Live birth after using assisted reproductive technologies in a late reproductive-aged female patient with her own oocytes without preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

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

Abstract

Background: The present-day social conditions set new trends in changing the age model of birth rates with the implementation of reproductive function at a later stage, which creates a number of medical and social problems. проблем. Late reproductive aged women the most frequently face failures in the treatment of infertility by assisted reproductive technologies (ART). In addition, the women of this age cohort have high rates of pregnancy complications and perinatal morbidity.

Case report: The paper describes a clinical case of a favorable outcome of infertility treatment by ART methods using the standard short protocol with gonadotropin-releasing antagonists in a married couple of late reproductive age (the wife is 44 years; the husband is 58 years).

Conclusion: This case shows the possibility of achieving clinical pregnancy with the birth of a healthy baby in even female patients of late reproductive age, which emphasizes the need to optimize ovulation stimulation protocols and to choose the most appropriate method of infertility treatment for each married couple individually. At the same time, it is necessary to provide these married couples with information about the extremely low chances of clinical pregnancy and live birth in the treatment of infertility with ART methods and their own oocytes, as well as about the fertility preservation opportunities, including those using deferred motherhood at an earlier reproductive age.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Leah V. Khachatryan

I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Ministry of Health of Russia

Author for correspondence.
Email: leahkhachatryan@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4867-500X

postgraduate student of the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, Perinatology and Reproductology, Faculty of Postgraduate Professional Training of Physicians

Russian Federation, 119991, Moscow, Trubetskaya str., 8-2

Veronika Yu. Smolnikova

V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: v_smolnikova@oparina4.ru

Dr. Med. Sci., Leading Researcher, Professor B.V. Leonov Department of Assistive Technologies in Infertility Treatment

Russian Federation, 117997, Moscow, Ac. Oparin str., 4

Natalya P. Makarova

V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: np_makarova@oparina4.ru

PhD, Leading Researcher, Professor B.V. Leonov Department of Assistive Technologies in Infertility Treatment

