Search

Objective To investigate whether paternal age exerts an independent effect on the clinical outcomes of assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles. Evidence Review Observational studies were identified through a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and National Health Service evidence. Data for women aged ≤39 years were extracted and analyzed. We included all studies, both autologous and donor oocyte, into separate analyses of the effect of paternal age on ART outcome. We excluded studies in azoospermic men, women aged ≥40 years, ART including preimplantation genetic testing, and involving donor sperm. The included studies scored well on the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for observational studies. The primary outcome was live birth rate and secondary outcome measures were clinical pregnancy rate and miscarriage rate. When pooling data, the random-effects model was used to counter the effect of heterogeneity in the studies. Result(s) Live birth rate was reported in three autologous oocyte studies (2,926 cycles) and five donor oocyte studies (7,648 cycles). Live birth rate was found to be increased significantly when male age was 40 years in autologous studies. In donor oocyte studies, the miscarriage rate was not increased when male age was >50 years. All of the autologous oocyte studies reported a statistically significant association between male age and female age. Conclusion(s) The findings of this review and meta-analysis, based on the donor oocyte model, suggest that advanced paternal age does not exert an independent effect on the outcome of ART cycles. Miscarriage rates do not appear to be increased even for men >50 years of age after treatment with donor oocytes. The meta-analysis of autologous oocyte studies suggests that increasing male age may have a deleterious effect on the outcome of ART, however, this may be confounded by the strong association with increasing maternal age.

PURPOSE: To compare reproductive outcomes following a euploid embryo transfer, between those embryos vitrified-warmed twice to those vitrified-warmed once. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed 694 single euploid frozen embryo transfer cycles following preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A). For cycles in group 1 (N = 451), embryos were biopsied for PGT-A at blastocyst stage and vitrified. For cycles in group 2 (N = 146), embryos were vitrified at blastocyst stage, before being warmed and biopsied for PGT-A and vitrified again. For cycles in group 3 (N = 97), embryos were vitrified on day-3, before being warmed, cultured to day-5 and biopsied for PGT-A and re-vitrified. RESULTS: The pregnancy, clinical pregnancy and livebirth rate in group 2 were not statistically different to group 1 (pregnancy rate, adjusted OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.62–1.91; clinical pregnancy, aOR 0.89, 95% CI 0.58–1.37; live birth rate, aOR 0.85, 95% CI 0.56–1.28). There was also no significant difference between group 3 and group 1, with similar pregnancy rate (aOR 1.22, 95% CI 0.74–1.99), clinical pregnancy rate (aOR 1.21, 95% CI 0.75–1.96) and live birth rate (aOR 1.15, 95% CI, 0.73–1.80). There was no significant difference in miscarriage rates between all three groups. The age at the oocyte collection, embryo quality and day of biopsy were associated with pregnancy, clinical pregnancy and live birth rate. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that vitrifying and warming embryos twice at blastocyst or at cleavage and then blastocyst stage, can lead to similar reproductive outcomes to embryos vitrified-warmed once, after a single euploid embryo transfer.

Introduction The effect of embryo quality on clinical outcomes of assisted reproductive technology following a double transfer is not well defined, with some studies suggesting that a low-quality embryo transferred with a high-quality embryo decreases the live birth rate (LBR), compared with transferring a single high-quality embryo. Our study examined whether the quality of a second blastocyst transferred affects the outcome, controlling for the number of the available high-quality blastocysts (HQB). Material and methods A historical cohort study of 2346 fresh blastocyst transfers in a single fertility clinic between 2013 and 2019. The main outcomes were pregnancy, miscarriage, live birth, and multiple gestation rates. Outcomes were compared between single embryo transfers with a high-quality blastocyst (SET-H), double embryo transfers with two HQBs (DET-HH), and transfers with one high-quality and one low-quality blastocyst (DET-HL). Outcomes were also assessed between SET and DET when only low-quality blastocysts were available. Results With one HQB available, DET-HL increased LBR (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.65, 95% CI 1.09-2.49) compared with SET-H, but increased multiple gestation rate (aOR 23.1, 95% CI 3.0-177.6). With two HQBs available, DET-HH was associated with a higher LBR (aOR 1.62, 95% CI 1.28-2.04) and lower miscarriage rate (aOR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40-0.80), but very high twin rate (aOR 49.8, 95% CI 24.3-102.1) compared with SET-H. A SET-H with at least one or more HQB available to freeze, compared with a SET-H with no other HQB available, had a higher LBR (aOR 1.69, 95% CI 1.17-2.45). When there were no HQBs available, compared with SET-L, a DET-LL had a higher live birth (aOR 3.20, 95% CI 1.78-7.703) and twin rate (aOR 3.72 × 1010 ) and a lower miscarriage rate (aOR 0.24, 95% CI 0.10-0.58). Conclusions When there is one HQB available, transferring an additional low-quality blastocyst would only slightly increase the LBR, but significantly increase the twin rate, therefore SET should be recommended. When two or more HQBs are available, SET-H would have a reasonably good chance of success without the very high twin rate associated with DET-HH. DET-LL when compared with SET-L, would increase the LBR, but increase the risk of multiple gestation.

