Effectiveness and outcomes of embryo cryopreservation programs in assisted reproductive technologies

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

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

Abstract

Background. Embryo cryopreservation is an essential part of ART programs today. In recent years vitrification method is used increasingly widely. Purposes and tasks. To compare the effectiveness of ART programs using vitrified and fresh embryos, as well as different endometrial preparation regimes for frozen\thawed embryo transfer (modified natural cycle (MNC) and the preparatory hormone therapy(PHT)). To analyze the course of pregnancy and perinatal outcomes after vitrified embryo transfer. Materials and methods. We prospectively assessed the ART programs effectiveness and perinatal outcomes in 153 patients (I group), who underwent vitrified embryo transfer in 2011-2013 year. To prepare the endometrium for thawed embryo transfer in 83 patients PHT (Ia subgroup) and MNC in 70 patients (Ib subgroup) were used. Control group consisted of 70 patients, who underwent fresh embryo transfer. Results. The clinical pregnancy rate, birth rate and “take home baby” rate were not significantly different between the I (47,5 %; 30,9 %; 30,9 %) and II (53,0 %; 34,9 %; 32,5 %) groups, and between Ia (48,3 %; 28,4 %; 28,4 %) and IIb (46,6 %; 34,1 %; 34,1 %) subgroups. Complications during pregnancy and delivery, birthweight, length, Apgar score, congenital malformation rate did not differ significantly after vitrified and fresh embryo transfer. Conclusion. Vitrification is an effective method to achieve clinical results, comparable to native cycles. Application of PHT and MNC results in similar clinical outcomes. Transfer Vitrified embryo transfer does not have a negative impact on obstetric and perinatal outcomes when compared with native cycles.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Yana Nikolayevna Kravchuk

NWSMU named after I. I. Mechnokov

Email: ynkravchuk@mail.ru
postgraduate student at the department of female reproductive health

