Search

To investigate whether endometrial thickness (ET) independently affects the live birth rate (LBR) after embryo transfer. Retrospective study. Private assisted reproductive technology center. A total of 959 single euploid frozen embryo transfers. Vitrified euploid blastocyst transfer. Live birth rate per embryo transfer. The conditional density plots did not demonstrate either a linear relationship between the ET and LBR or a threshold below which the LBR decreased perceivably. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses did not suggest a predictive value of the ET for the LBR. The area under the curve values were 0.55, 0.54, and 0.54 in the overall, programmed, and natural cycle transfers, respectively. Logistic regression analyses with age, embryo quality, day of trophectoderm biopsy, body mass index, and ET did not suggest an independent effect of the ET on the LBR. We did not identify a threshold of the ET that either precluded live birth or under which the LBR decreases perceivably. Common practice of cancelling embryo transfers when the ET is <7 mm may not be justified. Prospective studies, in which the management of the transfer cycle would not be altered by ET, would provide higher-quality evidence on the subject. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2020, SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 pandemic had a huge impact on the access to and provision of ART treatments. Gradually, knowledge of the virus and its transmission has become available, allowing ART activities to resume. Still, questions on the impact of the virus on human gametes and fertility remain.Objective and Rationale: This article summarizes published data, aiming to clarify the impact of SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 disease on human fertility and assisted reproduction, as well as the impact of vaccination, and from this, provide answers to questions that are relevant for people contemplating pregnancy and for health care professionals.Search Methods: PUBMED/MEDLINE and the WHO COVID-19 database were searched from inception to 5 October 2022 with search terms focusing on 'SARS-CoV-2' and gametes, embryos, reproductive function, fertility and ART. Non-English studies and papers published prior to 2020 were excluded, as well as reviews and non-peer reviewed publications. Full papers were assessed for relevance and quality, where feasible.Outcomes: From the 148 papers included, the following observations were made. The SARS-CoV-2-binding proteins, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and type II transmembrane serine protease (TMPRSS2), are expressed in the testis, but co-expression remains to be proven. There is some evidence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the ejaculate of COVID-19 patients with severe disease, but not in those with mild/moderate disease. SARS-CoV-2 infection can impair spermatogenesis, but this seems to resolve after one spermatogenic cycle. Testosterone levels seem to be lower during and after COVID-19, but long-term data are lacking; disease severity may be associated with testosterone levels. COVID-19 cannot be considered a sexually transmitted disease. There is no co-expression of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 in the myometrium, uterus, ovaries or fallopian tubes. Oocytes seem to have the receptors and protease machinery to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection; however, viral RNA in oocytes has not been detected so far. Women contemplating pregnancy following COVID-19 may benefit from screening for thyroid dysfunction. There is a possible (transient) impact of COVID-19 on menstrual patterns. Embryos, and particularly late blastocysts, seem to have the machinery to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most studies have not reported a significant impact of COVID-19 on ovarian reserve, ovarian function or follicular fluid parameters. Previous asymptomatic or mild SARS-CoV-2 infection in females does not seem to negatively affect laboratory and clinical outcomes of ART. There are no data on the minimum required interval, if any, between COVID-19 recovery and ART. There is no evidence of a negative effect of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on semen parameters or spermatogenesis, ovarian function, ovarian reserve or folliculogenesis. A transient effect on the menstrual cycle has been documented. Despite concerns, cross reactivity between anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies and Syncytin-1, an essential protein in human implantation, is absent. There is no influence of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine on patients' performance during their immediate subsequent ART cycle. Pregnancy rates post-vaccination are similar to those in unvaccinated patients.Wider Implications: This review highlights existing knowledge on the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 on fertility and assisted reproduction, but also identifies gaps and offers suggestions for future research. The knowledge presented should help to provide evidence-based advice for practitioners and couples contemplating pregnancy alike, facilitating informed decision-making in an environment of significant emotional turmoil. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How endometriosis causes infertility, with the exception of tubal dysfunction caused by adhesions, is unclear. The inflammatory milieu in the pelvis and impaired receptivity of the eutopic endometrium are considered to be possible factors. Anatomical staging systems fail to predict the fertility status of endometriosis patients. Data from assisted reproductive technology cycles consistently suggest that oocytes from patients with endometriosis have a normal potential to develop into euploid blastocysts. Moreover, oocyte or embryo recipients with endometriosis seem to have similar or slightly lower pregnancy and live birth rates compared with recipients without endometriosis, suggesting that eutopic endometrium is not or is only minimally affected, which may be caused by undiagnosed adenomyosis. In-vivo observations from women with endometriomas provide evidence against a detrimental effect of endometriomas on oocytes. Combined with the absence of an obvious improvement in fertility following the surgical destruction or excision of peritoneal endometriosis or from temporary medical suppression of the disease and the associated inflammation, the available evidence makes endometriosis-associated infertility questionable in the absence of tubal dysfunction caused by adhesions. It is likely that no anatomical staging will correlate with fertility beyond assessing tubal function. In patients with endometriosis assisted reproductive technology is as effective as for other indications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) is being increasingly used for ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technology. Different progestins have been used with similar success. The available studies suggest a similar response to ovarian stimulation with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues. Any differences in the duration of stimulation or gonadotrophin consumption are minor and clinically insignificant. PPOS has the advantage of oral administration and lower medication costs than GnRH analogues. As such it is clearly more cost-effective for fertility preservation and planned freeze-all cycles, but when fresh embryo transfer is intended PPOS can be less cost-effective depending on the local direct and indirect costs of the additional initial frozen embryo transfer cycle. Oocytes collected in PPOS cycles have similar developmental potential, including blastocyst euploidy rates. Frozen embryo transfer outcomes of PPOS and GnRH analogue cycles seem to be similar in terms of both ongoing pregnancy/live birth rates and obstetric and perinatal outcomes. While some studies have reported lower cumulative live birth rates with PPOS, they have methodological issues, including arbitrary definitions of the cumulative live birth rate. PPOS has been used in all patient types (except progesterone receptor-positive breast cancer patients) with consistent results and seems a patient friendly and cost-effective choice if a fresh embryo transfer is not intended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Question: What is the impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection on the outcome of a pregnancy after medically assisted reproduction (MAR)?Summary Answer: Our results suggest that MAR pregnancies are not differentially affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to spontaneous pregnancies.What Is Known Already: Information on the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on pregnancy after MAR is scarce when women get infected during MAR or early pregnancy, even though such information is vital for informing women seeking pregnancy.Study Design, Size, Duration: Data from SARS-CoV-2 affected MAR pregnancies were collected between May 2020 and June 2021 through a voluntary data collection, organised by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE).Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: All ESHRE members were invited to participate to an online data collection for SARS-CoV-2-infected MAR pregnancies.Main Results and the Role Of Chance: The dataset includes 80 cases from 32 countries, including 67 live births, 10 miscarriages, 2 stillbirths and 1 maternal death. An additional 25pregnancies were ongoing at the time of writing.Limitations, Reasons For Caution: An international data registry based on voluntary contribution can be subject to selective reporting with possible risks of over- or under-estimation.Wider Implications Of the Findings: The current data can be used to guide clinical decisions in the care of women pregnant after MAR, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.Study Funding/competing Interest(s): The authors acknowledge the support of ESHRE for the data registry and meetings. J.S.T. reports grants or contracts from Sigrid Juselius Foundation, EU and Helsinki University Hospital Funds, outside the scope of the current work. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.Trial Registration Number: N/A. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology is traditionally started in the early follicular phase. The essential rationale is to allow timely follicle growth and oocyte retrieval to ensure synchronization of the in-vitro cultured embryos with the receptive period of the endometrium in a fresh transfer cycle. In addition, conventional thought suggested that follicle recruitment happened only once, around menstruation. A deeper understanding of folliculogenesis, advances in cryobiology and an increasing proportion of freeze-all cycles provide a unique opportunity here. Experience from oncofertility patients as well as infertile women and oocyte donors who underwent ovarian stimulation in different phases of the menstrual cycle, dubbed 'random start' cycles, suggests that the number of oocytes collected and their reproductive potential do not depend on the time of starting ovarian stimulation, although the duration of stimulation and gonadotrophin consumption can vary slightly. It may be time to free both patients and clinics from the obsession with starting ovarian stimulation in the early follicular phase in planned freeze-all cycles. The flexibility provided by random start cycles is one aspect of individualizing treatment to patients' needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Question: Are live birth rates (LBR) different after ART cycles between women with primary or recurrent endometrioma?Summary Answer: Women with recurrent endometrioma have similar LBR as compared to patients with primary endometrioma.What Is Already Known: Recurrence rate can be as high as 29% after endometrioma excision. Prior studies on management of endometrioma before ART involve primary endometriomas. There is limited information regarding the prognosis of women with recurrent endometriomas.Study Design, Size, Duration: A multicenter retrospective cohort study, including 76 women with primary and 82 women with recurrent endometriomas treated at the participating centers over a 6-year period.Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: Women with endometrioma who underwent ART at three academic ART centers. Couples with another indication for ART were excluded.Main Results and the Role Of Chance: Female age, median number of prior failed ART cycles, proportion of patients with bilateral endometrioma (28 versus 28.9%), ovarian stimulation protocols, and total gonadotropin consumption were similar between the study groups. Numbers of metaphase two oocytes (5 versus 6), number of embryos transferred, and the proportion of patients undergoing blastocyst transfer were similar across the study groups. Clinical pregnancy rates (36.6 versus 34.2%, absolute difference 2.4%, 95% CI: -12.5 to 17.3%, P = 0.83) and LBR (35.4 versus 30.3%, absolute difference 5.1%, 95% CI: -9.5 to 19.7%, P = 0.51) per started cycle in recurrent and primary endometrioma were similar. Comparable success rates were also confirmed with logistic regression analysis (OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.78-0.57, P = 2.3).Limitations, Reasons For Caution: The retrospective design has inherent limitations. Some women with severely decreased ovarian reserve after primary endometrioma excision may not have pursued further treatment.Wider Implications Of the Findings: The management of endometrioma prior to ART is controversial but a different management strategy is not required for recurrent endometriomas. Since recurrent endometriomas do not have a worse impact on ART outcome than primary endometriomas, and repeat surgery has a higher risk for complications, conservative management without surgery can be justified.Study Funding/competing Interest(s): No funding or competing interests to declare.Trial Registration Number: None. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The aim of this study is to provide an overview of the studies investigating a possible association between thrombophilia and assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcome. Methods: This is a literature review. Results: Congenital thrombophilias (CoT) are reported to be associated with pregnancy loss. However, the association between CoT and early pregnancy loss is weak and does not necessarily support causation. CoT are more likely to be associated with late fetal loss. Even though data pooled from case-control and cohort studies suggest an increased risk of ART failure in women with CoTs, there seems no association when the analysis is confined to better quality cohort studies. The evidence supporting anticoagulation to improve ART outcome in CoT carriers is weak. Likewise, studies on antiphospholipid antibodies (APAs) and ART outcome suffer from multiple methodological limitations and a detrimental impact of APA positivity is controversial. Empirical administration of heparin or low molecular weight heparin to women with recurrent ART failures is supported by weak evidence. Importantly, thrombophilias are likely to increase thrombotic complications after ovarian stimulation for ART. Conclusions: Current evidence does not support routinely testing for or treatment of thrombophilia in the setting of ART nor in couples with implantation failure. A careful personal and family history should be obtained and a risk assessment for thrombotic complications should be made in every woman undergoing ovarian stimulation. If positive, testing for thrombophilia is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the context of assisted reproduction, the term ovarian aging is often used to refer to declining potential of ovaries to produce oocytes in adequate number or quality in response to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS). Different aspects of COS have been modified with the intention to increase the number and quality of oocytes obtained for in vitro fertilization. In the setting of ovarian aging, suppression of the luteinizing hormone (LH) surge with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist or short GnRH agonist protocol and stimulation with a daily gonadotropin dosage of ≤300 IU/day seem to be appropriate first choices, and there is a strong need for well-designed randomized controlled trials investigating effects of addition of LH activity, estradiol priming, transdermal testosterone administration, and growth hormone supplementation. Given the lack of high-quality evidence showing effectiveness of one approach over another, other factors such as duration of stimulation, total gonadotropin consumption and cost of medication, patient friendliness, and possible side effect profiles must be considered in tailoring the COS protocol according to each individual's needs and desires. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• The current study represents the first large-scale investigation providing significant data on the feasibility and reliability of the hypo-osmotic swelling test (sperm viability test) on sibling oocytes across different sperm origins (ejaculated/testicular) and processing methods (fresh/frozen-thawed) in the context of assisted reproductive technology. • Hypo-osmotic swelling test is more reliable in fresh samples than in those subjected to the freeze–thaw process. • Hypo-osmotic swelling test is not effective in predicting viability in frozen-thawed specimens, regardless of sperm origin. • Hypo-osmotic swelling is considered a safe method for selecting viable sperm in all subgroups. The viability of sperm is a crucial factor for achieving a successful pregnancy in intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the hypo-osmotic swelling test (HOST) in fresh and frozen-thawed sperm samples of different origins (ejaculated/testicular). A retrospective analysis was conducted on the outcomes of 2167 oocytes subjected to ICSI using motile and immotile-HOST-positive sperm from 2011 to 2023. We evaluated embryonic development, as well as clinical, obstetric, and neonatal outcomes in four groups based on different sperm origins (ejaculated/testicular) and processing (fresh/frozen). When comparing the results of ICSI between motile and immotile-HOST-positive sperm within each group, it was observed that there were no significant differences in the outcomes for fresh samples. However, for frozen-thawed samples, fertilization rates and blastocyst development rates were significantly lower when ICSI was performed with immotile-HOST-positive sperm compared to motile sperm. Of note, clinical, obstetric, and neonatal outcomes were statistically similar across all groups. Our findings indicate that HOST is more reliable in fresh samples than in those subjected to the freeze–thaw process. Nonetheless, HOST is considered a safe method for selecting viable sperm in all subgroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Progestins are capable of suppressing endogenous luteinizing hormone (LH) secretion from the pituitary; are less expensive than GnRH analogues. This systematic review summarizes the effectiveness of progestins as compared with GnRH analogues and identifies some of the future research perspectives. Several public resources were screened with a combination of keywords related to assisted reproductive technology, progesterone, GnRH analogue and ovarian stimulation. Overall, duration of stimulation, gonadotropin consumption and oocyte yield were similar with progestins and GnRH analogues. The live birth, ongoing and clinical pregnancy rates per embryo transfer were similar with progestins and GnRH analogues. There is still a low quality of evidence. Available information is reassuring regarding obstetric and neonatal outcomes with the use of progestins. As a wider implication, progestins can present an effective option for women who do not contemplate a fresh embryo transfer, anticipated hyper responders, preimplantation genetic testing, oocyte donors, double stimulation cycles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created a significant impact on medically assisted reproduction (MAR) services. ESHRE decided to mobilize resources in order to collect, analyse, monitor, prepare and disseminate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) knowledge specifically related to ART and early pregnancy. This article presents the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic focusing on reproductive healthcare. It details the rationale behind the guidance prepared to support MAR services in organizing and managing the re-start of treatments or in case of any future wave of COVID-19 disease. The guidance includes information on patient selection and informed consent, staff and patient triage and testing, adaptation of ART services, treatment planning and code of conduct. The initiatives detailed in this article are not necessarily COVID-specific and such action plans could be applied effectively to manage similar emergency situations in different areas of medicine, in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To date, recurrent implantation failure (RIF) has no clear definition and no clearly identified impaired function. Hence, the term RIF is currently used somewhat haphazardly, on the basis of clinicians' judgment. International experts in reproductive medicine met on July 1, 2022, in Lugano, Switzerland, to review the different facets of RIF and define the diagnosis and its appropriate management. A systematic review without meta-analysis of studies published in English from January 2015 to May 2022. Data indicated that RIF has been largely overevaluated, overdiagnosed, and overtreated without sufficient critical assessment of its true nature. Our analyses show that true RIF is extremely uncommon—occurring in <5% of couples with infertility—and that reassurance and continued conventional therapies are warranted in most cases of assisted reproductive technology (ART) failure. Although the true biologic determinants of RIF may exist in a small subset of people with infertility, they elude the currently available tools for assessment. Without identification of the true underlying etiology(ies), it is reasonable not to assign this diagnosis to a patient until she has failed at least 3 euploid blastocyst transfers (or the equivalent number of unscreened embryo transfers, adjusted to the patient's age and corresponding euploidy rate). In addition, other factors should be ruled out that may contribute to her reduced odds of sustained implantation. In such cases, implantation failure should not be the only issue considered in case of ART failure because this may result from multiple other factors that are not necessarily repetitive or persistent. In reality, RIF impacting the probability of further ART success is a very rare occurrence. True RIF is extremely uncommon, occurring in <5% of couples with infertility. Reassurance and continued conventional therapies are warranted in most cases. It would seem reasonable not to assign this diagnosis to a patient until she has failed at least 3 euploid embryo transfers (or the equivalent number of unscreened embryos, adjusted to her age). Given the number of internationally recognized experts in the field present at the Lugano meeting 2022, our publication constitutes a consensus statement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the