Imported donated vitrified oocytes

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    进口玻璃化卵母细胞捐献的功效是否受到来源冷冻库的影响?
    纵向队列研究,包括来自200个受体的249个完成的卵母细胞升温周期(2016年1月至2020年7月)。不包括严重的男性因素。玻璃化卵母细胞由三个西班牙冷冻银行提供。主要结果是每个完成的卵母细胞升温周期的累积活产分娩率(CLBR)。
    加温1535个卵母细胞后,1244例存活(81.0%),945例受精(76.0%);胚胎利用率为65.3%。每个完成周期的总CLBR为47.0%,但在冷冻库1(31.2%)中低于冷冻库2(56.0%,P=0.0010)和冷冻库3(50.8%,P=0.0241)。多变量逻辑回归分析确定四个或更多卵母细胞的存活是分娩的最强预测因子(P=0.0282)。在249个卵母细胞升温周期中,只有202个有4个或更多的卵母细胞存活,其比例在冷冻库1中明显低于冷冻库2(70.1%对89.0%,P=0.0020);与冷冻库3(81.0%)比较无统计学意义。在202个卵母细胞升温周期中,冷冻库1中的CLBR(37.0%)低于冷冻库2中的CLBR(58.8%,P=0.0115)和冷冻库3(60.8%,P=0.0019),这表明来自冷冻库1的卵母细胞存活能力降低。
    发现进口的玻璃化卵母细胞相对于来源的冷冻库的功效存在差异。在开始与卵母细胞冷冻库合作时,每个中心都需要在内部评估结果,以建立必要的措施来最大限度地提高治疗效果。
    Is the efficacy of imported vitrified oocyte donation affected by the cryobank of origin?
    Longitudinal cohort study, including 249 completed oocyte warming cycles from 200 recipients (January 2016-July 2020). No severe male factor was included. Vitrified oocytes were provided by three Spanish cryobanks. Primary outcome was cumulative live birth delivery rate (CLBR) per completed oocyte warming cycle.
    After warming 1535 oocytes, 1244 survived (81.0%) and 945 fertilized (76.0%); embryo utilization rate was 65.3%. The overall CLBR per completed cycle was 47.0% but was lower in cryobank 1 (31.2%) versus cryobank 2 (56.0%, P = 0.0010) and cryobank 3 (50.8%, P = 0.0241). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified survival of four or more oocytes as the strongest predictor for delivery (P = 0.0282). Only 202 out of 249 oocyte warming cycles had four or more survived oocytes in a proportion that was significantly lower in cryobank 1 versus cryobank 2 (70.1% versus 89.0%, P = 0.0020); comparison with cryobank 3 (81.0%) was not significant. In the 202 oocyte warming cycles, CLBR in cryobank 1 (37.0%) was lower versus cryobank 2 (58.8%, P = 0.0115) and cryobank 3 (60.8%, P = 0.0019), suggesting a reduced viability in oocytes from cryobank 1 that survived warming.
    Differences were found in the efficacy of imported vitrified oocytes in relation to the cryobank of origin. Each centre needs to evaluate the results internally when starting a collaboration with an oocyte cryobank to establish the necessary measures to maximize treatment efficacy.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    Which is the most suitable clinical strategy in egg donation IVF cycles conducted with imported donated vitrified oocytes?
    The importation, and allocation, of at least eight vitrified eggs per couple during an egg donation cycle is associated with a high cumulative live birth delivery rate per cycle, as well as the confident adoption of a single blastocyst transfer strategy to minimize the risk of multiple pregnancies.
    IVF using donor eggs is commonly used worldwide to treat women who are unable to conceive with their own oocytes. In 2014, the Constitutional Court (n.162/2014) gave permission for gamete donation to be allowed for ART in Italy. Initially recommended as a therapeutic approach for premature ovarian insufficiency, the use of donated oocytes has become more and more common. In countries such as Italy, fresh oocyte donation is theoretically possible, but practically impossible due to the lack of donors. In fact, the Italian law does not allow reimbursement to the young women, who can only voluntarily donate their eggs. Therefore, Italian IVF centers have established several collaborations with international oocyte cryo-banks. The most popular workflow involves the importation of donated oocytes that have been vitrified. However, recent evidence has questioned the overall efficacy of such an approach. This is because detrimental effects arising from oocyte vitrification and warming might reduce the number of eggs available for insemination, with a consequential reduction in the achievable live birth rate per cycle.
