IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0234481.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of elective frozen vs. fresh embryo transfer strategies on cumulative live birth: Do deleterious effects still exist in normal & hyper responders?

Author

Listed:
  • Fazilet Kubra Boynukalin
  • Niyazi Emre Turgut
  • Meral Gultomruk
  • Selen Ecemis
  • Zalihe Yarkiner
  • Necati Findikli
  • Mustafa Bahceci

Abstract

Background: Is freeze-all strategy effective in terms of cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) in all patients? Methods: This retrospective single-center study analyzed the CLBRs of 2523 patients undergoing fresh or electively frozen blastocyst transfer cycles. In 1047, cycles, the fresh embryo transfer (ET) strategy was applied for the 1st ET, whereas electively frozen ET (e-FET) was performed in 1476 cycles. Female age ≤ 37 and blastocysts frozen via vitrification were included. The patients in each arm were further stratified into four subgroups according to the number of oocytes retrieved as follows: Group A: 1–5, group B: 6–10, group C: 11–15 and group D: 16–25 oocytes retrieved. The primary endpoint was the CLBR. The secondary endpoints were the ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate and the live birth rates (LBRs) following fresh ETs and e-FETs for the first transfers. Result(s): The CLBR was similar between the fresh ET and e-FET arms in group A (35/76 (46.1%) vs 29/67 (43.3%), p = 0.74) and group B (165/275 (60%) vs 216/324 (66.7%), p = 0.091), whereas significantly higher rates were detected in favor of the e-FET arm within group C (328/460 (71.3%) vs 201/348 (57.8%), p 10 oocytes retrieved during stimulated cycles.

Suggested Citation

  • Fazilet Kubra Boynukalin & Niyazi Emre Turgut & Meral Gultomruk & Selen Ecemis & Zalihe Yarkiner & Necati Findikli & Mustafa Bahceci, 2020. "Impact of elective frozen vs. fresh embryo transfer strategies on cumulative live birth: Do deleterious effects still exist in normal & hyper responders?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-15, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0234481
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234481
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0234481
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0234481&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0234481?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0234481. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.