Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T15:48:25.827Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 30 - On The Strategy of “Freezing Only” Embryos

from Section 5 - Embryo Selection and Transfer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2019

By
Bruce S. Shapiro  and
Forest C. Garner
Edited by
Gabor Kovacs ,
Anthony Rutherford  and
David K. Gardner
Gabor Kovacs
Affiliation:
Monash University, Victoria
Anthony Rutherford
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
David K. Gardner
Affiliation:
University of Melbourne
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
How to Prepare the Egg and Embryo to Maximize IVF Success , pp. 354 - 361
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. 2014 Assisted Reproductive Technology Fertility Clinic Success Rates Report. Atlanta (GA): US Dept. of Health and Human Services; 2016.Google Scholar
Maheshwari, A, Bhattacharya, S. Elective frozen replacement cycles for all: ready for prime time? Hum Reprod. 2013 January;28(1):6–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roque, M. Freeze-all policy: is it time for that? J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015 February;32(2): 171–76.Google Scholar
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 July;102(1):3–9.Google Scholar
Shapiro, BS, Daneshmand, ST, Garner, FC et al. 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 August;96(2): 344–48.Google Scholar
Shapiro, BS, Daneshmand, ST, Garner, FC et al. Evidence of impaired endometrial receptivity after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a prospective randomized trial comparing fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfers in high responders. Fertil Steril. 2011 August;96(2): 516–18.Google ScholarPubMed
Chen, ZJ, Shi, Y, Sun, Y et al. Fresh versus frozen embryos for infertility in the polycystic ovary syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2016 August 11;375(6): 523–33.Google Scholar
Maheshwari, A, Pandey, S, Shetty, A, Hamilton, M, Bhattacharya, S. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies resulting from the transfer of frozen thawed versus fresh embryos generated through in vitro fertilization treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2012 August;98(2): 368–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wennerholm, UB, Henningsen, AK, Romundstad, LB et al. Perinatal outcomes of children born after frozen-thawed embryo transfer: a Nordic cohort study from the CoNARTaS group. Hum Reprod. 2013 September;28(9): 2545–53.Google Scholar
Kalra, SK, Ratcliffe, SJ, Coutifaris, C, Molinaro, T, Barnhart, KT. Ovarian stimulation and low birth weight in newborns conceived through in vitro fertilization. Obstet Gynecol. 2011 October;118(4): 863–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shapiro, BS, Daneshmand, ST, Bedient, CE, Garner, FC. Comparison of birth weights in patients randomly assigned to fresh or frozen-thawed embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2016 August;106(2): 317–21.Google Scholar
Rodriguez-Purata, J, Lee, J, Whitehouse, M et al. Reproductive outcome is optimized by genomic embryo screening, vitrification, and subsequent transfer into a prepared synchronous endometrium. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016 March;33(3): 401–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grifo, J, Kofinas, J, Schoolcraft, WB. The practice of in vitro fertilization according to the published literature. Fertil Steril. 2014 September;102(3): 658–59.Google Scholar
Kolibianakis, E, Bourgain, C, Albano, C et al. Effect of ovarian stimulation with recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone, gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonists, and human chorionic gonadotropin on endometrial maturation on the day of oocyte pick-up. Fertil Steril. 2002 November;78(5): 1025–29.Google Scholar
Shapiro, BS, Daneshmand, ST, Garner, FC, Aguirre, M, Ross, R. Contrasting patterns in in vitro fertilization pregnancy rates among fresh autologous, fresh oocyte donor, and cryopreserved cycles with the use of day 5 or day 6 blastocysts may reflect differences in embryo-endometrium synchrony. Fertil Steril. 2008 January;89(1):20–26.Google Scholar
Shapiro, BS, Daneshmand, ST, Garner, FC, Aguirre, M, Thomas, S. Large blastocyst diameter, early blastulation, and low preovulatory serum progesterone are dominant predictors of clinical pregnancy in fresh autologous cycles. Fertil Steril. 2008 August;90(2): 302–09.Google Scholar
