Cumulative live birth rate after two single frozen embryo transfers (eSFET) versus a double frozen embryo transfer (DFET) with cleavage stage embryos: a retrospective cohort study

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

Volumn 31, Issue 12, 2014, Pages 1621-1627

  López Regalado, Ma Luisa ^a,b   Clavero, Ana ^a   Gonzalvo, M Carmen ^a   Serrano, María ^a   Martínez, Luis ^a   Mozas, Juan ^a   Rodríguez Serrano, Fernando ^b   Fontes, Juan ^a   Romero, Bárbara ^a   Castilla, Jose A ^a,c,d  

^a HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO VIRGEN DE LAS NIEVES   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

^c Banco de Semen CEIFER   (Spain)

^d Centro MasVida Reproducción   (Spain)

Author keywords

Cumulative live birth rate; Elective single frozen embryo transfer; Multiple pregnancy rate; Vitrification

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CELL CYCLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DELIVERY; DEVELOPMENTAL STAGE; DOUBLE FROZEN EMBRYO TRANSFER; EMBRYO DEVELOPMENT; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LIVE BIRTH; MULTIPLE PREGNANCY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY RATE; PROGNOSIS; PUBLIC HOSPITAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SINGLE FROZEN EMBRYO TRANSFER; SURVIVAL RATE; VITRIFICATION; BIRTH RATE; CRYOPRESERVATION; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; OOCYTE CLEAVAGE; PHYSIOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

ADULT; BIRTH RATE; CLEAVAGE STAGE, OVUM; COHORT STUDIES; CRYOPRESERVATION; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMANS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY RATE; PREGNANCY, MULTIPLE; SINGLE EMBRYO TRANSFER; VITRIFICATION;