    This was a longitudinal cohort study, conducted between October 2015 and December 2018 at two private IVF centers. Overall, 273 couples were treated (mean maternal age: 42.5 ± 3.5 years, range: 31-50 years; mean donor age: 25.7 ± 4.2, 20-35 years) with oocytes purchased from three different Spanish egg banks.
    We performed an overall analysis, as well as several sub-analyses clustering the data according to the year of treatment (2015-2016, 2017 or 2018), the number of warmed (6, 7, 8 or 9) and surviving oocytes (≤4, 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9) and the cycle strategy adopted (cleavage stage embryo transfer and vitrification, cleavage stage embryo transfer and blastocyst vitrification, blastocyst stage embryo transfer and vitrification). This study aimed to create a workflow to maximize IVF efficacy, efficiency, and safety, during egg donation cycles with imported vitrified oocytes. The primary outcome was the cumulative live birth delivery rate among completed cycles (i.e. cycles where at least a delivery of a live birth was achieved, or no embryo was produced/left to transfer). All cycles, along with their embryological, obstetric and neonatal outcomes, were registered and inspected.
    The survival rate after warming was 86 ± 16%. When 6, 7, 8 and 9 oocytes were warmed, 94, 100, 72 and 70% of cycles were completed, resulting in 35, 44, 69 and 59% cumulative live birth delivery rates per completed cycle, respectively. When ≤4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 oocytes survived, 98, 94, 85, 84, 66 and 68% of cycles were completed, resulting in 16, 46, 50, 61, 76 and 60% cumulative live birth delivery rates per completed cycle, respectively. When correcting for donor age, and oocyte bank, in a multivariate logistic regression analysis, warming eight to nine oocytes resulted in an odds ratio (OR) of 2.5 (95% CI: 1.07-6.03, P = 0.03) for the cumulative live birth delivery rate per completed cycle with respect to six to seven oocytes. Similarly, when seven to nine oocytes survived warming, the OR was 2.7 (95% CI: 1.28-5.71, P < 0.01) with respect to ≤6 oocytes. When cleavage stage embryos were transferred, a single embryo transfer strategy was adopted in 17% of cases (N = 28/162); the live birth delivery rate per transfer was 26% (n = 43/162), but among the pregnancies to term, 28% involved twins (n = 12/43). Conversely, when blastocysts were transferred, a single embryo transfer strategy was adopted in 96% of cases (n = 224/234) with a 30% live birth delivery rate per transfer (N = 70/234), and the pregnancies to term were all singleton (n = 70/70). During the study period, 125 babies were born from 113 patients. When comparing the obstetric outcomes for the cleavage and blastocyst stage transfer strategies, the only significant difference was the prevalence of low birthweight: 34 versus 5%, respectively (P < 0.01). However, several significant differences were identified when comparing singleton with twin pregnancies; in fact, the latter resulted in a generally lower birthweight (mean ± SD: 3048 ± 566 g versus 2271 ± 247 g, P < 0.01), a significantly shorter gestation (38 ± 2 versus 36 ± 2 weeks, P < 0.01), solely Caesarean sections (72 versus 100%, P = 0.02), a higher prevalence of low birthweight (8 versus 86%, P < 0.01), small newborns for gestational age (24 versus 57%, P = 0.02) and preterm births (25 versus 86%, P < 0.01).
    This retrospective study should now be confirmed across several IVF centers and with a greater sample size in order to improve the accuracy of the sub-analyses.
    Single blastocyst transfer is the most suitable approach to achieve high success rates per procedure, thereby also limiting the obstetric complications that arise from twin pregnancies in oocyte donation programs. In this regard, the larger the cohort of imported donated vitrified oocytes, the more efficient the management of each cycle.
    None.
    None.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

公众号