Shapiro, BS, Daneshmand, ST, Restrepo, H et al. Matched-cohort comparison of single-embryo transfers in fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles. Fertil Steril. 2013 February;99(2): 389–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Venetis, CA, Kolibianakis, EM, Bosdou, JK, Tarlatzis, BC. Progesterone elevation and probability of pregnancy after IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis of over 60 000 cycles. Hum Reprod Update. 2013 September–October;19(5): 433–57.Google Scholar
Shapiro, BS, Daneshmand, ST, Garner, FC et al. Embryo cryopreservation rescues cycles with premature luteinization. Fertil Steril. 2010 February;93(2): 636–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shapiro, BS, Daneshmand, ST, Desai, J et al. The risk of embryo-endometrium asynchrony increases with maternal age after ovarian stimulation and IVF. Reprod Biomed Online. 2016 July;33(1):50–55.Google Scholar
Levi, AJ, Drews, MR, Bergh, PA, Miller, BT, Scott, RT Jr. Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation does not adversely affect endometrial receptivity in in vitro fertilization cycles. Fertil Steril. 2001 October;76(4): 670–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vuong, LT, Dang, VQ, Ho, TM et al. Freeze-all versus fresh embryo transfer in IVF/ICSI, a randomised controlled trial (NCT02471573). Fertil Steril. 2018 January106(3):e376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roque, M, Lattes, K, Serra, S et al. Fresh embryo transfer versus frozen embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2013 January;99(1): 156–62.Google Scholar
Perkins, KM, Boulet, SL, Kissin, DM, Jamieson, DJ; National ART Surveillance (NASS) Group. Risk of ectopic pregnancy associated with assisted reproductive technology in the United States, 2001–2011. Obstet Gynecol. 2015 January;125(1):70–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shapiro, BS, Daneshmand, ST, De Leon, L et al. Frozen-thawed embryo transfer is associated with a significantly reduced incidence of ectopic pregnancy. Fertil Steril. 2012 December;98(6): 1490–94.Google Scholar
Mainigi, MA, Olalere, D, Burd, I et al. Peri-implantation hormonal milieu: elucidating mechanisms of abnormal placentation and fetal growth. Biol Reprod. 2014 February 13;90(2):26.Google Scholar
Shah, PS, Balkhair, T, Ohlsson, A et al. Intention to become pregnant and low birth weight and preterm birth: a systematic review. Matern Child Health J. 2011 February;15(2): 205–16.Google Scholar
Kolibianakis, EM, Albano, C, Camus, M et al. Prolongation of the follicular phase in in vitro fertilization results in a lower ongoing pregnancy rate in cycles stimulated with recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone and gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists. Fertil Steril. 2004 July;82(1): 102–07.Google Scholar
Rosen, MP, Shen, S, Dobson, AT et al. A quantitative assessment of follicle size on oocyte developmental competence. Fertil Steril. 2008 September;90(3): 684–90.Google Scholar
Cakmak, H, Katz, A, Cedars, MI, Rosen, MP. Effective method for emergency fertility preservation: random-start controlled ovarian stimulation. Fertil Steril. 2013 December;100(6): 1673–80.Google Scholar
Kuang, Y, Chen, Q, Fu, Y et al. Medroxyprogesterone acetate is an effective oral alternative for preventing premature luteinizing hormone surges in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2015 July;104(1):62–70.Google Scholar
Kol, S. Luteolysis induced by a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist is the key to prevention of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Fertil Steril. 2004 January;81(1):1–5.Google Scholar
Engmann, L, Benadiva, C, Humaidan, P. GnRH agonist trigger for the induction of oocyte maturation in GnRH antagonist IVF cycles: a SWOT analysis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2016 March;32(3): 274–85.Google Scholar
Youssef, MA, Van der Veen, F, Al-Inany, HG et al. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus HCG for oocyte triggering in antagonist-assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 October 31;(10):CD008046.Google Scholar
Devroey, P, Polyzos, NP, Blockeel, C. An OHSS-Free clinic by segmentation of IVF treatment. Hum Reprod. 2011 October;26(10): 2593–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roque, M, Valle, M, Guimarães, F, Sampaio, M, Geber, S. Cost-effectiveness of the freeze-all policy. JBRA Assist Reprod. 2015 August 1;19(3): 125–30.Google Scholar
Papaleo, E, Pagliardini, L, Vanni, VS et al. A direct healthcare cost analysis of the cryopreserved versus fresh transfer policy at the blastocyst stage. Reproductive Biomedicine Online. In press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, BS, Daneshmand, ST, Garner, FC, Aguirre, M, Hudson, C. Freeze-all at the blastocyst or bipronuclear stage: a randomized clinical trial. Fertil Steril. 2015;104: 1138–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×