Background: The advent of ovarian stimulation within an in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle has resulted in modifying the physiology of stimulated cycles and has helped optimize pregnancy outcomes. In this regard, the importance of progesterone (P4) elevation at time of human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) administration within an IVF cycle has been studied over several decades. Our study aimed to evaluate the association of P4 levels at time of hCG trigger with live birth rate (LBR), clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and miscarriage rate (MR) in fresh IVF or IVF-ICSI cycles. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study (n=170) involving patients attending the Centre for Reproductive and Genetic Health (CRGH) in London. The study cohort consisted of women undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation using GnRH antagonist or GnRH agonist protocols. Univariate and multiple logistic regression ana-lyses were used to evaluate the association of clinical outcomes. Differences were considered statistically significant if p£0.05. Results: As serum progesterone increased, a decrease in LBR was observed. Following multivariate logistical analyses, LBR significantly decreased with P4 thresholds of 4.0 ng/ml (OR 0.42, 95% CI:0.17-1.0) and 4.5 ng/ml (OR 0.35, 95% CI:0.12-0.96). Conclusion: P4 levels are important in specific groups and the findings were statistically significant with a P4 threshold value between 4.0-4.5 ng/ml. Therefore, it seems logical to selectively measure serum P4 levels for patients who have ovarian dysfunction or an ovulatory cycles and accordingly prepare the individualized management packages for such patients.

Introduction Intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection (IMSI) is one of the sperm selection techniques used for assisted reproduction which has been applied for a variety of indications including previously failed fertilization with intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). A Cochrane review1 found no difference in outcomes between either modality of sperm selection. Since the Cochrane review was published there have been a further two randomized controlled trials comparing IMSI and ICSI. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare IMSI with ICSI as insemination methods regarding live birth rate and miscarriage rate. Material and methods Systematic review of randomized controlled trials, observational studies and similar reviews in electronic databases published before January 2018. Results We found nine randomized controlled trials, evaluating 1610 cycles of in vitro fertilization and 15 observational studies evaluating 1243 cycles of in vitro fertilization. Meta-analysis of the included randomized controlled trials showed no difference in the live birth rate or miscarriage rate between the ICSI and IMSI groups. Meta-analysis of five observational studies showed a significantly higher number of live births in the IMSI group than ICSI group (live birth rate odds ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.16-4.07), with a moderate degree of heterogeneity (I2 = 41%). Additionally, from six observational studies, a significantly lower miscarriage rate was observed in the IMSI group than in the ICSI group (odds ratio 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.37-0.70, I2 = 0%). Conclusions Meta-analysis of randomized studies comparing IMSI to ICSI has not shown any difference in live birth rate and miscarriage rate. Meta-analysis of observational studies, which must be interpreted with caution, revealed an increased live birth rate and decreased miscarriage rate with IMSI vs ICSI.

In oocyte donation cycles where hormone replacement is given to recipients, progesterone administration is necessary to induce the luteal phase and synchronize the endometrium with the embryo stage. Most studies suggest that 5–7days of progesterone are needed to prepare the endometrium for a day-5 embryo transfer and provide optimal implantation rate. This paper reports a case where an agonadal oocyte recipient received only 2days of progesterone prior to the embryo transfer of a day-5 embryo. She subsequently had a clinical pregnancy and a live birth.