The effect of late-follicular phase progesterone elevation on embryo ploidy and cumulative live birth rates.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does late-follicular phase progesterone elevation have a deleterious effect on embryo euploidy, blastocyst formation rate and cumulative live birth rates (CLBR)? DESIGN: A multicentre retrospective cross-sectional study including infertile patients aged 18-40 years who underwent ovarian stimulation in a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A) followed by a freeze-all strategy and euploid embryo transfer between August 2017 and December 2019. The sample was stratified according to the progesterone concentrations on the day of trigger: normal (≤1.50 ng/ml) and high (>1.50 ng/ml). Moreover, sensitivity analyses were performed to determine whether different conclusions would have been drawn if different cut-offs had been adopted. The primary outcome was the embryo euploidy rate. Secondary outcomes were the blastocyst formation rate, the number of euploid blastocysts and CLBR. RESULTS: Overall 1495 intracytoplasmic sperm injection PGT-A cycles were analysed. Late-follicular phase progesterone elevation was associated with significantly higher late-follicular oestradiol concentrations (2847.56 ± 1091.10 versus 2240.94 ± 996.37 pg/ml, P < 0.001) and significantly more oocytes retrieved (17.67 ± 8.86 versus 12.70 ± 7.00, P < 0.001). The number of euploid embryos was significantly higher in the progesterone elevation group (2.32 ± 1.74 versus 1.86 ± 1.42, P = 0.001), whereas the blastocyst formation rate (47.1% [43.7-50.5%] versus 51.0% [49.7-52.4%]), the embryo euploidy rate (48.3% [44.9-51.7%] versus 49.1% [47.7-50.6%], the live birth rate in the first frozen embryo transfer (34.1% versus 31.1%, P = 0.427) and CLBR (38.9% versus 37.0%, P = 0.637) were not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Euploidy rate and CLBR do not significantly differ among PGT-A cycles with and without late-follicular progesterone elevation in a freeze-all approach.

Impact of aging on obstetric outcomes: defining advanced maternal age in Barcelona.

BACKGROUND: Women of advanced maternal age (AMA) are a growing population, with higher obstetric risks. The Mediterranean population has specific characteristics different from other areas. Thus, the objective of this study was to establish a cut-off to define AMA in a selected mediterranean population coming from a tertiary referral private/mutual health hospital in Barcelona. METHODS: Retrospective cohort of euploid singleton pregnancies delivered from January 2007 to June 2017. Main maternal outcomes were: gestational diabetes, preeclampsia, placenta previa, c-section and prolonged hospitalization (≥ 7 days). Main adverse perinatal outcomes were: stillbirth, prematurity, preterm prelabor rupture of membranes, low birth weight, need of admission at a neonatal intensive care unit and perinatal mortality. Adjustment for confounding factors (smoking, previous comorbilities, parity, assisted reproductive techniques (ART) and obesity) was performed. RESULTS: A total of 25054 pregnancies were included. Mean maternal age was 34.7 ± 4.2 years, with 2807 patients in the group of age between 40 and 44 years (11.2%) and 280 patients ≥45 years (1.1%). Women at AMA had higher incidence of previous comorbilities (compared to the reference group of women < 30 years): prior c-section, chronic hypertension and obesity. In addition, they were more likely to use ART. After adjusting for confounding factors, maternal age was an independent and statistically significant risk factor for gestational diabetes (OR 1.66/2.80/3.14) for ages 30-39, 40-44 and ≥ 45 years respectively, c-section (OR 1.28/2.41/7.27) and placenta previa (OR 2.56/4.83) for ages 40-44 and ≥ 45 years respectively, but not for preeclampsia (neither early-onset nor late-onset). Risk of emergency c-section was only increased in women ≥45 years (OR, 2.03 (95% CI, 1.50-2.74). In the other groups of age, the increase in c-section rate was because of elective indications. Age ≥ 45 years was associated with iatrogenic prematurity < 37 weeks (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.30-5.27). No other relevant associations between AMA and maternal or neonatal outcomes were found. CONCLUSIONS: Maternal age is an independent risk factor for adverse obstetric outcomes. Age ≥ 40 years was associated to relevant increased risks and reveals to be an adequate cut-off to define AMA in our population.

What is the clinical impact of the endometrial receptivity array in PGT-A and oocyte donation cycles?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of the endometrial receptivity array (ERA) test on the implantation rate (IR) and pregnancy rate (PR) in patients with previous failed euploid embryo transfers (Euploid-ET) or oocyte donation embryo transfers (Donor-ET). METHODS: Single-center retrospective study of patients with ≥ 1 previous failed Euploi-ET (n = 24) or ≥ 2 failed Donor-ET (n = 32) who underwent an ERA test and a post-ERA Euploid-ET/Donor-ET between 2012 and 2018. Controls were patients with ≥ 1 previously failed Euploid-ET (n = 119) or ≥ 2 failed Donor-ET (n = 158) who underwent Euploid-ET/Donor-ET during the same period without performing an ERA test. Only blastocyst stage embryos were included. IR/PR was compared between the post-ERA ET and the last ET in the control group. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference regarding IR [55.6% (34.6-76.5%) vs. 65.0% (56.9-73.1%)] nor PR (58.3% vs.70.6%, p = 0.238) in the Euploid-ET ERA vs. Euploid-ET control groups. In the Donor-ET arm, both IR [26.8% (12.3-41.4%) vs. 57.2% (50.1-64.3%)] and PR (34.4% vs. 65.2%, p = 0.001) were significantly lower in the ERA group. Multivariate analysis confirmed that performing an ERA test did not influence the PR in the Euploid-ET arm and was associated with a diminished PR in the Donor-ET arm. In the ERA group, 41.1% patients were non-receptive (NR). No significant difference was found regarding IR/PR in NR vs. receptive patients in both Euploid-ET/Donor-ET arms. CONCLUSIONS: In our sample, the performance of an ERA test did not improve pregnancy outcomes. Future prospective studies in larger samples are needed to confirm the role of the ERA test in Euploid-ET/Donor-ET.