Fresh or Frozen Embryo Transfer in The Antagonist In Vitro Fertilization Cycles: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences, Sanandaj, Iran

2 Liver and Digestive Research Center, Research Institute for Health Development, Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences, Sanandaj, Iran

3 Department of Anatomical Sciences, School of Medicine, Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences, Sanandaj, Iran

Abstract

Background: Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant), widely adopted protocol, is more in line with the physiological processes, and induces a shorter and more cost-effective ovarian stimulation. In order to assess the success rate of embryo transferring (ET) in the antagonist in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles, we compared the fresh ET with the frozen ET outcomes.
Materials and Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, one hundred five cases of ET of the infertility clinic of the Besat hospital (Kurdistan, Iran) between March 2014 to March 2020 that were treated with antagonist cycle (both fresh and frozen) were analyzed. The difference between the two groups in baseline data and reproductive outcomes were evaluated using Independent sample t test, Mann-Whitney U test, Chi-squared test, and Fisher's exact test in SPSS software (version 22).
Results: Out of 105 cases, 48 and 57 were in the fresh and frozen ET groups, respectively. The participants age was 35.75 ± 4.9 Y. In the fresh ET group, and 33.98 ± 5.1 Y in the frozen ET group. The percentage of chemical pregnancy was 12 (25%) in the fresh ET group and 15 (26.3%) in the frozen ET group (P=0.8); Clinical pregnancy rate was 11 (22.9%) in the fresh ET group and 11 (19.3%) in the frozen ET group (P=0.6); the rate of abortion in the fresh ET group was 3 (6.3%, P=0.2), and in the frozen ET group was 8 (14%, P=0.2); and the live birth rate was 9 (18.8%) in the fresh ET group, in comparison with 7 (12.3%) in the frozen ET group (P=0.3).
Conclusion: Not statistically significant, the percentage of chemical pregnancy and abortion were higher in the frozen ET group. The percentage of clinical pregnancy and live birth were higher in the fresh ET group.