EID: 84914675707     PISSN: 10580468     EISSN: 15737330     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10815-014-0346-5     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Cobo A, Santos MJ D l, Castellò D, Gámiz 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;98:1138–46.
2. Liu SY, Teng B, Fu J, Li X, Zheng Y, Sun XX. Obstetric and neonatal outcomes after transfer of vitrified early cleavage embryos. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:2093–100.
3. Absalan F, Ghannadi A, Kazerooni M. Reproductive outcome following thawed embryo transfer in management of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. J Reprod Infertil. 2013;14:133–7.
4. Decleer W, Osmanagaoglu K, Meganck G, Devroey P. Slightly lower incidence of ectopic pregnancies in frozen embryo transfer cycles versus fresh in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles: a retrospective cohort study. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:163–5.
5. Prados F, De los Santos MJ, Cabello Y, Buxaderas R, Segura A, Hernández J, et al. [Internet] Registro de la Sociedad Española de Fertilidad: Tecnicas de reproducción asistida (IA y FIV/ICSI). Año2.010. Available at: https://www.registrosef.com/public/Docs/sef2010_IAFIV.pdf
6. Ferraretti AP, Goossens V, Kupka M, Bhattacharya S, de Mouzon J, Castilla JA, et al. The european ivf-monitoring (EIM) Consortium, for The european society of human reproduction and embryology (ESHRE). Hum Reprod. 2013;28:2318–31.
7. Mc Lernon DJ, Harrild K, Bergh C, Davies MJ, de Neubourg D, Dumoilin JCM, et al. Clinical effectiveness of elective single versus double embryo transfer: meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised trials. BMJ. 2010:341.
8. Pandian Z, Bhattacharya S, Ozturk O, Serour G, Templeton A. Number of embryos for transfer following in-vitro fertilization or intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection. 2013;7. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.
9. Martikainen H, Tiitinen A, Tomás C, Tapanainen J, Orava M, Tuomivaara L, et al. One versus two embryo transfer after IVF and ICSI: a randomized study. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:1900–3.
10. Rodríguez DB, Tur R, Mancini F, Parriego M, Rodríguez I, Barri PN, et al. Elective single embryo transfer and cumulative pregnancy rate: five-year experience in a Southern European Country. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2012;28:425–28.
11. Ardoy M, Calderón G, Cuadros J, Figueroa MJ, Herrer R, Moreno JM et al. II Criterios ASEBIR de valoración morfológica de oocitos, embriones tempranos y blastocistos humanos. 2ª Ed. Madrid: Asocicación para el Estudio de la Biología de la Reproducción (ASEBIR); 2008.
12. Ishihara O, Araki R, Kuwahara A, Itakura A, Saito H, Adamson D. Impact of frozen-thawed single-blastocyst transfer on maternal and neonatal outcome: an analysis of 277,042 single-embryo transfer cycles from 2008 to 2010 in Japan. Fertil Steril. 2013;101:128–33.
13. Roberts SA, Fitzgerald CT, Brison D. Modelling the impact of single embryo transfer in a national health service IVF programme. Hum Reprod. 2011;24:122–31.
14. American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Elective single embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:835–42.
15. Rama GA, Haranath GB, Krishna KM, Prakash GJ, Madan K. Vitrification of human 8-cell embryos, a modified protocol for better pregnancy rates. Reprod BioMed Online. 2005;11:434–37.
16. Li Y, Chen ZJ, Yang HJ, Zhong WX, Ma SY, Li M. Comparison of vitrification and slow-freezing of human day 3 cleavage stage embryos: post-vitrification development and pregnancy outcomes. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2007;42:753–55.
17. Wang XL, Zhang X, Qin YQ, Hao DY, Shi HR. Outcomes of day 3 embryo transfer with vitrification using Cryoleaf: a 3-year follow-up study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012;29:883–9.
18. Zhang XJ, Yang YZ, Lv Q, Wang Y, Cao XH, Guo C, et al. The impact of two different thaw protocols on outcomes of vitrified cleavage-stage embryos transfer. CryoLetters. 2012;33:411–7.
19. Desai N, Blackmon H, Szeptycki J, Goldfarb J. Cryoloop vitrification of human day 3 cleavage-stage embryos: post-vitrification development, pregnancy outcomes and live births. Reprod BioMed Online. 2007;14:208–13.
20. Mackenna A, Crosby J, Zegers-Hochschild F. Sibling embryo blastocyst development as a prognostic factor for the outcome of day-3 embryo transfer. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;26:486–90.
21. Hydén-Granskog C, Unkila-Kallio L, Halttunen M, Tiitinen A. Single embryo transfer is an option in frozen embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:2935–38.
22. Kumasako Y, Otsu E, Utsunomiya T, Araki Y. The efficacy of the transfer of twice frozen-thawed embryos with the vitrification method. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:383–6.
23. Taylor TH, Patrick JL, Gitlin SA, Michael Wilson J, Crain JL, Griffin DK. Outcomes of blastocysts biopsied and vitrified once versus those cryopreserved twice for euploid blastocyst transfer. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;29:59–64.
24. Koch J, Costello M, Chapman M, Kilani S. Twice-frozen embryos are no detriment to pregnancy success: a retrospective comparative study. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:58–62.
25. Murakami M, Egashira A, Murakami K, Araki Y, Kuramoto T. Perinatal outcome of twice-frozen-thawed embryo transfers: a clnical follow-up study. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:2648–50.
26. Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, Restrepo H, Garner FC, Aguirre M, Hudson C. Matched-cohort comparison of single-embryo transfers in fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:389–92.
27. Roy T, Bradley C, Bowman M, McArthur S. Single-embryo transfer of vitrified-warmed blastocysts yields equivalent live-birth rates and improved neonatal outcomes compared with fresh transfers. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:1294–301.
28. Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, Garner FC, Aguirre M, Hudson C. Clinical rationale for cryopreservation of entire embryo cohorts in lieu of fresh transfer. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:3–9.
29. De Sutter P, Gerris J, Dhont M. A health-economic decision-analytic model comparing double with single embryo transfer in IVF/ICSI. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:2891–96.
30. Gerris J, De Sutter P, De Neubourg D, Va Royen E, Vander J, Mangelschots K, et al. A real-life prospective health economic study of elective single embryo transfer versus two-embryo transfer in first IVF/ICSI cycles. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:917–23.
31. Fiddelers A, Van Montfoort A, Dirksen C, Dumoulin J, Land J, Dunselman G, et al. Single versus double embryo transfer: cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomized clinical trial. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:2090–97.
32. Fiddelers A, Severens J, Dirksen C, Dumoulin J, Land J, Evers J. Economic evaluations of single versus double-embryo transfer in IVF. Hum Reprod. 2007;13:5–13.
33. Dixon S, Faghih Nasiri F, Ledger W, Lenton E, Duenas A, Dutcliffe P, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of different embryo transfer strategies in England. BJOG. 2008;115:758–66.
34. Guía de reproducción humana asistida en el Sistema Sanitario Público de Andalucía. Sevilla: Consejería de Igualdad, Salud y Políticas sociales de Andalucía, 2013 [Access December 23. 2013]. Electronic text (pdf), 92 p. Available at: www.juntadeandalucia.es/servicioandaluzdesalud.