Russian Federation, 117997, Moscow, Ac. Oparin str., 4

References

  1. Delbaere I., Verbiest S., Tydén T. Knowledge about the impact of age on fertility: a brief review. Ups. J. Med. Sci. 2020; 125(2): 167-74. https://dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/03009734.2019.1707913.
  2. Lancaster E.E., Lapato D.M., Jackson-Cook C., Strauss J.F. 3rd, Roberson-Nay R., York T.P. Maternal biological age assessed in early pregnancy is associated with gestational age at birth. Sci. Rep. 2021; 11(1): 15440. https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-94281-7.
  3. Saccone G., Gragnano E., Ilardi B., Marrone V., Strina I., Venturella R., Berghella V., Zullo F. Maternal and perinatal complications according to maternal age: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2022; 159(1): 43-55. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.14100.
  4. Lebovitz O., Haas J., Mor N., Zilberberg E., Aizer A., Kirshenbaum M. et al. Predicting IVF outcome in poor ovarian responders. BMC Womens Health. 2022; 22(1): 395. https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12905-022-01964-y.
  5. Camaioni A., Ucci M.A., Campagnolo L., De Felici M., Klinger F.G.; Italian Society of Embryology, Reproduction and Research (SIERR). The process of ovarian aging: it is not just about oocytes and granulosa cells. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2022; 39(4): 783-92. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10815-022-02478-0.
  6. Yan F., Zhao Q., Li Y., Zheng Z., Kong X., Shu C. et al. The role of oxidative stress in ovarian aging: a review. J. Ovarian Res. 2022; 15(1): 100. https://dx.doi.org/ https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13048-022-01032-x.
  7. Ma L., Lu H., Chen R., Wu M., Jin Y., Zhang J., Wang S. Identification of key genes and potential new biomarkers for ovarian aging: A Study Based on RNA-Sequencing Data. Front. Genet. 2020; 11: 590660. https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2020.590660.
  8. Tesarik J., Galán-Lázaro M., Mendoza-Tesarik R. Ovarian aging: molecular mechanisms and medical management. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021; 22(3): 1371. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms22031371.
  9. Yang L., Chen Y., Liu Y., Xing Y., Miao C., Zhao Y. et al. The role of oxidative stress and natural antioxidants in ovarian aging. Front. Pharmacol. 2021;11:617843. https://dx.doi.org/110.3389/fphar.2020.617843.
  10. Агаджанян Д.С., Смольникова В.Ю., Красный А.М., Лобанова Н.Н., Щипицына В.С., Садекова А.А., Макарова Н.П., Калинина Е.А. Оценка маркеров окислительного стресса у женщин с бесплодием в программах вспомогательных репродуктивных технологий. Акушерство и гинекология. 2022; 9: 64-70. [Agadzhanyan D.S., Smolnikova V.Yu., Krasnyi A.M., Lobanova N.N., Shchipitsyna V.S., Sadekova A.A., Makarova N.P., Kalinina E.A. Informative value of oxidative stress markers in predicting outcomes of infertility treatment using ART methods. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2022; (9): 64-70. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2022.9.64-70.
  11. Moghadam A.R.E., Moghadam M.T., Hemadi M., Saki G. Oocyte quality and aging. JBRA Assist. Reprod. 2022;26(1):105-22. https://dx.doi.org/10.5935/1518-0557.20210026.
  12. Hoque S.A.M., Kawai T., Zhu Z., Shimada M. Mitochondrial protein turnover is critical for granulosa cell proliferation and differentiation in antral follicles. J. Endocr. Soc. 2018; 3(2): 324-39. https://dx.doi.org/10.1210/js.2018-00329.
  13. Wang L., Tang J., Wang L., Tan F., Song H., Zhou J., Li F. Oxidative stress in oocyte aging and female reproduction. J. Cell. Physiol. 2021; 236(12): 7966-83. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcp.30468.
  14. Colella M., Cuomo D., Peluso T., Falanga I., Mallardo M., De Felice M., Ambrosino C. Ovarian aging: role of pituitary-ovarian axis hormones and ncRNAs in regulating ovarian mitochondrial activity. Front. Endocrinol. (Lausanne). 2021; 12: 791071. https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2021.791071.
  15. Chiang J.L., Shukla P., Pagidas K., Ahmed N.S., Karri S., Gunn D.D. et al. Mitochondria in ovarian aging and reproductive longevity. Ageing Res. Rev. 2020; 63: 101168. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arr.2020.101168.
  16. Spath M.A., Braat D.D.M. Iatrogenic and non-iatrogenic causes of female fertility loss that may indicate fertility preservation. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2019; 98(5): 559-62. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13594.
  17. Viotti M. Preimplantation genetic testing for chromosomal abnormalities: aneuploidy, mosaicism, and structural rearrangements. Genes (Basel). 2020; 11(6): 602. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes11060602.
  18. Vaiarelli A., Cimadomo D., Ubaldi N., Rienzi L., Ubaldi F.M. What is new in the management of poor ovarian response in IVF? Curr. Opin. Obstet. Gynecol. 2018; 30(3):155-62. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0000000000000452.
  19. Alviggi C., Andersen C.Y., Buehler K., Conforti A., De Placido G., Esteves S.C. et al.; Poseidon Group (Patient-Oriented Strategies Encompassing Individualized Oocyte Number). A new more detailed stratification of low responders to ovarian stimulation: from a poor ovarian response to a low prognosis concept. Fertil. Steril. 2016; 105(6): 1452-3. https://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/ j.fertnstert.2016.02.005.
  20. Cedars M.I. Managing poor ovarian response in the patient with diminished ovarian reserve. Fertil. Steril. 2022; 117(4): 655-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.fertnstert.2022.02.026.
  21. Zhang Y., Zhang C., Shu J., Guo J., Chang H.M., Leung P.C.K. et al. Adjuvant treatment strategies in ovarian stimulation for poor responders undergoing IVF: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2020; 26(2): 247-63.
  22. Aggarwal B., Evans A.L., Ryan H., Martins da Silva S.J. IVF or ICSI for fertility preservation? Reprod. Fertil. 2021; 2(1): L1-L3. https://dx.doi.org/10.1530/RAF-20-0059.
  23. Cai H., Ren W., Wang H., Shi J. Sex ratio imbalance following blastocyst transfer is associated with ICSI but not with IVF: an analysis of 14,892 single embryo transfer cycles. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2022; 39(1): 211-8. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10815-021-02387-8.
  24. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. The role of assisted hatching in in vitro fertilization: a guideline. Fertil. Steril. 2022; 117(6): 1177-82. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2022.02.020.
  25. Endo Y., Mitsuhata S., Hayashi M., Fujii Y., Motoyama H. Laser-assisted hatching on clinical and neonatal outcomes in patients undergoing single vitrified Blastocyst transfer: A propensity score-matched study. Reprod. Med. Biol. 2021; 20(2): 182-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmb2.12366.
  26. Mikwar M., MacFarlane A.J., Marchetti F. Mechanisms of oocyte aneuploidy associated with advanced maternal age. Mutat. Res. Rev. Mutat. Res. 2020; 785: 108320. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mrrev.2020.108320.
  27. Kimelman D., Pavone M.E. Non-invasive prenatal testing in the context of IVF and PGT-A. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2021; 70: 51-62. https://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2020.07.004.
  28. Penzias A., Bendikson K., Butts S., Coutifaris C., Falcone T., Fossum G. et al. The use of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A): a committee opinion. Ferti.l Steril. 2018; 109(3): 429-36 https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.fertnstert.2018.01.002.
  29. Валиахметова Э.З., Кулакова Е.В., Скибина Ю.С., Грязнов А.Ю., Сысоева А.П., Макарова Н.П., Калинина Е.А. Неинвазивное тестирование преимплантационных эмбрионов человека in vitro как способ прогнозирования исходов программ экстракорпорального оплодотворения. Акушерство и гинекология. 2021; 5: 5-16. [Valiakhmetova E.Z., Kulakova E.V., Skibina Yu.S., Gryaznov A.Yu., Sysoeva A.P., Makarova N.P., Kalinina E.A. Non-invasive testing of human preimplantation embryos in vitro as a way to predict the outcomes of in vitro fertilization programs. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2021; (5): 5-16. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2021.5.5-16.

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