.А., Ладыгина Е.А., Белова А.Е., Дегтярев М.А., Пасман Н.М., Останин А.А., Черных Е.Р. Регуляторные факторы и цитокины в сыворотке и фолликулярной жидкости у женщин при контролируемой овариальной гиперстимуляции. Цитокины и воспаление. 2005; 4(2): 38-44. [Honina N.A., Ayzikovich I.V., Shevela E.Ya., Tihonova M.A., Ladyigina E.A., Belova A.E., Degtyarev M.A., Pasman N.M., Ostanin A.A., Chernyih E.R. Regulatory factors and cytokines in serum and follicular fluid in women with ovarian hyperstimulation controlled. Tsitokinyi i vospalenie. 2005; 4(2): 38-44. (in Russian)]
  7. Кузьмичев Л.Н., Смольникова В.Ю., Калинина Е.А., Дюжева Е.В. Принципы комплексной оценки и подготовки эндометрия у пациенток программ вспомогательных репродуктивных технологий. Акушерство и гинекология 2010; 5: 32-6. [Kuzmichev L.N., Smolnikova V.Yu., Kalinina Ye.A., Dyuzheva Ye. V. The principles of complex evaluation and preparation of the endometrium in patients of assisted reproductive technology programs. Akusherstvo i ginecologiya/Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2010; 5: 32-36. (in Russian)]
  8. Митюрина Е.В., Перминова С.Г., Демура Т.А., Галлямова Е.М. Рецептивность эндометрия в программе экстракорпорального оплодотворения. Акушерство и гинекология. 2014; 2: 14-20. [Mityurina E.V., Perminova S.G., Demura T.A., Gallyamova E.M. Endometrial receptivity in an in-vitro fertilization program. Akusherstvo i ginecologiya/Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2014; 2: 14-20. (in Russian)]
  9. Devroey P., Bourgain C., Macklon N.S., Fauser B.C. Reproductive biology and IVF: ovarian stimulation and endometrial receptivity. Trends Endocrinol. Metab. 2004; 15(1): 84-90.
  10. Shapiro B.S., Daneshmand S.T., Garner F.C., Aguirre M., Hudson C., Thomas S. High ongoing pregnancy rates after deferred transfer through bipronuclear oocyte cryopreservation and post-thaw extended culture. Fertil. Steril. 2009; 92(5): 1594-9.
  11. Shapiro B.S., Daneshmand S.T., Garner F.C., Aguire M., Thomas S. Large blastocyst diameter, early blastulation, and low preovulatory serum proges terone are dominant predictors of clinical pregnancy in fresh autologous cycles. Fertil. Steril. 2008; 90(2): 302-9.
  12. Richter K.S., Shipley S.K., McVearry I., Tucker M.J., Widra E.A. Cryopreserved embryo transfers suggest that endometrial receptivity may contribute to reduced success rates of later developing embryos. Fertil. Steril. 2006; 86(4): 862-6.
  13. Herrero L., Martinez M., Garcia-Velasco J.A. Current status of human oocyte and embryo cryopreservation. Curr. Opin. Obstet. Gynecol. 2011; 23(4): 245-50.
  14. Shapiro B.S., Daneshmand S.T., Garner F.C.,Aguirre M., Hudson C., Thomas S. Similar ongoing pregnancy rates after blastocyst transfer in fresh donor cycles and autologous cycles using cryopreserved bipronuclear oocytes suggest similar viability of transferred blastocysts. Fertil. Steril. 2010; 93(1): 319-21.
  15. Griesinger G., von Otte S., Schroer A., Ludwig A.K., Diedrich K., Al-Hasani S. et al. Elective cryopreservation of all pronuclear oocytes after GnRH agonist triggering of final oocyte maturation in patients at risk of developing OHSS: a prospective, observational proof-of-concept study. Hum. Reprod. 2007; 22(5): 1348-52.
  16. d’Angelo A. Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome prevention strategies: cryopreservation of all embryos. Semin. Reprod. Med. 2010; 28(6): 513-8.
  17. Griesinger G., Schultz L., Bauer T., Broessner A., Frambach T., Kissler S. Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome prevention by gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist triggering of final oocyte maturation in a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in combination with “freeze-all” strategy: a prospective multicentric study. Fertil. Steril. 2011; 95(6): 2029-33.