predictive value of endometrial thickness (EMT) for live birth when a lower threshold of EMT is not employed for embryo transfer (ET).Design: Retrospective study SETTING: Academic assisted reproduction center PATIENT(S): All women who underwent fresh or frozen-thawed ET at the Koç University Hospital Assisted Reproduction Unit between October 2016 and August 2019 INTERVENTION(S): After ruling out endometrial pathology, blastocyst transfer was planned regardless of the EMT in the absence of increased serum progesterone level on the trigger day in fresh embryo transfer cycles or before commencing progesterone treatment in artificially prepared frozen-thawed ET cycles.Main Outcome Measure(s): The primary outcome was live birth. Live birth and miscarriage rates per ET were stratified according to fresh and frozen-thawed ET cycles for each millimeter of endometrial thickness. Receiver operator characteristic curve analyses were performed to evaluate the predictive value of EMT for live birth.Result(s): A total of 560 ET cycles, 273 fresh and 287 frozen-thawed, were included in the study. Relevant patient characteristics as well as EMTs were similar between women who achieved a live birth and those who did not after fresh or frozen-thawed ET. There was no linear association between EMT and live birth or miscarriage rates. Area under the curve values for EMT to predict live birth after fresh, frozen-thawed, and all ETs were 0.56, 0.47, and 0.52, respectively.Conclusion(s): Our results showed that the EMT was not predictive for live birth in either fresh or frozen-thawed ET cycles. Once intracavitary pathology and inadvertent progesterone exposure were excluded, women with thinner EMTs should not be denied their potential for live birth because it is comparable to that of those with thicker EMT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies investigated whether progestins are as effective as gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues for pituitary suppression in assisted reproduction. The primary outcome was live birth rate per woman. Secondary outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy per woman and per embryo transfer, ongoing pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, numbers of oocytes and metaphase-two oocytes, duration of stimulation and gonadotrophin consumption. Adverse events included miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy and multiple pregnancy rates. The GRADE system was used to assess the quality of evidence. Seven studies involving a total of 2047 women were included. Three studies compared a progestin with a GnRH antagonist and four studies compared a progestin with a GnRH agonist. Most studies are non-randomized and report outcomes per embryo transfer, rather than per woman. Although progestins were similar to GnRH antagonists in effectiveness and safety parameters, they were associated with significantly higher live birth or ongoing pregnancy per embryo transfer compared with the short GnRH agonist protocol (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.91). Progestin primed stimulation lasted significantly longer (mean difference 0.61 days, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.89) and required significantly more gonadotrophins (mean difference 433.2 IU, 95% CI 311.11 to 555.19) than the short GnRH agonist protocol, but the differences were clinically negligible. Safety parameters were similar between progestins and GnRH agonists. In conclusion, progestins can effectively prevent premature ovulation in assisted reproductive technology cycles. If larger and well-designed studies confirm these findings, progestins may be an effective and low-cost alternative to GnRH analogues when a fresh embryo transfer is not planned owing to a medical indication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine whether a flexible progestin primed ovarian stimulation (fPPOS) protocol is effective for preventing premature ovulation.Design: Retrospective cohort study.Setting: Private assisted reproduction center.Patient(s): Eighty-seven oocyte donors and 191 recipients of fresh oocytes.Intervention(s): Each donor was stimulated with a flexible gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol in one cycle and with the new fPPOS protocol in the other, within a period of 6 months. FSH was started on cycle day 2-3, and 0.25 mg/day GnRH antagonist or 10 mg/day medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) was started on stimulation day 7 or when the leading follicle reached 14 mm, whichever came first.Main Outcome Measure(s): Duration of stimulation, gonadotropin consumption, duration of GnRH antagonist or MPA administration, number of metaphase II oocytes, and pregnancy rates in fresh oocyte recipients.Results: Duration of stimulation was 11 (10-11) days in both groups. Total gonadotropin consumption was similar. Pituitary suppression was started on day 7 and lasted for 5 days in each group. There were no premature ovulations in any group. The fPPOS yielded a significantly higher number of cumulus oocyte complexes than GnRH antagonist cycles (33 [21-39] vs. 26 [18-36], respectively). Likewise, the fPPOS generated significantly more metaphase II oocytes than GnRH antagonist cycles (24 [17-34] vs. 21 [15-28], respectively). Recipients of fresh oocytes from fPPOS and GnRH antagonist cycles had similar cleavage, blastulation, implantation, and live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates (50% vs. 48.6%).Conclusion(s): FPPOS with MPA seems to be an effective choice for preventing premature ovulation in women undergoing ovarian stimulation without compromising oocyte quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A receptive endometrium is required for successful embryo implantation. Endometrial thickness, as measured by ultrasonography, is the most commonly