» Articles » PMID: 24907917

Cryopreservation and Delayed Embryo Transfer-assisted Reproductive Technology Registry and Reporting Implications

Overview
Journal Fertil Steril
Date 2014 Jun 9
PMID 24907917
Citations 24
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Clinics performing assisted reproductive technology (ART) procedures have collected data via registry and publicly reported pregnancy outcomes for more than 25 years. During this time, the practice of ART has changed considerably with frozen embryo transfer (FET) procedures contributing an increasing proportion of live births. Cycles initiated with the intent of embryo banking for the purpose of fertility preservation have been excluded from these public reports, because pregnancy outcomes are not immediately available. An unintended consequence of the common sense handling of fertility preservation has been that cycles performed with intentional short-term cryopreservation of all embryos for other indications have also been excluded from the report. Over the last few years, cryopreservation with short-term delayed transfer increasingly has been performed for reasons other than fertility preservation. The pregnancy outcomes of these cycles are expected within a reasonable time frame and should be transparently reported. The Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology has collaborated with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to "recapture" these cycles for the public reports. This recapture is done by linking the FET cycles to the stimulation cycles from which the embryos were derived and by changing the labels of the outcome success metrics. Stimulations using ART, initiated for the purpose of transferring embryos within 1 year will be included in the report despite any prospective intent to freeze all eggs or embryos. A positive outcome will be reported when a live birth results from the first embryo transfer following stimulation ("primary transfer"). Linkage of ovarian stimulation and egg-retrieval procedures to FET will also allow development of other success metrics to further benefit fertility patients.

Citing Articles

No improvement in pregnancy and perinatal outcomes with combined luteal support in modified natural cycle frozen embryo transfer.

Zhang W, Wu S, Ren B, Jia R, Zhang W, Wang B Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2025; 15:1458527.

PMID: 39882266 PMC: 11774695. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2024.1458527.


Mitigating multiples, less is more: examining trends in multifetal gestation rates with assisted reproductive technology.

Kim H, Claffey A, Doody K, Doody K J Assist Reprod Genet. 2024; 41(9):2301-2310.

PMID: 39085741 PMC: 11405601. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-024-03208-4.


Immediate versus delayed single blastocyst transfer following the first stimulated IVF cycle in the freeze-all strategy: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Li H, Zhang W, Chen J, Lu X, Li L, Sun X BMJ Open. 2024; 14(5):e081018.

PMID: 38719320 PMC: 11086268. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-081018.


Clinical Outcomes in Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT)-Frozen Embryo Transfer (FET) Protocol Increased by Administering Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonist (GnRH) in the Initial Stage of the Luteal Phase: A Retrospective Analysis.

Mahmood A, Tan L Cureus. 2024; 16(2):e53877.

PMID: 38465078 PMC: 10924828. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.53877.


The impact of the embryo banking on the cumulative live birth rate in women with poor ovarian response according to the Bologna criteria.

Ge Q, Teng X, Chen M, Li K, Ng E, Chen Z Reprod Med Biol. 2023; 22(1):e12533.

PMID: 37638350 PMC: 10457668. DOI: 10.1002/rmb2.12533.