Alla Stanislavovna Kalugina

AVA-PETER clinic

Email: Kalugina-AS@avaclinic.ru
Deputy head doctor for reproductive medicine

Olga Vladimirovna Bystrova

AVA-PETER clinic

PhD, embryologist

Svetlana Aleksandrovna Shlykova

AVA-PETER clinic

embryologist, the head of the laboratory of embryology

References

  1. ASRM. Elective single-embryo transfer. Practice Committee of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Fertil. Steril. 2012; 97 (4): 835-842.
  2. Belva F., Henriet S., Van den Abbeel E., Camus M., Devroey P., Van der Elst J., Liebaers I., Haentjens P., Bonduelle M. Neonatal outcome of 937 children born after transfer of cryopreserved embryos obtained by ICSI and IVF and comparison with outcome data of fresh ICSI and IVF cycles. Hum. Reprod. 2008; 23 (10): 2227-2238.
  3. Chang E. M., Han J. E., Kim Y. S., Lyu S. W., Lee W. S., Yoon T. K. Use of the natural cycle and vitrification thawed blastocyst transfer results in better in vitro fertilization outcomes. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2011; 28 (4): 369-374.
  4. Cobo A., de los Santos M. J., Castello D., Gamiz P., Campos P., Remohí J. Outcomes of vitrified early cleavage-stage and blastocyst-stage embryos in a cryopreservation program: evaluation of 3,150 warming cycles. Fertil. Steril. 2012; 98 (5): 1138-1146.
  5. Kallen B., Finnstrom O., Nygren K. G., Olausson P. O. In vitro fertilization (IVF) in Sweden: risk for congenital malformations after different IVF methods. Birth Defects Res. A Clin. Mol. Teratol. 2005; 73 (3): 162-169.
  6. Konc J., Kanyo K., Varga E., Kriston R., Cseh S. The effect of cycle regimen used for endometrium preparation on the outcome of day 3 frozen embryo transfer cycle. Fertil. Steril. 2010; 94 (2): 767-678.
  7. Ku P. Y., Lee R. K., Lin S. Y., Lin M. H., Hwu Y. M. Comparison of the clinical outcomes between fresh blastocyst and vitrified-thawed blastocyst transfer. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2012; 29 (12): 1353-1356.
  8. Kuwayama M., Vajta G., Ieda S., Kato O. Comparison of open and closed methods for vitrification of human embryos and the elimination of potential contamination. Reprod. Biomed. Online. 2005; 11 (5): 608-614.
  9. Li H. Z., Qiao J., Chi H. B., Chen X. N., Liu P., Ma C. H. Comparison of the major malformation rate of children conceived from cryopreserved embryos and fresh embryos. Chin. Med. J. 2010; 123 (14): 1893-1897.
  10. Mesut N., Ciray H. N., Mesut A., Aksoy T., Bahceci M. Cryopreservation of blastocysts is the most feasible strategy in good responder patients. Fertil. Steril. 2011; 96 (5): 1121-1125.
  11. Morozov V., Ruman J., Kenigsberg D., Moodie G., Brenner S. Natural cycle cryo-thaw transfer may improve pregnancy outcome. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2007; 24 (4): 119-123.
  12. Nachtigall R. D., Mac Dougall K., Harrington J., Duff J., Lee M., Becker G. How couples who have undergone IVF decide what to do with surplus frozen embryos. Fertil. Steril. 2009; 92 (6): 2094-2096.
  13. Panagiotidis Y., Vanderzwalmen P., Prapas Y., Kasapi E., Goudakou M., Papatheodorou A., Passadaki T., Petousis S., Nikolettos N., Veletza S., Prapas N., Maroulis G. Open versus closed vitrification of blastocysts from an oocyte-donation programme: a prospective randomized study. Reprod. Biomed. Online. 2013; 26 (5): 470-476.
  14. Pelkonen S., Koivunen R., Gissler M., Nuojua-Huttunen S., Suikkari A. M., Hyden-Granskog C., Martikainen H., Tiitinen A., Hartikainen A. L. Perinatal outcome of children born after frozen and fresh embryo transfer: the Finnish cohort study 1995- 2006. Hum. Reprod. 2010; 25 (4): 914-923.
  15. Pinborg A., Loft A., Aaris Henningsen A. K., Rasmussen S., Andersen A. N. Infant outcome of 957 singletons born after frozen embryo replacement: The Danish National Cohort Study 1995-2006. Fertil. Steril. 2010; 94 (4): 1320-1327.
  16. Provoost V., Pennings G., De Sutter P., Gerris J., Van de Velde A., Dhont M. Patients’ conceptualization of cryopreserved embryos used in their fertility treatment. Hum. Repr. 2010; 25 (3): 705-713.
  17. Raju G. A., Prakash G. J., Krishna K. M., Madan K. Vitrification of human early cavitating and deflated expanded blastocysts: clinical outcome of 474 cycles. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2009; 26 (9-10): 523-529.
  18. SART. Assisted reproductive technology in the United States and Canada: 1995 results generated from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Registry. Fertil. Steril. 1998; 69 (3): 389-398.
  19. Sathanandan M., Macnamee M. C., Rainsbury P., Wick K., Brinsden P., Edwards R. G. Replacement of frozen-thawed embryos in artificial and natural cycles: a prospective semi-randomized study. Hum. Reprod. 1991; 6 (5): 685-687.
  20. Sazonova A., Kallen K., Thurin-Kjellberg A., Wennerholm U. B., Bergh C. Obstetric outcome in singletons after in vitro fertilization with cryopreserved/thawed embryos. Hum. Reprod. 2012; 27 (5): 1343-1350.
  21. Shih W., Rushford D. D., Bourne H., Garrett C., McBain J. C., Healy D. L., Baker H. W. Factors affecting low birthweight after assisted reproduction technology: difference between transfer of fresh and cryopreserved embryos suggests an adverse effect of oocyte collection. Hum. Repr. 2008; 23 (7): 1644-1653.
  22. Shi W., Xue X., Zhang S., Zhao W., Liu S., Zhou H., Wang M., Shi J. Perinatal and neonatal outcomes of 494 babies delivered from 972 vitrified embryo transfers. Fertil. Steril. 2012; 97 (6): 1338-1342.
  23. Stehlik E., Stehlik J., Katayama K. P., Kuwayama M., Jambor V., Brohammer R., Kato O. Vitrification demonstrates significant improvement versus slow freezing of human blastocysts. Reprod. Biomed. Online. 2005; 11 (1): P. 53-57.
  24. Takahashi K., Mukaida T., Goto T., Oka C. Perinatal outcome of blastocyst transfer with vitrification, using cryoloop: a 4-year follow-up study. Fertil. Steril. 2005; 84 (1): 88-92.
  25. Tong G. Q., Cao S. R., Wu X., Zhang J. Q., Cui J., Heng B. C., Ling X. F. Clinical outcome of fresh and vitrified-warmed blastocyst and cleavage-stage embryo transfers in ethnic Chinese ART patients. J. Ovarian Res. 2012. Available at: http://www.ovarianresearch.com/content/5/1/27 (accessed 06.03.2012).
  26. Wada I., Macnamee M. C., Wick K., Bradfield J. M., Brinsden P. R. Birth characteristics and perinatal outcome of babies conceived from cryopreserved embryos. Hum. Reprod. 1994; 9 (3): 543-546.
  27. Wikland M., Hardarson T., Hillensjo T., Westin C., Westlander G., Wood M., Wennerholm U. B. Obstetric outcomes after transfer of vitrified blastocysts. Hum. Reprod. 2010; 25 (7): 1699- 1707.
  28. Zhu D., Zhang J., Cao S., Zhang J., Heng B. C., Huang M., Ling X., Duan T., Tong G. Q. Vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer cycles yield higher pregnancy and implantation rates compared with fresh blastocyst transfer cycles - time for a new embryo transfer strategy?. Fertil. Steril. 2011; 95 (5): 1691-1695.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2014 Kravchuk Y.N., Kalugina A.S., Bystrova O.V., Shlykova S.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ № ФС 77 - 66759 от 08.08.2016 г. 
СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия Эл № 77 - 6389 от 15.07.2002 г.