used marker of endometrial receptivity in assisted reproductive technology cycles. Several factors simultaneously affect both endometrial thickness and probability of live birth, including age, oestradiol concentration and oocyte number, among others. Most of the studies investigating a relationship between endometrial thickness and embryo transfer outcomes are retrospective and do not adequately address confounding factors, in addition to other limitations. Despite multiple meta-analyses and studies with large numbers of cycles, controversy still exists. The difference between the results from prospective and retrospective studies is also striking. This article presents a critical appraisal of the studies on endometrial thickness and embryo transfer outcomes in order to highlight methodological issues and how they can be overcome in future studies. Currently available evidence does not seem to support a modification of management just because endometrial thickness is below an arbitrary threshold. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We performed a literature review of studies comparing the effectiveness of progestins in preventing premature ovulation during ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology (ART). Five randomized trials and cohort studies involving a total of 2404 women, which compared; i) two different progestins or ii) two different doses of the same progestin were included. The primary outcome was live birth rate (LBR) per woman. Secondary outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy (LB/OP) per woman and per embryo transfer (ET), ongoing pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, positive pregnancy test, numbers of oocytes and metaphase-two oocytes, duration of stimulation and gonadotropin consumption. The primary outcome was not reported in most studies however there were no differences between progestins for secondary outcomes. All progestins seem to effectively prevent premature ovulation in ART cycles. Low-quality evidence suggests that progestins can effectively prevent premature ovulation in ART cycles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We performed a literature review of studies comparing the effectiveness of progestins in preventing premature ovulation during ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology (ART). Five randomized trials and cohort studies involving a total of 2404 women, which compared; i) two different progestins or ii) two different doses of the same progestin were included. The primary outcome was live birth rate (LBR) per woman. Secondary outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy (LB/OP) per woman and per embryo transfer (ET), ongoing pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, positive pregnancy test, numbers of oocytes and metaphase-two oocytes, duration of stimulation and gonadotropin consumption. The primary outcome was not reported in most studies however there were no differences between progestins for secondary outcomes. All progestins seem to effectively prevent premature ovulation in ART cycles. Low-quality evidence suggests that progestins can effectively prevent premature ovulation in ART cycles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Whether endometriomas grow because of supraphysiological oestradiol levels attained during ovarian stimulation for assisted reproduction techniques is a concern. In this prospective study, 25 women with 28 endometriomas underwent three-dimensional ultrasound using sono-automated volume calculation software. Endometrioma volume was measured on the first day of gonadotrophin injection (V1) and the day of ovulation trigger (V2). Nine (36%) women were stimulated in a gonadotrophin releasing hormone antagonist protocol (GnRH), 13 (52%) in a long, and three (12%) in an ultra-long GnRH agonist protocol. Mean duration of stimulation was 10.3 days with median total gonadotrophin dose of 4500 IU/day. Median number of cumulus oocyte complexes was five, and metaphase-two oocytes was four. None of the endometriomas were punctured during oocyte retrieval. Median V1 was 22.2 ml (12–30 ml) and median V2 was 24.99 ml (11.2–37.4 ml) with P = 0.001. Twenty-three out of 28 endometriomas (82%) grew to some extent during ovarian stimulation. Endometrioma growth was positively correlated with prestimulation cyst volume (Correlation coefficient 0.664; P < 0.01). Although the 3-ml average growth was statistically significant, it could be regarded as clinically insignificant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite their wide and global use, possible short and long-term effects of fertility treatments on children is not well-established. In this review, birth defects and perinatal complications and their relationship with assisted reproductive technology (ART), along with long-term effects of ART on cardiovascular system, metabolism, behavior, cognitive skills, and childhood cancers are discussed. Children conceived through ART are at increased risk for birth defects and perinatal complications such as preterm delivery, low birth weight and small for gestational age. Parental characteristics, underlying infertility etiology and ART procedures themselves may contribute to this. The long-term effects of ART are difficult to establish. Studies so far report that ART children have normal social, emotional, cognitive, and motor functions. Likewise, despite some minor inconsistencies in some studies, they do not seem to be at increased risk for childhood cancers. However, there are a number of studies that imply vascular system may be adversely affected by ART and its possible consequences should be further investigated with follow up studies. Large scale studies with long-term follow up periods are required to determine the effects of ART on conceived children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]