  18. Калинина Е.А., Эбзеева М.В., Кузьмичев Л.Н. Опыт применения «мягких» схем стимуляции суперовуляции у пациенток группы риска развития синдрома гиперстимуляции яичников. Акушерство и гинекология. 2010; 6: 60-4. [Kalinina Ye.A., Ebzeyeva M.V., Kuzmichev L.N. Experience with mild superovulation regimens used in ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome risk group patients. Akusherstvo i ginecologiya/Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2010; 6: 60-64. (in Russian)]
  19. Marrs R.P., Greene J., Stone B.A. Potential factors affecting embryo survival and clinical outcome with cryopreserved pronuclear human embryos. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2004; 190(6): 1766-71.
  20. Evans J., Hannan N.J., Edgell T.A., Vollenhoven B.J., Lutjen P.J., Osianlis T. et al. Fresh versus frozen embryo transfer: backing clinical decisions with scientific and clinical evidence. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2014; 20(6): 808-21.
  21. Shen C., Shu D., Zhao X., Gao Y. Comparison of clinical outcomes between fresh embryo transfers and frozen-thawed embryo transfers. Iran J. Reprod. Med. 2014; 12(6): 409-14.
  22. Shapiro B.S., Daneshmand S.T., Garner F.C., Aguirre M., Hudson C., Thomas S. Embryo cryopreservation rescues cycles with premature luteinization. Fertil. Steril. 2010; 93(2): 636-41.
  23. Al-Azemi M., Kyrou D., Kolibianakis E.M., Humaidan P., van Vaerenbergh I., Devroey P., Fatemi H.M. Elevated progesterone during ovarian stimulation for IVF. Reprod. Biomed. Online. 2012; 24(4): 381-8.
  24. Venetis C.A., Kolibianakis E.M., Papanikolaou E., Bontis J., Devroey P., Tarlatzis B.C. Is progesterone elevation on the day of human chorionic gonadotrophin administration associated with the probability of pregnancy in in vitro fertilization? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2007; 13(4): 343-55.
  25. Santos M.A., Kuijk E.W., Macklon N.S. The impact of ovarian stimulation for IVF on the developing embryo. Reproduction. 2010; 139(1): 23-34.
  26. Paulson R.J. Hormonal induction of endometrial receptivity. Fertil. Steril. 2011; 96(3): 530-5.
  27. Groothuis P.G., Dassen H.H., Romano A., Punyadeera C. Estrogen and the endometrium: lessons learned from gene expression profiling in rodents and human. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2007; 13(4): 405-17.
  28. Haouzi D., Assou S., Mahmoud K., Tondeur S., Rème T., Hedon B. et al. Gene expression profile of human endometrial receptivity: comparison between natural and stimulated cycles for the same patients. Hum. Reprod. 2009; 24(6): 1436-45.
  29. Papanikolaou E.G., Bourgain C., Kolibianakis E., Tournaye H., Devroey P. Steroid receptor expression in late follicular phase endometrium in GnRH antagonist IVF cycles is already altered, indicating initiation of early luteal phase transformation in the absence of secretory changes. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2005; 20(6): 1541-7.
  30. AbdelHafez F.F., Desai N., Abou-Setta A.M., Falcone T., Goldfarb J. Slow freezing, vitrification and ultra-rapid freezing of human embryos: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod. Biomed. Online. 2010; 20(2): 209-22.
  31. Martinez-Conejero J.A., Simon C., Pellicer A., Horcajadas J.A. Is ovarian stimulation detrimental to the endometrium? Reprod. Biomed. Online. 2007; 15(1): 45-50.
  32. Glujovsky D., Pesce R., Fiszbajn G., Sueldo C., Hart R.J., Ciapponi A. Endometrial preparation for women undergoing embryo transfer with frozen embryos or embryos derived from donor oocytes. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2010; (1): CD006359.
  33. Saragusty J., Arav A. Current progress in oocyte and embryo cryopreservation by slow freezing and vitrification. Reproduction. 2011; 141(1): 1-19.
  34. Prades M., Golmard J.L., Schubert B., Poirot C. Embryo cryopreservation: proposal for a new indicator of efficiency. Fertil. Steril. 2011; 95(2): 577-82. e1-2.
  35. Valojerdi M., Eftekhari-Yazdi P., Karimian L., Hassani F., Movaghar B. Vitrification versus slow freezing gives excellent survival, post warming embryo morphology and pregnancy outcomes for human cleaved embryos. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2009; 26(6): 347-54.
  36. Balaban B., Urman B., Ata B., Isiklar A., Larman M.G., 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(9): 1976-82.
  37. Check J.H., Wilson C., Choe J.K., Amui J., Katsoff B. A comparison of pregnancy rates following fresh and frozen embryo transfer according to the use of leuprolide acetate vs ganirelix vs cetrorelix. Clin. Exp. Obstet. Gynecol. 2010; 37(2): 105-7.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies