Levothyroxine for a high-normal TSH in unexplained infertility.

OBJECTIVE: Unexplained infertility affects nearly one-third of infertile couples. Women with unexplained infertility are more likely to have a high-normal thyroid-stimulating hormone level (TSH: 2.5-5 mIU/L) compared to women with severe male factor infertility. Practice guidelines vary on whether treatment should be initiated for TSH levels >2.5 mIU/L in women attempting conception because the effects of treating a high-normal TSH level with levothyroxine are not known. We evaluated conception and live birth rates in women with unexplained infertility and high-normal TSH levels. DESIGN, PATIENTS AND MEASUREMENTS: Retrospective study including 96 women evaluated for unexplained infertility at a large academic medical centre between 1 January 2000 and 30 June 2017 with high-normal TSH (TSH: 2.5-5 mIU/L and within the normal range of the assay) who were prescribed (n = 31) or not prescribed (n = 65) levothyroxine. Conception and live birth rates were assessed. RESULTS: The conception rate in the levothyroxine group was 100% compared to 90% in the untreated group (p = .086 unadjusted; p < .05 adjusted for age; p = .370 adjusted for TSH; p = .287 adjusted for age and TSH). The live birth rate was lower in the levothyroxine group (63%) compared to the untreated group (84%) (p = .05 unadjusted; p = .094 adjusted for age; p = .035 adjusted for TSH; p = .057 adjusted for age and TSH). CONCLUSIONS: Women with unexplained infertility and high-normal TSH levels treated with levothyroxine had a higher rate of conception but lower live birth rate compared to untreated women, with the limitation of a small sample size. These findings assert the need for prospective, randomized studies to determine whether treatment with levothyroxine in women with unexplained infertility and high-normal TSH is beneficial.

Pretreatment prediction for IVF outcomes: generalized applicable model or centre-specific model?

STUDY QUESTION: What was the performance of different pretreatment prediction models for IVF, which were developed based on UK/US population (McLernon 2016 model, Luke model, Dhillon model, and McLernon 2022 model), in wider populations? SUMMARY ANSWER: For a patient in China, the published pretreatment prediction models based on the UK/US population provide similar discriminatory power with reasonable AUCs and underestimated predictions. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Several pretreatment prediction models for IVF allow patients and clinicians to estimate the cumulative probability of live birth in a cycle before the treatment, but they are mostly based on the population of Europe or the USA, and their performance and applicability in the countries and regions beyond these regions are largely unknown. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A total of 26 382 Chinese patients underwent oocyte pick-up cycles between January 2013 and December 2020. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: UK/US model performance was externally validated according to the coefficients and intercepts they provided. Centre-specific models were established with XGboost, Lasso, and generalized linear model algorithms. Discriminatory power and calibration of the models were compared as the forms of the AUC of the Receiver Operator Characteristic and calibration curves. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The AUCs for McLernon 2016 model, Luke model, Dhillon model, and McLernon 2022 model were 0.69 (95% CI 0.68-0.69), 0.67 (95% CI 0.67-0.68), 0.69 (95% CI 0.68-0.69), and 0.67 (95% CI 0.67-0.68), respectively. The centre-specific yielded an AUC of 0.71 (95% CI 0.71-0.72) with key predictors including age, duration of infertility, and endocrine parameters. All external models suggested underestimation. Among the external models, the rescaled McLernon 2022 model demonstrated the best calibration (Slope 1.12, intercept 0.06). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study is limited by its single-centre design and may not be representative elsewhere. Only per-complete cycle validation was carried out to provide a similar framework to compare different models in the sample population. Newer predictors, such as AMH, were not used. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Existing pretreatment prediction models for IVF may be used to provide useful discriminatory power in populations different from those on which they were developed. However, models based on newer more relevant datasets may provide better calibrations. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant number 22176159], the Xiamen Medical Advantage Subspecialty Construction Project [grant number 2018296], and the Special Fund for Clinical and Scientific Research of Chinese Medical Association [grant number 18010360765]. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Endometriosis-related infertility: severe pain symptoms do not impact assisted reproductive technology outcomes.

STUDY QUESTION: Do severe endometriosis-related painful symptoms impact ART live birth rates? SUMMARY ANSWER: Severe pain symptoms are not associated with reduced ART live birth rates in endometriosis patients. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: ART is currently recognized as one of the main therapeutic options to manage endometriosis-related infertility. Presently, no data exist in the literature regarding the association between the core symptom of the disease, e.g. pain and ART reproductive outcomes. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Observational cohort study of 354 endometriosis patients, who underwent ART at a tertiary care university hospital, between October 2014 and October 2021. Diagnosis of endometriosis was based on published imaging criteria using transvaginal sonography and magnetic resonance imaging, and histologically confirmed in women who had a previous history of endometriosis surgery (n = 127, 35.9%). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The intensity of painful symptoms related to dysmenorrhea (DM), dyspareunia (DP), noncyclic chronic pelvic pain, gastrointestinal (GI) pain, or lower urinary tract pain was evaluated using a 10-point visual analog scale (VAS), before ART. Severe pain was defined as having a VAS of 7 or higher for at least one symptom. The main outcome measure was the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) per patient. We analyzed the impact of endometriosis-related painful symptoms on ART live births using univariable and multivariate analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Three hundred and fifty-four endometriosis patients underwent 711 ART cycles. The mean age of the population was 33.8 ± 3.7 years, and the mean duration of infertility was 3.6 ± 2.1 years. The distribution of the endometriosis phenotypes was 3.1% superficial endometriosis, 8.2% ovarian endometrioma, and 88.7% deep infiltrating endometriosis. The mean VAS scores for DM, DP, and GI pain symptoms were 6.6 ± 2.7, 3.4 ± 3.1, and 3.1 ± 3.6, respectively. Two hundred and forty-two patients (68.4%) had severe pain symptoms. The CLBR per patient was 63.8% (226/354). Neither the mean VAS scores for the various painful symptoms nor the proportion of patients displaying severe pain differed significantly between patients who had a live birth and those who had not, based on univariate and multivariate analyses (P = 0.229). The only significant factors associated with negative ART live births were age >35 years (P < 0.001) and anti-Müllerian hormone levels <1.2 ng/ml (P < 0.001). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The diagnosis of endometriosis was based on imaging rather than surgery. This limitation is, however, inherent to the design of most studies on endometriosis patients reverting to ART first. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Rather than considering a single argument such as pain, the decision-making process for choosing between ART and surgery in infertile endometriosis patients should be based on a multitude of aspects, including the patient's choice, the associated infertility factors, the endometriosis phenotypes, and the efficiency of medical therapies in regard to pain symptoms, through an individualized approach guided by a multidisciplinary team of experts. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No funding; no conflict of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

A history of recurrent pregnancy loss is associated with increased perinatal complications, but not necessarily a longer birth interval: a population study spanning 18 years.

STUDY QUESTION: Is there a difference in the time interval between the first and second live births among individuals with and without recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Primary RPL (two or more pregnancy losses before the first live birth) is associated with a shorter time interval between the first and second live births compared with individuals without RPL, but this association is reversed in patients with secondary RPL (RPL patients with no or one pregnancy loss before the first live birth). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: There is limited information regarding the ability to have more than one child for patients with RPL. Previous studies have investigated the time to live birth and the live birth rate from the initial presentation to clinical providers. Most of the previous studies have included only patients treated at specialized RPL clinics and thus may be limited by selection bias, including patients with a more severe condition. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of 184 241 participants who delivered in British Columbia, Canada, and had at least two recorded live births between 2000 and 2018. The aim was to study the differences in the time interval between the first and second live births and the prevalence of pregnancy complications in patients with and without RPL. Additionally, 198 319 individuals with their first live birth between 2000 and 2010 were studied to evaluate cumulative second live birth rates. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Among individuals with at least two recorded live births between 2000 and 2018, 12 321 patients with RPL and 171 920 participants without RPL were included. RPL was defined as at least two pregnancy losses before 20 weeks gestation. Patients with primary RPL had at least two pregnancy losses occurring before the first live birth, while patients with secondary RPL had no or one pregnancy loss before the first live birth. We compared the time interval from the first to second live birth in patients with primary RPL, those with secondary RPL, and participants without RPL using generalized additive models to allow for a non-linear relationship between maternal age and time interval between first and second live births. We also compared prevalence of pregnancy complications at the first and second live births between the groups using non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis H test and Fisher's exact test for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. We assessed the cumulative second live birth rates in patients with primary RPL and those without RPL, among participants who had their first live birth between 2000 and 2010. Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate and compare hazard ratios between the two groups using a stratified modelling approach. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The adjusted time interval between the first and second live births was the longest in patients with secondary RPL, followed by individuals without RPL, and the shortest time interval was observed in patients with primary RPL: 4.34 years (95% CI: 4.09-4.58), 3.20 years (95% CI: 3.00-3.40), and 3.05 years (95% CI: 2.79-3.32). A higher frequency of pregnancy losses was associated with an increased time interval between the first and second live births. The prevalence of pregnancy complications at the first and second live births, including gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorder of pregnancy, preterm birth, and multiple gestations was significantly higher in patients with primary RPL compared with those without RPL. The cumulative second live birth rate was significantly lower in patients with primary RPL compared with individuals without RPL. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This study may be limited by its retrospective nature. Although we adjusted for multiple potential confounders, there may be residual confounding due to a lack of information about pregnancy intentions and other factors, including unreported pregnancy losses. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The results of this study provide information that will help clinicians in the counselling of RPL patients who desire a second child. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was supported in part by a grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR): Reference Number W11-179912. M.A.B. reports research grants from CIHR and Ferring Pharmaceutical. He is also on the advisory board for AbbVie, Pfizer, and Baxter. The other authors report no conflict of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04360564.

A modified flexible GnRH antagonist protocol using antagonist early cessation and a gonadotropin step-down approach improves live birth rates in fresh cycles: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Can pregnancy outcomes following fresh elective single embryo transfer (eSET) in gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocols increase using a gonadotropin (Gn) step-down approach with cessation of GnRH antagonist on the day of hCG administration (hCG day) in patients with normal ovarian response? SUMMARY ANSWER: The modified GnRH antagonist protocol using the Gn step-down approach and cessation of GnRH antagonist on the hCG day is effective in improving live birth rates (LBRs) per fresh eSET cycle. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Currently, there is no consensus on optimal GnRH antagonist regimens. Studies have shown that fresh GnRH antagonist cycles result in poorer pregnancy outcomes than the long GnRH agonist (GnRHa) protocol. Endometrial receptivity is a key factor that contributes to this phenomenon. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: An open label randomized controlled trial (RCT) was performed between November 2021 and August 2022. There were 546 patients allocated to either the modified GnRH antagonist or the conventional antagonist protocol at a 1:1 ratio. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Both IVF and ICSI cycles were included, and the sperm samples used were either fresh or frozen from the partner, or from frozen donor ejaculates. The primary outcome was the LBRs per fresh SET cycle. Secondary outcomes included rates of implantation, clinical and ongoing pregnancy, miscarriage, and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), as well as clinical outcomes of ovarian stimulation. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Baseline demographic features were not significantly different between the two ovarian stimulation groups. However, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, the LBRs in the modified antagonist group were significantly higher than in the conventional group (38.1% [104/273] vs. 27.5% [75/273], relative risk 1.39 [95% CI, 1.09-1.77], P = 0.008). Using a per-protocol (PP) analysis which included all the patients who received an embryo transfer, the LBRs in the modified antagonist group were also significantly higher than in the conventional group (48.6% [103/212] vs. 36.8% [74/201], relative risk 1.32 [95% CI, 1.05-1.66], P = 0.016). The modified antagonist group achieved significantly higher implantation rates, and clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates than the conventional group in both the ITT and PP analyses (P < 0.05). The two groups did not show significant differences between the number of oocytes retrieved or mature oocytes, two-pronuclear zygote (2PN) rates, the number of embryos obtained, blastocyst progression and good-quality embryo rates, early miscarriage rates, or OHSS incidence rates (P > 0.05). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: A limitation of our study was that the subjects were not blinded to the treatment allocation in the RCT trial. Only women under 40 years of age who had a good prognosis were included in the analysis. Therefore, use of the modified antagonist protocol in older patients with a low ovarian reserve remains to be investigated. In addition, the sample size for Day 5 elective SET was small, so larger trials will be required to strengthen these findings. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The modified GnRH antagonist protocol using the Gn step-down approach and cessation of GnRH antagonist on hCG day improved the LBRs per fresh eSET cycle in normal responders. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This project was funded by grant 2022YFC2702503 from the National Key Research & Development Program of China and grant 2021140 from the Beijing Health Promotion Association. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The RCT was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry; Study Number: ChiCTR2100053453. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 21 November 2021. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLLMENT: 23 November 2021.

The density of the inner cell mass is a new indicator of the quality of a human blastocyst: a valid supplement to the Gardner scoring system.

STUDY QUESTION: Can the density of the inner cell mass (ICM) be a new indicator of the quality of the human blastocyst? SUMMARY ANSWER: The densification index (DI) developed in this study can quantify ICM density and provide positive guidance for ploidy, pregnancy, and live birth. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In evaluating the quality of ICM, reproductive care clinics still use size indicators without further evaluation. The main disadvantage of this current method is that the evaluation of blastocyst ICM is relatively rough and cannot meet the needs of clinical embryologists, especially when multiple blastocysts have the same ICM score, which makes them difficult to evaluate further. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This observational study included data from 2272 blastocysts in 1991 frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles between January 2018 to November 2021 and 1105 blastocysts in 430 preimplantation genetic testing cycles between January 2019 and February 2023. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: FET, ICSI, blastocyst culture, trophectoderm biopsy, time-lapse (TL) monitoring, and next-generation sequencing were performed. After preliminary sample size selection, the 11 focal plane images captured by the TL system were normalized and the spatial frequency was used to construct the DI of the ICM. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: This study successfully constructed a quantitative indicator DI that can reflect the degree of ICM density in terms of fusion and texture features. The higher the DI value, the better the density of the blastocyst ICM, and the higher the chances that the blastocyst was euploid (P < 0.001) and that pregnancy (P < 0.001) and live birth (P = 0.005) were reached. In blastocysts with ICM graded B and blastocysts graded 4BB, DI was also positively associated with ploidy, pregnancy, and live birth (P < 0.05). ROC analysis showed that combining the Gardner scoring system with DI can more effectively predict pregnancy and live births, when compared to using the Gardner scoring system alone. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Accurate calculation of the DI value places high demands on image quality, requiring manual selection of the clearest focal plane and exposure control. Images with the ICM not completely within the field of view cannot be used. The association between the density of ICM and chromosomal mosaicism was not evaluated. The associations between the density of ICM and different assisted reproductive technologies and different culture conditions in embryo laboratories were also not evaluated. Prospective studies are needed to further investigate the impact of ICM density on clinical outcomes. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: ICM density assessment is a new direction in blastocyst assessment. This study explores new ways of assessing blastocyst ICM density and develops quantitative indicators and a corresponding qualitative evaluation scheme for ICM density. The DI of the blastocyst ICM developed in this study is easy to calculate and requires only TL equipment and image processing, providing positive guidance for clinical outcomes. The qualitative evaluation scheme of ICM density can assist embryologists without TL equipment to manually evaluate ICM density. ICM density is a simple indicator that can be used in practice and is a good complement to the blastocyst scoring systems currently used in most centers. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was supported by the National Key Research & Development Program of China (2021YFC2700603). The authors report no financial or commercial conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Vitrification preservation of good-quality blastocysts for more than 5 years reduces implantation and live birth rates.

STUDY QUESTION: Does vitrification cryopreservation of embryos for more than 5 years affect the pregnancy outcomes after frozen embryo transfer (FET)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Vitrification cryopreservation of good-quality blastocysts for more than 5 years is associated with a decrease in the implantation rate (IR) and live birth rate (LBR). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Previous studies have predominantly focused on embryos cryopreserved for relatively short durations (less than 5 years), yet the impact of extended cryopreservation duration on pregnancy outcomes remains a controversial issue. There is a relative scarcity of data regarding the efficacy and safety of storing embryos for 5 years or longer. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This retrospective study involved 36 665 eligible vitrified-thawed embryo transfer cycles from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2022, at a single fertility center in China. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Patients were divided into three groups according to embryo storage time: Group 1 consisted of 31 565 cycles, with storage time of 0-2 years; Group 2 consisted of 4458 cycles, with a storage time of 2-5 years; and Group 3 included 642 cycles, with storage time exceeding 5 years. The main outcome measures were IR and LBR. Secondary outcome variables included rates of biochemical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, and miscarriage, as well as neonatal outcomes. Reproductive outcomes were analyzed as binary variables. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to explore the effect of preservation time on pregnancy outcomes after correcting for confounding factors. In addition, we also assessed neonatal outcomes, such as large for gestational age (LGA) and small for gestational age (SGA). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: IRs in the three groups (0-2, 2-5, and >5 years) were 37.37%, 39.03%, and 35.78%, respectively (P = 0.017), and LBRs in the three groups were 37.29%, 39.09%, and 34.91%, respectively (P = 0.028). After adjustment for potential confounding factors, compared with the 0-2 years storage group, prolonged embryo vitrification preservation time (2-5 years or >5 years) did not affect secondary outcomes such as rates of biochemical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, and miscarriage (P > 0.05). But cryopreservation of embryos for more than 5 years reduced the IR (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.69-0.97, P = 0.020) and LBR (aOR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.91, P = 0.002). Multivariate stratified analysis also showed that prolonging the cryopreservation time of blastocysts (>5 years) reduced the IR (aOR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62-0.98, P = 0.033) and LBR (aOR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53-0.87, P = 0.002). However, no effect on cleavage embryos was observed (P > 0.05). We further conducted stratified analyses based on the number and quality of frozen blastocysts transferred, and the results showed that the FET results after transfers of good-quality blastocysts in the >5 years storage group were negatively affected. However, the storage time of non-good-quality blastocysts was not significantly associated with pregnancy outcomes. Regarding the neonatal outcomes (of singletons), embryo vitrification preservation time had no effect on preterm birth rates, fetal birth weight, or neonatal sex ratios. However, as the storage time increased, rates of SGA (5.60%, 4.10%, and 1.18%) decreased, while rates of LGA (5.22%, 6.75%, and 9.47%) increased (P < 0.05). After adjusting for confounding factors, the increase in LGA and the decrease in SGA were significantly correlated with the duration of storage time. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This was a retrospective study using data from a single fertility center, even though the data had been adjusted, our findings still need to be validated in further studies. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: With the full implementation of the two-child policy in China, there may be more patients whose embryos have been frozen for a longer time in the future. Patients should be aware that the IR and LBR of blastocysts are negatively affected when the cryopreservation time is longer than 5 years. Couples may therefore consider shortening the time until FET treatment. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was supported by the National Nature Science Foundation of China (No. 82101672), Science and Technology Projects in Guangzhou (No. 2024A03J0180), General Guidance Program for Western Medicine of Guangzhou Municipal Health Commission (No. 20231A011096), and the Medical Key Discipline of Guangzhou (2021-2023). None of the authors have any conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Assessment of reproductive outcomes of fresh versus cryopreserved ejaculated sperm samples-a retrospective analysis of 44 423 oocyte donation ICSI cycles.

STUDY QUESTION: Does the use of frozen sperm affect live birth rate (LBR) and cumulative LBR (CLBR) compared to fresh sperm samples in oocyte donation ICSI cycles? SUMMARY ANSWER: Although there were slight decreases in pregnancy rates (PRs) and LBR, as well as CLBR per embryo replaced and per embryo transfer (ET), when frozen sperm samples were used compared to fresh ejaculates, their clinical impact was limited. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Sperm cryopreservation is part of the daily routine in reproduction clinics worldwide because of its many advantages in cycle planning. Nonetheless, there is a lack of agreement in terms of its impact on the outcomes of ICSI cycles. Previous studies showed conflicting conclusions and focused on different populations, which makes reaching consensus on the impact of sperm freezing-thawing complicated. Moreover, classical parameters are used to assess cycle success: pregnancy, live birth and miscarriage rates per ET. This study reports those measurements plus CLBR, which more accurately reflects the impact of the technique on the likelihood of achieving a newborn. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A retrospective multicenter observational cohort study, including data from 37 041 couples and 44 423 ICSI procedures from January 2008 to June 2022, was carried out. The group using frozen sperm included 23 852 transferred embryos and 108 661 inseminated oocytes, whereas the fresh sample group comprised 73 953 embryos replaced and 381 509 injected oocytes. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Outcomes measured per first ET and per ET were compared between groups using Fisher's exact test and Chi-squared test, as appropriate. Binary-logistics regression models were used to adjust the analyses according to clinically relevant co-variables. Kaplan-Meier curves plotted the CLBR per oocyte inseminated, per embryo replaced and per ET, and compared between groups using the Mantel-Cox test. Cox regressions were employed for the multivariate analyses of CLBR. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The frozen sperm group showed a slightly lower biochemical (3.55% and 2.56%), clinical (3.68% and 3.54%) and ongoing (3.63% and 3.15%) PR compared to the cycles using fresh sperm, respectively, both per first ET and per ET. LBR was 4.57% lower per first ET and 3.95% lower per ET in the frozen sperm group than the fresh sperm group. There was also a subtle increase of 2.66% in biochemical miscarriage rate per ET when using frozen versus fresh sperm. All these differences remained statistically significant after the multivariate analysis (adjusted P ≤ 0.001). There were statistically significant differences in CLBR per embryo replaced and per ET but not per oocyte used (adjusted P = 0.071). Despite the statistical significance of the differences between the groups, those using frozen sperm required only 0.54 more oocytes injected, 0.45 more embryos transferred and 0.41 more ET procedures, on average, to achieve a live birth compared to the fresh samples. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The retrospective nature of the study subjects the data to biases or potential errors during annotation on the source clinical and cycle records. This study uses multivariate analyses to control biases as much as possible. Using the oocyte donation model also contributes to reducing heterogeneity in the oocyte quality factor. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The large sample sizes included in this study allowed for the detection of small changes in cycle success rates between groups. Although statistically significant, the decrease in PRs, LBR, and CLBR when using frozen sperm can be clinically overlooked in favor of the many benefits of sperm cryopreservation. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): None declared. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.

Abnormal cleavage up to Day 3 does not compromise live birth and neonatal outcomes of embryos that have achieved full blastulation: a retrospective cohort study.

STUDY QUESTION: Do embryos displaying abnormal cleavage (ABNCL) up to Day 3 have compromised live birth rates and neonatal outcomes if full blastulation has been achieved prior to transfer? SUMMARY ANSWER: ABNCL is associated with reduced full blastulation rates but does not impact live birth rates and neonatal outcomes once full blastulation has been achieved. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY?: It is widely accepted that ABNCL is associated with reduced implantation rates of embryos when transferred at the cleavage stage. However, evidence is scarce in the literature reporting birth outcomes from blastocysts arising from ABNCL embryos, likely because they are ranked low priority for transfer. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This retrospective cohort study included 1562 consecutive autologous in vitro fertilization cycles (maternal age 35.1 ± 4.7 years) performed at Fertility North, Australia between January 2017 and June 2022. Fresh transfers were performed on Day 3 or 5, with remaining embryos cultured up to Day 6 before vitrification. A total of 6019 embryos were subject to blastocyst culture, and a subset of 664 resulting frozen blastocysts was included for live birth and neonatal outcome analyses following single transfers. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: ABNCL events were annotated from the first mitotic division up to Day 3, including direct cleavage (DC), reverse cleavage (RC) and <6 intercellular contact points at the 4-cell stage (<6ICCP). For DC and RC in combination, the ratios of affected blastomeres over the total number of all blastomeres up to Day 3 were also recorded. All pregnancies were followed up until birth with gestational age, birthweight, and sex of the baby being recorded. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Full blastulation rates for embryos showing DC (19.5%), RC (41.7%), <6ICCP (58.8%), and mixed (≥2) ABNCL types (26.4%) were lower than the rates for those without ABNCL (67.2%, P < 0.01 respectively). Subgroup analysis showed declining full blastulation rates with increasing ratios of combined DC/RC affected blastomeres over all blastomeres up to the 8-cell stage (66.2% when 0 affected, 47.0% when 0.25 affected, 27.4% when 0.5 affected, 14.5% when 0.75 affected, and 7.7% when all affected, P < 0.01). However, once full blastulation had been achieved, no difference was detected between DC, RC, <6ICCP, and no ABNCL blastocysts following single frozen transfers in subsequent live birth rates (25.9%, 33.0%, 36.0% versus 30.8%, P > 0.05, respectively), gestational age (38.7 ± 1.6, 38.5 ± 1.2, 38.3 ± 3.5 versus 38.5 ± 1.8 weeks, P > 0.05, respectively) and birthweight (3343.0 ± 649.1, 3378.2 ± 538.4, 3352.6 ± 841.3 versus 3313.9 ± 509.6 g, P > 0.05, respectively). Multiple regression (logistic or linear as appropriate) confirmed no differences in all of the above measures after accounting for potential confounders. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Our study is limited by its retrospective nature, making it impossible to control every known or unknown confounder. Embryos in our dataset, being surplus after selection for fresh transfer, may not represent the general embryo population. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our findings highlight the incremental impact of ABNCL, depending on the ratio of affected blastomeres up to Day 3, on subsequent full blastulation. The reassuring live birth and neonatal outcomes of ABNCL blastocysts imply a potential self-correction mechanism among those embryos reaching the blastocyst stage, which provides valuable guidance for clinical practice and patient counseling. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETTING INTEREST(S): This research is supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship. All authors report no conflict of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Does recurrent implantation failure exist? Prevalence and outcomes of five consecutive euploid blastocyst transfers in 123 987 patients.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the clinical pregnancy and live birth rates in women who underwent up to two more euploid blastocyst transfers after three failures in the absence of another known factor that affects implantation? SUMMARY ANSWER: The fourth and fifth euploid blastocyst transfers resulted in similar live birth rates of 40% and 53.3%, respectively, culminating in a cumulative live birth rate of 98.1% (95% CI = 96.5-99.6%) after five euploid blastocyst transfers. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The first three euploid blastocysts have similar implantation and live birth rates and provide a cumulative live birth rate of 92.6%. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: An international multi-center retrospective study was conducted at 25 individual clinics. The study period spanned between January 2012 and December 2022. A total of 123 987 patients with a total of 64 572 euploid blastocyst transfers were screened for inclusion. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Patients with a history of any embryo transfer at another clinic, history of any unscreened embryo transfer at participating clinics, parental karyotype abnormalities, the use of donor oocytes or a gestational carrier, untreated intracavitary uterine pathology (e.g. polyp, leiomyoma), congenital uterine anomalies, adenomyosis, communicating hydrosalpinx, endometrial thickness <6 mm prior to initiating of progesterone, use of testicular sperm due to non-obstructive azoospermia in the male partner, transfer of an embryo with a reported intermediate chromosome copy number (i.e. mosaic), preimplantation genetic testing cycles for monogenic disorders, or structural chromosome rearrangements were excluded. Ovarian stimulation protocols and embryology laboratory procedures including trophectoderm biopsy followed the usual practice of each center. The ploidy status of blastocysts was determined with comprehensive chromosome screening. Endometrial preparation protocols followed the usual practice of participating centers and included programmed cycles, natural or modified natural cycles. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 105 (0.085% of the total population) patients met the criteria and underwent at least one additional euploid blastocyst transfer after failing to achieve a positive pregnancy test with three consecutive euploid blastocyst transfers. Outcomes of the fourth and fifth euploid blastocyst transfers were similar across participating centers. Overall, the live birth rate was similar with the fourth and fifth euploid blastocysts (40% vs 53.3%, relative risk = 1.33, 95% CI = 0.93-1.9, P value = 0.14). Sensitivity analyses excluding blastocysts biopsied on Day 7 postfertilization, women with a BMI >30 kg/m2, cycles using non-ejaculate or donor sperm, double-embryo transfer cycles, and cycles in which the day of embryo transfer was modified due to endometrial receptivity assay test result yielded similar results. Where data were available, the fourth euploid blastocyst had similar live birth rate with the first one (relative risk = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.58-1.21, P = 0.29). The cumulative live birth rate after five euploid blastocyst transfers was 98.1% (95% CI = 96.5-99.6%). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Retrospective design has its own inherent limitations. Patients continuing with a further euploid embryo transfer and patients dropping out from treatment after three failed euploid transfers can be systematically different, perhaps with regard to ovarian reserve or economic status. WIDER IMPLICATION OF THE FINDINGS: Implantation failure seems to be mainly due to embryonic factors. Given the stable and high live birth rates up to five euploid blastocysts, unexplained recurrent implantation failure should have a prevalence of <2%. Proceeding with another embryo transfer can be the best next step once a known etiology for implantation failure is ruled out. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): None. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Natural proliferative phase frozen embryo transfer-a new approach which may facilitate scheduling without hindering pregnancy outcomes.

STUDY QUESTION: How does a natural proliferative phase (NPP) strategy for frozen embryo transfer (FET) compare with the conventional artificial (AC) and natural (NC) endometrial preparation protocols in terms of live birth rates (LBR)? SUMMARY ANSWER: This study supports the hypothesis that, just as for NC, NPP-FET may be a superior alternative to AC in terms of LBR. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Although FETs are increasing worldwide, the optimal FET protocol is still largely controversial. Despite recent evidence supporting a possibly higher efficacy and safety of NC FETs, their widespread use is limited by the difficulties encountered during cycle monitoring and scheduling. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: In this single center retrospective cohort study, we describe the NPP-FET protocol, in which vaginal progesterone is initiated during the proliferative phase as soon as an endometrium with a thickness of at least 7 mm is identified and ovulation is ruled out, regardless of mean diameter of the dominant follicle. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: For comparison, we considered all blastocyst stage FET cycles preformed at a private infertility center between January 2010 and June 2022, subdivided according to the following subgroups of endometrial preparation: AC, NPP, and NC. We performed multivariable generalized estimating equations regression analysis to account for the following potential confounding variables: oocyte age at retrieval, oocyte source (autologous without preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A) versus autologous with PGT-A versus donated), number of oocytes retrieved/donated, embryo developmental stage (Day 5 versus Day 6), number of embryos transferred, quality of the best embryo transferred, and year of treatment. The main outcome measure was LBR. The secondary outcomes included hCG positive, clinical pregnancy and miscarriage rates, and the following perinatal outcomes: first trimester bleeding, second/third trimester bleeding, preterm rupture of membranes, gestational diabetes, gestational hypertensive disorders (GHD), and gestational age at delivery. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 5791 FET cycles were included in this analysis (2226 AC, 349 NPP, and 3216 NC). The LBR for FET was lower in the AC subgroup when compared to the NPP and NC (38.4%, 49.1%, and 45.2%, respectively; P < 0.01 AC versus NPP and AC versus NC). The rates of miscarriage were also lower in the NPP and NC subgroups when compared to AC (19.7%, 25.0%, and 34.9%, respectively; P < 0.01 NPP versus AC and NC versus AC). Considering perinatal outcomes, NPP-FET and NC were associated with a significantly lower first trimester bleeding compared to AC (17.3%, 14.7%, and 37.6%, respectively; P < 0.01 NPP versus AC and NC versus AC). Additionally, NC was associated with a lower rate of GHD when compared with AC (8.6% versus 14.5%, P < 0.01), while the rate following NPP-FET was 9.4%. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This study is limited by its retrospective design. Moreover, there was also a low number of patients in the NPP subgroup, which may have led the study to be underpowered to detect clinically relevant differences between the subgroups. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our study posits that the NPP-FET protocol may be an effective and safe alternative to both NC and AC, while still allowing for enhanced practicality in patient follow-up and FET scheduling. Further investigation on NPP-FET is warranted, with prospective studies including a larger and more homogeneous subsets of patients. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research was supported by the IVI-RMA-Lisbon (2008-LIS-053-CG). The authors did not receive any funding for this study. The authors have no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.

A 10-year follow-up of reproductive outcomes in women attempting motherhood after elective oocyte cryopreservation.

STUDY QUESTION: Which reproductive treatment outcomes are observed in women who underwent elective oocyte cryopreservation (EOC) and who returned to the clinic with a desire for a child? SUMMARY ANSWER: Whether to warm oocytes or to first use fresh own oocytes for ART depends on age upon returning, but both strategies result in favorable reproductive outcomes. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Most affluent countries have observed a trend toward postponement of childbearing, and EOC is increasingly used based on the assumption that oocytes cryopreserved at a younger age may extend a woman's reproductive lifespan and mitigate her age-related fertility decline. Although most follow-up studies after EOC have focused on women who requested oocyte warming, a substantial proportion of women who do not conceive naturally will embark on fertility treatment without using their cryopreserved oocytes. Reports on reproductive outcomes in past EOC users are scarce, and the lack of reproductive treatment algorithms in this group of women hampers counseling toward the most efficient clinical strategy. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This retrospective observational single-center study encompasses 843 women who had elective oocyte vitrification between 2009 and 2019 at our fertility clinic. Women who underwent fertility preservation for medical or oncological reasons were excluded. This study describes the outcomes of the diverse reproductive treatment strategies performed until May 2022 in women returning to our clinic to attempt motherhood. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Using descriptive statistics, patient characteristics and data of ovarian stimulation (OS) of EOC cycles were analyzed, as well as data related to OS and laboratory data of ART in women who pursued fertility treatment with and/or without using their cryopreserved oocytes. The primary outcome was live birth rate (LBR) per patient after oocyte warming and after ART using fresh oocytes. Secondary outcomes were return rate, utilization rate of the cryopreserved oocytes, laboratory outcomes upon return, and LBR per embryo transfer. A multivariable regression model was developed to identify factors associated with the decision to thaw oocytes as the primary strategy and factors associated with ongoing pregnancy upon return to the clinic. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 1353 EOC cycles (mean ± SD, 1.6 ± 0.9 per patient) were performed. At the time of EOC, the mean age was 36.5 ± 2.8 years, mean anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) was 2.3 ± 2.0 ng/ml, and 174 (20.6%) women had a partner. On average, 13.9 ± 9.2 mature oocytes were cryopreserved. Two hundred thirty-one (27.4%) women returned to the clinic, an average of 39.9 ± 23.4 months after EOC. Upon returning, their mean age was 40.4 ± 3.1 years, mean AMH was 1.5 ± 1.5 ng/ml, and 158/231 (68.3%) patients had a partner. As a primary approach, 110/231 (47.6%) past EOC users embarked on oocyte warming, 50/231 (21.6%) had intrauterine insemination, and 71/231 (30.7%) had ART using fresh own oocytes. Cumulative LBR (CLBR) was 45.9% (106/231) notwithstanding a miscarriage rate (MR) of 30.7% (51/166) in the entire cohort. In total, 141 women performed oocyte warming at some stage in their treatment trajectory. A subset of 90/231 (39.0%) patients exclusively had oocyte warming (41.6 ± 3.0 years, with 10.0 ± 5.2 oocytes warmed per patient). 52/231 (22.5%) patients exclusively had ART using fresh own oocytes (mean age of 39.0 ± 2.8 years, with 9.9 ± 7.4 mature oocytes retrieved per patient). CLBR was 37/90 (41.1%) in the oocyte warming-only group and 25/52 (48.1%) in the OS-only group. MR/transfer was 25.0% and 29.3% in the oocyte warming-only group and the OS-only group, respectively. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Both sample size and the retrospective design are limitations of this study. The decision to embark on a specific reproductive treatment strategy was based on patient preference, after counseling on their treatment options. This precludes direct comparison of the efficiency of reproductive treatment options in past EOC users in this study. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Reporting on clinical outcomes of women who underwent EOC and returned to the clinic to embark on divergent reproductive treatment strategies is mandatory to establish guidelines for best clinical practice in this growing patient population. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): None. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

ESHRE guideline: number of embryos to transfer during IVF/ICSI†.

STUDY QUESTION: Which clinical and embryological factors should be considered to apply double embryo transfer (DET) instead of elective single embryo transfer (eSET)? SUMMARY ANSWER: No clinical or embryological factor per se justifies a recommendation of DET instead of eSET in IVF/ICSI. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: DET is correlated with a higher rate of multiple pregnancy, leading to a subsequent increase in complications for both mother and babies. These complications include preterm birth, low birthweight, and other perinatal adverse outcomes. To mitigate the risks associated with multiple pregnancy, eSET is recommended by international and national professional organizations as the preferred approach in ART. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The guideline was developed according to the structured methodology for development and update of ESHRE guidelines. Literature searches were performed in PUBMED/MEDLINE and Cochrane databases, and relevant papers published up to May 2023, written in English, were included. Live birth rate, cumulative live birth rate, and multiple pregnancy rate were considered as critical outcomes. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Based on the collected evidence, recommendations were discussed until a consensus was reached within the Guideline Development Group (GDG). A stakeholder review was organized after the guideline draft was finalized. The final version was approved by the GDG and the ESHRE Executive Committee. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The guideline provides 35 recommendations on the medical and non-medical risks associated with multiple pregnancies and on the clinical and embryological factors to be considered when deciding on the number of embryos to transfer. These recommendations include 25 evidence-based recommendations, of which 24 were formulated as strong recommendations and one as conditional, and 10 good practice points. Of the evidence-based recommendations, seven (28%) were supported by moderate-quality evidence. The remaining recommendations were supported by low (three recommendations; 12%), or very low-quality evidence (15 recommendations; 60%). Owing to the lack of evidence-based research, the guideline also clearly mentions recommendations for future studies. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The guideline assessed different factors one by one based on existing evidence. However, in real life, clinicians' decisions are based on several prognostic factors related to each patient's case. Furthermore, the evidence from randomized controlled trials is too scarce to formulate high-quality evidence-based recommendations. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The guideline provides health professionals with clear advice on best practice in the decision-making process during IVF/ICSI, based on the best evidence currently available, and recommendations on relevant information that should be communicated to patients. In addition, a list of research recommendations is provided to stimulate further studies in the field. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The guideline was developed and funded by ESHRE, covering expenses associated with the guideline meetings, the literature searches, and the dissemination of the guideline. The guideline group members did not receive payment. DPB declared receiving honoraria for lectures from Merck, Ferring, and Gedeon Richter. She is a member of ESHRE EXCO, and the Mediterranean Society for reproductive medicine and the president of the Croatian Society for Gynaecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine. CDG is the past Chair of the ESHRE EIM Consortium and a paid deputy member of the Editorial board of Human Reproduction. IR declared receiving reimbursement from ESHRE and EDCD for attending meetings. She holds an unpaid leadership role in OBBCSSR, ECDC Sohonet, and AER. KAR-W declared receiving grants for clinical researchers and funding provision to the institution from the Swedish Cancer Society (200170F), the Senior Clinical Investigator Award, Radiumhemmets Forskningsfonder (Dnr: 201313), Stockholm County Council FoU (FoUI-953912) and Karolinska Institutet (Dnr 2020-01963), NovoNordisk, Merck and Ferring Pharmaceuticals. She received consulting fees from the Swedish Ministry of Health and Welfare. She received honoraria from Roche, Pfizer, and Organon for chairmanship and lectures. She received support from Organon for attending meetings. She participated in advisory boards for Merck, Nordic countries, and Ferring. She declared receiving time-lapse equipment and grants with payment to institution for pre-clinical research from Merck pharmaceuticals and from Ferring. SS-R received research funding from Roche Diagnostics, Organon/MSD, Theramex, and Gedeo-Richter. He received consulting fees from Organon/MSD, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, and Merck Serono. He declared receiving honoraria for lectures from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Besins, Organon/MSD, Theramex, and Gedeon Richter. He received support for attending Gedeon Richter meetings and participated in the Data Safety Monitoring Board of the T-TRANSPORT trial. He is the Deputy of ESHRE SQART special interest group. He holds stock options in IVI Lisboa and received equipment and other services from Roche Diagnostics and Ferring Pharmaceuticals. KT declared receiving payment for honoraria for giving lectures from Merck Serono and Organon. She is member of the safety advisory board of EDQM. She holds a leadership role in the ICCBBA board of directors. ZV received reimbursement from ESHRE for attending meetings. She also received research grants from ESHRE and Juhani Aaltonen Foundation. She is the coordinator of EHSRE SQART special interest group. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. DISCLAIMER: This guideline represents the views of ESHRE, which were achieved after careful consideration of the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. In the absence of scientific evidence on certain aspects, a consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders has been obtained. Adherence to these clinical practice guidelines does not guarantee a successful or specific outcome, nor does it establish a standard of care. Clinical practice guidelines do not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type. ESHRE makes no warranty, express or implied, regarding the clinical practice guidelines and specifically excludes any warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular use or purpose (full disclaimer available at https://www.eshre.eu/Guidelines-and-Legal).

Hysterosalpingo-foam sonography versus hysterosalpingography during fertility work-up: an economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the costs and effects of tubal patency testing by hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy) compared to hysterosalpingography (HSG) in infertile women during the fertility work-up? SUMMARY ANSWER: During the fertility work-up, clinical management based on the test results of HyFoSy leads to slightly lower, though not statistically significant, live birth rates, at lower costs, compared to management based on HSG results. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Traditionally, tubal patency testing during the fertility work-up is performed by HSG. The FOAM trial, formally a non-inferiority study, showed that management decisions based on the results of HyFoSy resulted in a comparable live birth rate at 12 months compared to HSG (46% versus 47%; difference -1.2%, 95% CI: -3.4% to 1.5%; P = 0.27). Compared to HSG, HyFoSy is associated with significantly less pain, it lacks ionizing radiation and exposure to iodinated contrast medium. Moreover, HyFoSy can be performed by a gynaecologist during a one-stop fertility work-up. To our knowledge, the costs of both strategies have never been compared. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We performed an economic evaluation alongside the FOAM trial, a randomized multicenter study conducted in the Netherlands. Participating infertile women underwent, both HyFoSy and HSG, in a randomized order. The results of both tests were compared and women with discordant test results were randomly allocated to management based on the results of one of the tests. The follow-up period was twelve months. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We studied 1160 infertile women (18-41 years) scheduled for tubal patency testing. The primary outcome was ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth. The economic evaluation compared costs and effects of management based on either test within 12 months. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): the difference in total costs and chance of live birth. Data were analyzed using the intention to treat principle. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Between May 2015 and January 2019, 1026 of the 1160 women underwent both tubal tests and had data available: 747 women with concordant results (48% live births), 136 with inconclusive results (40% live births), and 143 with discordant results (41% had a live birth after management based on HyFoSy results versus 49% with live birth after management based on HSG results). When comparing the two strategies-management based on HyfoSy results versus HSG results-the estimated chance of live birth was 46% after HyFoSy versus 47% after HSG (difference -1.2%; 95% CI: -3.4% to 1.5%). For the procedures itself, HyFoSy cost €136 and HSG €280. When costs of additional fertility treatments were incorporated, the mean total costs per couple were €3307 for the HyFoSy strategy and €3427 for the HSG strategy (mean difference €-119; 95% CI: €-125 to €-114). So, while HyFoSy led to lower costs per couple, live birth rates were also slightly lower. The ICER was €10 042, meaning that by using HyFoSy instead of HSG we would save €10 042 per each additional live birth lost. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: When interpreting the results of this study, it needs to be considered that there was a considerable uncertainty around the ICER, and that the direct fertility enhancing effect of both tubal patency tests was not incorporated as women underwent both tubal patency tests in this study. WIDER IMPLICATION OF THE FINDINGS: Compared to clinical management based on HSG results, management guided by HyFoSy leads to slightly lower live birth rates (though not statistically significant) at lower costs, less pain, without ionizing radiation and iodinated contrast exposure. Further research on the comparison of the direct fertility-enhancing effect of both tubal patency tests is needed. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): FOAM trial was an investigator-initiated study, funded by ZonMw, a Dutch organization for Health Research and Development (project number 837001504). IQ Medical Ventures provided the ExEm®-FOAM kits free of charge. The funders had no role in study design, collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data. K.D. reports travel-and speakers fees from Guerbet and her department received research grants from Guerbet outside the submitted work. H.R.V. received consulting-and travel fee from Ferring. A.M.v.P. reports received consulting fee from DEKRA and fee for an expert meeting from Ferring, both outside the submitted work. C.H.d.K. received travel fee from Merck. F.J.M.B. received a grant from Merck and speakers fee from Besins Healthcare. F.J.M.B. is a member of the advisory board of Merck and Ferring. J.v.D. reported speakers fee from Ferring. J.S. reports a research agreement with Takeda and consultancy for Sanofi on MR of motility outside the submitted work. M.v.W. received a travel grant from Oxford Press in the role of deputy editor for Human Reproduction and participates in a DSMB as independent methodologist in obstetrics studies in which she has no other role. B.W.M. received an investigator grant from NHMRC GNT1176437. B.W.M. reports consultancy for ObsEva, Merck, Guerbet, iGenomix, and Merck KGaA and travel support from Merck KGaA. V.M. received research grants from Guerbet, Merck, and Ferring and travel and speakers fees from Guerbet. The other authors do not report conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: International Clinical Trials Registry Platform No. NTR4746.

Age-related increase in live-birth rates of first frozen thaw embryo versus first fresh transfer in initial assisted reproductive technology cycles without PGT.

BACKGROUND: The landscape of assisted reproductive technology (ART) has seen a significant shift towards frozen-thawed embryo transfers (FET) over fresh transfers, driven by technological advancements and clinical considerations. This study aimed to compare live birth outcomes between primary FET and fresh transfers, focusing on cycles without preimplantation genetic testing (PGT), using United States national data from the SART CORS database spanning from 2014 to 2020. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of autologous first ART cycles without PGT comparing primary embryo transfer (frozen thaw vs. fresh) success rates from the 2014-2020 SARTCORS database. Live-birth rates (LBR) and cumulative live-birth rates (CLBR) were compared between first FET versus first fresh embryo transfer from an index retrieval. Multivariate logistic regression (MLR) determined association between live birth outcomes and method of transfer. In a subsequent sub-analysis, we compared these two embryo transfer methods among patients with either diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) or male factor infertility. RESULTS: 228,171 first ART cycles resulted in primary embryo transfer. 62,100 initial FETs and 166,071 fresh transfers were compared. Initial FETs demonstrated higher LBR and CLBR compared to fresh transfers (LBR 48.3% vs. 39.8%, p < 0.001; CLBR 74.0% vs. 60.0%, p < 0.0001). MLR indicated greater chances of live birth with FET across all age groups, with adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of live-birth incrementally increasing with advancing age groups. For DOR cycles, LBR and CLBR were significantly higher for FET compared to fresh (33.9% vs. 26.0%, p < 0.001, 44.5% vs. 37.6%, p < 0.0001), respectively. MF cycles also demonstrated higher LBR and CLBR with FET (52.3% vs. 44.2%, p < 0.001, 81.2% vs. 68.9%, p < 0.0001), respectively. MLR demonstrated that in DOR cycles, initial FET was associated with greater chance of live birth in age groups ≥ 35yo (p < 0.01), with aOR of live birth increasingly considerably for those > 42yo (aOR 2.63, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Overall LBR and CLBR were greater for first FET than fresh transfers with incremental increases in odds of live birth with advancing age, suggesting the presence of a more favorable age-related change in endometrial receptivity present in frozen-thawed cycles. For both DOR and MF cycles, LBR and CLBR after primary transfer were greater for first FET than fresh. However, this was particularly evident in older ages for DOR cycles. This suggests that supraphysiologic stimulation in older DOR cycles may be detrimental to endometrial receptivity, which is in part corrected for in FET cycles.

The role of age and AMH on cumulative live birth rates over multiple frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: a study based on low prognosis patients of POSEIDON 3 and 4 groups.

BACKGROUND: Among the POSEIDON criteria, group 3 and group 4 have an expected low prognosis. For those patients with inadequate ovary reserve, embryo accumulated from consecutive oocyte retrieval cycles for multiple frozen-thawed embryo transfers (FET) has become more common. It is necessary to inform them of the pregnancy outcomes after single or multiple FET cycles before the treatment. However few studies about cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) for those with low prognosis have been reported. METHODS: This retrospective study included 4712 patients undergoing frozen embryo transfer cycles from July 2015 to August 2020. Patients were stratified as POSEIDON group 3, group 4, control 1 group (< 35 years) and control 2 group (≥ 35 years). The primary outcome is CLBRs up to six FET cycles and the secondary outcomes were LBRs per transfer cycle. Optimistic approach was used for the analysis of CLBRs and the depiction of cumulative incidence curves. RESULTS: Under optimistic model analyses, control 1 group exhibited the highest CLBR (93.98%, 95%CI 91.63-95.67%) within 6 FET cycles, followed by the CLBR from women in POSEIDON group 3(92.51%, 95%CI 77.1-97.55)was slightly lower than that in control 1 group. The CLBR of POSEIDON group 4(55% ,95%CI 39.34-70.66%)was the lowest and significantly lower than that of control 2 group(88.7%, 95%CI 80.68-96.72%). Further, patients in POSEIDON group 4 reached a CLBR plateau after 5 FET cycles. CONCLUSIONS: The patients of POSEIDON group 3 may not be considered as traditional "low prognosis" in clinical practice as extending the number of FET cycles up to 6 can archive considerably CLBR as control women. While for the POSEIDON group 4, a simple repeat of the FET cycle is not recommended after four failed FET cycles, some strategies such as PGT-A may be beneficial.

In vitro fertilization outcome based on the detailed early luteal phase trajectory of hormones: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian stimulation and the use of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) for triggering oocyte maturation in women undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) introduces several differences in luteal phase hormone levels compared with natural cycles that may negatively impact on endometrial receptivity and pregnancy rates after fresh embryo transfer. Exogenous luteal phase support is given to overcome these issues. The suitability of a pragmatic approach to luteal phase support is not known due to a lack of data on early phase luteal hormone levels and their association with fertility outcomes during IVF with fresh embryo transfer. This study determined early luteal phase profiles of serum progesterone, 17-hydroxyprogesterone and hCG, and associations between hormone levels/hormone level profile after hCG trigger and the live birth rate in women undergoing IVF with fresh embryo transfer. METHODS: This prospective single center, cohort study was conducted in Vietnam from January 2021 to December 2022. Women aged 18-38 years with normal ovarian reserve and undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation using a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol were included. Serum hormone levels were determined before trigger, at 12, 24 and 36 h after hCG, and daily from 1 to 6 days after oocyte pick-up. Serum hormone level profiles were classified as lower or upper. The primary outcome was live birth rate based on early luteal phase hormone level profile. RESULTS: Ninety-five women were enrolled. Live birth occurred in 19/69 women (27.5%) with a lower progesterone profile and 13/22 (59.1%) with an upper progesterone profile (risk ratio [RR] 2.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-3.60), and in 6/31 (19.4%) versus 26/60 (43.3%) with a lower versus upper serum 17-hydroxyprogesterone profile (RR 2.24; 95% CI 1.03-4.86). Nearly 20% of women had peak progesterone concentration on or before day 3 after oocyte pick-up, and this was associated with significantly lower chances of having a life birth. CONCLUSIONS: These data show the importance of proper corpus luteum function with sufficient progesterone/17-hydroxyprogesterone production for achievement of pregnancy and to maximize the chance of live birth during IVF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04693624 ( www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov ).

Predicting personalized cumulative live birth rate after a complete in vitro fertilization cycle: an analysis of 32,306 treatment cycles in China.

BACKGROUND: The cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) has been regarded as a key measure of in vitro fertilization (IVF) success after a complete treatment cycle. Women undergoing IVF face great psychological pressure and financial burden. A predictive model to estimate CLBR is needed in clinical practice for patient counselling and shaping expectations. METHODS: This retrospective study included 32,306 complete cycles derived from 29,023 couples undergoing IVF treatment from 2014 to 2020 at a university-affiliated fertility center in China. Three predictive models of CLBR were developed based on three phases of a complete cycle: pre-treatment, post-stimulation, and post-treatment. The non-linear relationship was treated with restricted cubic splines. Subjects from 2014 to 2018 were randomly divided into a training set and a test set at a ratio of 7:3 for model derivation and internal validation, while subjects from 2019 to 2020 were used for temporal validation. RESULTS: Predictors of pre-treatment model included female age (non-linear relationship), antral follicle count (non-linear relationship), body mass index, number of previous IVF attempts, number of previous embryo transfer failure, type of infertility, tubal factor, male factor, and scarred uterus. Predictors of post-stimulation model included female age (non-linear relationship), number of oocytes retrieved (non-linear relationship), number of previous IVF attempts, number of previous embryo transfer failure, type of infertility, scarred uterus, stimulation protocol, as well as endometrial thickness, progesterone and luteinizing hormone on trigger day. Predictors of post-treatment model included female age (non-linear relationship), number of oocytes retrieved (non-linear relationship), cumulative Day-3 embryos live-birth capacity (non-linear relationship), number of previous IVF attempts, scarred uterus, stimulation protocol, as well as endometrial thickness, progesterone and luteinizing hormone on trigger day. The C index of the three models were 0.7559, 0.7744, and 0.8270, respectively. All models were well calibrated (p = 0.687, p = 0.468, p = 0.549). In internal validation, the C index of the three models were 0.7422, 0.7722, 0.8234, respectively; and the calibration P values were all greater than 0.05. In temporal validation, the C index were 0.7430, 0.7722, 0.8234 respectively; however, the calibration P values were less than 0.05. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides three IVF models to predict CLBR according to information from different treatment stage, and these models have been converted into an online calculator ( https://h5.eheren.com/hcyc/pc/index.html#/home ). Internal validation and temporal validation verified the good discrimination of the predictive models. However, temporal validation suggested low accuracy of the predictive models, which might be attributed to time-associated amelioration of IVF practice.

Clinical data-based modeling of IVF live birth outcome and its application.

BACKGROUND: The low live birth rate and difficult decision-making of the in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment regimen bring great trouble to patients and clinicians. Based on the retrospective clinical data of patients undergoing the IVF cycle, this study aims to establish classification models for predicting live birth outcome (LBO) with machine learning methods. METHODS: The historical data of a total of 1405 patients undergoing IVF cycle were first collected and then analyzed by univariate and multivariate analysis. The statistically significant factors were identified and taken as input to build the artificial neural network (ANN) model and supporting vector machine (SVM) model for predicting the LBO. By comparing the model performance, the one with better results was selected as the final prediction model and applied in real clinical applications. RESULTS: Univariate and multivariate analysis shows that 7 factors were closely related to the LBO (with P < 0.05): Age, ovarian sensitivity index (OSI), controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) treatment regimen, Gn starting dose, endometrial thickness on human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) day, Progesterone (P) value on HCG day, and embryo transfer strategy. By taking the 7 factors as input, the ANN-based and SVM-based LBO models were established, yielding good prediction performance. Compared with the ANN model, the SVM model performs much better and was selected as the final model for the LBO prediction. In real clinical applications, the proposed ANN-based LBO model can predict the LBO with good performance and recommend the embryo transfer strategy of potential good LBO. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed model involving all essential IVF treatment factors can accurately predict LBO. It can provide objective and scientific assistance to clinicians for customizing the IVF treatment strategy like the embryo transfer strategy.

Does growth hormone supplementation of in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection improve cumulative live birth rates in women with poor embryonic development in the previous cycle?

BACKGROUND: Growth hormone (GH) has been proposed as an adjunct in in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles, especially in women with poor ovarian response. However, it is unclear whether GH supplementation is effective in women with poor embryonic development in the previous IVF cycle. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of GH supplementation in IVF/ICSI cycles in women with poor embryonic development in the previous cycle. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study from a public fertility center in China, in which we performed propensity score-matching (PSM) for female age and AFC in a ratio of 1:1. We compared the cumulative live birth rate per started cycle, as well as a series of secondary outcomes. We included 3,043 women with poor embryonic development in the previous IVF/ICSI cycle, of which 1,326 had GH as adjuvant therapy and 1,717 had not. After PSM, there were 694 women in each group. RESULTS: After PSM, multivariate analyses showed the cumulative live birth rate to be significantly higher in the GH group than the control group [N = 694, 34.7% vs. N = 694, 27.5%, risk ratio (RR): 1.4 (95%CI: 1.1-1.8)]. Endometrial thickness, number of oocytes retrieved, number of embryos available, and number of good-quality embryos were significantly higher in the GH group compared to controls. Pregnancy outcomes in terms of birth weight, gestational age, fetal sex, preterm birth rate, and type of delivery were comparable. When we evaluated the impact of GH on different categories of female age, the observed benefit in the GH group did not appear to be significant. When we assessed the effect of GH in different AFC categories, the effect of GH was strongest in women with an AFC5-6 (32.2% versus 19.5%; RR 2.0; 95% CI 1.2-3.3). CONCLUSIONS: Women with poor embryonic quality in the previous IVF/ICSI cycles have higher rates of cumulative live birth with GH supplementation.