Keywords

References

1. Carson SA, Kallen AN. Diagnosis and management of infertility: a Review. JAMA. 2021; 326(1): 65-76.
2. Vander Borght M, Wyns C. Fertility and infertility: definition and epidemiology. Clin Biochem. 2018; 62: 2-10.
3. Mascarenhas MN, Flaxman SR, Boerma T, Vanderpoel S, Stevens GA. National, regional, and global trends in infertility prevalence since 1990: a systematic analysis of 277 health surveys. PLoS Med. 2012; 9(12): e1001356.
4. Glujovsky D, Pesce R, Sueldo C, Quinteiro Retamar AM, Hart RJ, 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.
5. Wasilewski T, Łukaszewicz-Zając M, Wasilewska J, Mroczko B. Biochemistry of infertility. Clinica Chimica Acta. 2020; 508: 185-190.
6. Fauser BC, Diedrich K, Devroey P. Predictors of ovarian response: progress towards individualized treatment in ovulation induction and ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod Update. 2008; 14(1): 1-14.
7. Roque M, Valle M, Guimarães F, Sampaio M, Geber S. Freeze-all cycle for all normal responders? J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017; 34(2): 179-185.
8. Gerber RS, Fazzari M, Kappy M, Cohen A, Galperin S, Lieman H, et al. Differential impact of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation on live birth rate in fresh versus frozen embryo transfer cycles: a Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome System study. Fertil Steril. 2020; 114(6): 1225-1231.
9. Kliman HJ, Frankfurter D. Clinical approach to recurrent implantation failure: evidence-based evaluation of the endometrium. Fertil Steril. 2019; 111(4): 618-628.
10. Zhao Y, He D, Zeng H, Luo J, Yang S, Chen J, et al. Expression and significance of miR-30d-5p and SOCS1 in patients with recurrent implantation failure during implantation window. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2021; 19(1): 138.
11. Zhang D, Han M, Zhou M, Liu M, Li Y, Xu B, et al. Down-regulation of S100P induces apoptosis in endometrial epithelial cell during GnRH antagonist protocol. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2021; 19(1): 99.
12. Yeh JS, Steward RG, Dude AM, Shah AA, Goldfarb JM, Muasher SJ. Pregnancy rates in donor oocyte cycles compared to similar autologous in vitro fertilization cycles: an analysis of 26,457 fresh cycles from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Fertil Steril. 2014; 102(2): 399-404.
13. Orvieto R, Meltzer S, Rabinson J, Zohav E, Anteby EY, Nahum R. GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist in ovarian stimulation: the role of endometrial receptivity. Fertil Steril. 2008; 90(4): 1294-1296.
14. Chan JM, Sukumar AI, Ramalingam M, Ranbir Singh SS, Abdullah MF. The impact of endometrial thickness (EMT) on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration on pregnancy outcomes: a 5-year retrospective cohort analysis in Malaysia. Fertil Res Pract. 2018; 4: 5.
15. Basir GS, O WS, So WW, Ng EH, Ho PC. Evaluation of cycle-to-cycle variation of endometrial responsiveness using transvaginal sonography in women undergoing assisted reproduction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 19(5): 484-489.
16. Dessolle L, Daraï E, Cornet D, Rouzier R, Coutant C, Mandelbaum J, et al. Determinants of pregnancy rate in the donor oocyte model: a multivariate analysis of 450 frozen-thawed embryo transfers. Hum Reprod. 2009; 24(12): 3082-3089.
17. Yang J, Zhang X, Ding X, Wang Y, Huang G, Ye H. Cumulative live birth rates between GnRH-agonist long and GnRH-antagonist protocol in one ART cycle when all embryos transferred: real-word data of 18,853 women from China. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2021; 19(1): 124.
18. Pereira N, Neri QV, Lekovich JP, Palermo GD, Rosenwaks Z. The role of in-vivo and in-vitro maturation time on ooplasmic dysmaturity. Reprod Biomed Online. 2016; 32(4): 401-406.
19. Yang M, Lin L, Sha C, Li T, Gao W, Chen L, et al. Which is better for mothers and babies: fresh or frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer? BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020; 20: 559.
20. Luo X, Pei L, Li F, Li C, Huang G, Ye H. Fixed versus flexible antagonist protocol in women with predicted high ovarian response except PCOS: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021; 21(1): 348.
21. Xia M, Zheng J. Comparison of clinical outcomes between the depot gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist protocol and gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in normal ovarian responders. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021; 21(1): 372.
22. Depalo R, Jayakrishan K, Garruti G, Totaro I, Panzarino M, Giorgino F, et al. GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist in in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF/ET). Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2012; 10: 26.
23. Liu Y, Su R, Wu Y. Cumulative live birth rate and cost-effectiveness analysis of gonadotropin releasing hormone-antagonist protocol and multiple minimal ovarian stimulation in poor responders. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2020; 11: 605939.
24. Halvaei I, Khalili MA, Esfandiari N, Safari S, Talebi AR, Miglietta S, et al. Ultrastructure of cytoplasmic fragments in human cleavage stage embryos. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016; 33(12): 1677-1684.
25. Nasiri N, Eftekhari-Yazdi P. An overview of the available methods for morphological scoring of pre-implantation embryos in in vitro fertilization. Cell J. 2015; 16(4): 392-405.
26. Wang R, Lin S, Wang Y, Qian W, Zhou L. Comparisons of GnRH antagonist protocol versus GnRH agonist long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2017; 12(4): e0175985.
27. Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, Garner FC, Aguirre M, Hudson C, Thomas S. 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): 344-348.
28. Shah MS, Caballes M, Lathi RB, Baker VL, Westphal LM, Milki AA. In vitro fertilization outcomes after fresh and frozen blastocyst transfer in South Asian compared with Caucasian women. Fertil Steril. 2016; 105(6): 1484-1487.
29. Roque M, Valle M, Sampaio M, Geber S. Obstetric outcomes after fresh versus frozen-thawed embryo transfers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JBRA Assist Reprod. 2018; 22(3): 253-260.
30. Roque M, Lattes K, Serra S, Solà I, Geber S, Carreras R, et al. Fresh embryo transfer versus frozen embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2013; 99(1): 156-162.
31. Ding X, Yang J, Li L, Yang N, Lan L, Huang G, et al. Fertility outcomes in women after controlled ovarian stimulation with gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist long protocol: fresh versus frozen embryo transfer. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021; 21(1): 207.
32. Dieamant FC, Petersen CG, Mauri AL, Comar V, Mattila M, Vagnini LD, et al. Fresh embryos versus freeze-all embryos - transfer strategies: nuances of a meta-analysis. JBRA Assist Reprod. 2017; 21(3): 260-272.
33. Basirat Z, Adib Rad H, Esmailzadeh S, Jorsaraei SG, Hajian-Tilaki K, Pasha H, et al. Comparison of pregnancy rate between fresh embryo transfers and frozen-thawed embryo transfers following ICSI treatment. Int J Reprod Biomed. 2016; 14(1): 39-46.
34. Seyedoshohadaei F, Rezaei M, Allahveisi A, Rahmani K, Amirkhani Z. Effect of fresh and frozen embryo transfer method on fertility success in assisted reproduction: a comparative study. J Postgrad Med Inst. 2019; 33(2).
35. Roque M, Valle M, Guimarães F, Sampaio M, Geber S. Freeze-all policy: fresh vs. frozen-thawed embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2015; 103(5): 1190-1193.
36. Liu X, Bai H, Shi W, Shi J. Frozen-thawed embryo transfer is better than fresh embryo transfer in GnRH antagonist cycle in women with 3-10 oocytes retrieved: a retrospective cohort study. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019; 300(6): 1791-1796.
37. Zhu L, Zhang Y, Liu Y, Zhang R, Wu Y, Huang Y, et al. Maternal and live-birth outcomes of pregnancies following assisted reproductive technology: a retrospective cohort study. Sci Rep. 2016; 6: 35141.
38. Karlström PO, Bergh C. Reducing the number of embryos transferred in Sweden-impact on delivery and multiple birth rates. Hum Reprod. 2007; 22(8): 2202-2207.
39. Stormlund S, Sopa N, Zedeler A, Bogstad J, Prætorius L, Nielsen HS, et al. Freeze-all versus fresh blastocyst transfer strategy during in vitro fertilisation in women with regular menstrual cycles: multicentre randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2020; 370.
40. Ashrafi M, Jahangiri N, Hassani F, Akhoond MR, Madani T. The factors affecting the outcome of frozen–thawed embryo transfer cycle. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 50(2): 159-164.
International Journal of Fertility and Sterility
Volume 16, Issue 4
October 2022
Pages 256-262

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics