Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 9/2018

01-09-2018 | Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Live birth and multiple birth rates in US in vitro fertilization treatment using donor oocytes: a comparison of single-embryo transfer and double-embryo transfer

Authors: V. E. Klenov, S. L. Boulet, R. B. Mejia, D. M. Kissin, E. Munch, A. Mancuso, B. J. Van Voorhis

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 9/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

To compare live birth rates (LBRs) and multiple birth rates (MBRs) between elective single-embryo transfer (eSET) and double-embryo transfer (DET) in donor oocyte in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments in both a cycle-level and clinic-level analysis.

Methods

Donor oocyte IVF treatments performed by US IVF clinics reporting to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 2013–2014 were included in the analysis. Primary outcomes included LBR and MBR. Secondary outcomes included gestational age at delivery (GA) and birth weight (BW) of offspring. These outcomes were evaluated on an individual cycle level as well as on the clinic level.

Results

In multivariable models, LBR did not change significantly as clinics utilized eSET more frequently. MBR decreased significantly as utilization of eSET increased, from 39% MBR in clinics that utilized eSET 0–9% of the time to 7% MBR in clinics that used eSET 70% of the time (P < .0001). Mean BW and GA of IVF-conceived offspring both increased as clinics utilized eSET more frequently (2778 to 3185 g [P < .0001] and 37.5 to 38.5 weeks [P = .02] for clinics with the lowest and highest eSET utilization, respectively).

Conclusions

US IVF clinics utilizing eSET with higher frequencies have clinically comparable LBRs and significantly lower MBRs than clinics with lower-frequency eSET utilization. Mean offspring BW and GA increased with higher eSET utilization, further confirming the improved safety of this practice.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ASfRM, Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. 2014 Assisted reproductive technology national summary report. US Dept of Health and Human Services. 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ASfRM, Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. 2014 Assisted reproductive technology national summary report. US Dept of Health and Human Services. 2016.
2.
go back to reference Kawwass JF, Monsour M, Crawford S, Kissin DM, Session DR, Kulkarni AD, et al. Trends and outcomes for donor oocyte cycles in the United States, 2000-2010. JAMA. 2013;310(22):2426–34.PubMedPubMedCentral Kawwass JF, Monsour M, Crawford S, Kissin DM, Session DR, Kulkarni AD, et al. Trends and outcomes for donor oocyte cycles in the United States, 2000-2010. JAMA. 2013;310(22):2426–34.PubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Fitzpatrick KE, Tuffnell D, Kurinczuk JJ, Knight M. Pregnancy at very advanced maternal age: a UK population-based cohort study. BJOG. 2017;124(7):1097–106.CrossRefPubMed Fitzpatrick KE, Tuffnell D, Kurinczuk JJ, Knight M. Pregnancy at very advanced maternal age: a UK population-based cohort study. BJOG. 2017;124(7):1097–106.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Joseph KS, Allen AC, Dodds L, Turner LA, Scott H, Liston R. The perinatal effects of delayed childbearing. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105(6):1410–8.CrossRefPubMed Joseph KS, Allen AC, Dodds L, Turner LA, Scott H, Liston R. The perinatal effects of delayed childbearing. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105(6):1410–8.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 144. Multifetal gestations: twin, triplet, and higher-order multifetal pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(5):1118–32.CrossRef ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 144. Multifetal gestations: twin, triplet, and higher-order multifetal pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(5):1118–32.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Practice Committee of Society for Assisted Reproductive T, Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive M. Elective single-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(4):835–42.CrossRef Practice Committee of Society for Assisted Reproductive T, Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive M. Elective single-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(4):835–42.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Kresowik JD, Stegmann BJ, Sparks AE, Ryan GL, van Voorhis BJ. Five-years of a mandatory single-embryo transfer (mSET) policy dramatically reduces twinning rate without lowering pregnancy rates. Fertil Steril. 2011;96(6):1367–9.CrossRefPubMed Kresowik JD, Stegmann BJ, Sparks AE, Ryan GL, van Voorhis BJ. Five-years of a mandatory single-embryo transfer (mSET) policy dramatically reduces twinning rate without lowering pregnancy rates. Fertil Steril. 2011;96(6):1367–9.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Dude AM, Yeh JS, Muasher SJ. Donor oocytes are associated with preterm birth when compared to fresh autologous in vitro fertilization cycles in singleton pregnancies. Fertil Steril. 2016;106(3):660–5.CrossRefPubMed Dude AM, Yeh JS, Muasher SJ. Donor oocytes are associated with preterm birth when compared to fresh autologous in vitro fertilization cycles in singleton pregnancies. Fertil Steril. 2016;106(3):660–5.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Letur H, Peigne M, Ohl J, Cedrin-Durnerin I, Mathieu-D’Argent E, Scheffler F, et al. Hypertensive pathologies and egg donation pregnancies: results of a large comparative cohort study. Fertil Steril. 2016;106(2):284–90.CrossRefPubMed Letur H, Peigne M, Ohl J, Cedrin-Durnerin I, Mathieu-D’Argent E, Scheffler F, et al. Hypertensive pathologies and egg donation pregnancies: results of a large comparative cohort study. Fertil Steril. 2016;106(2):284–90.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Storgaard M, Loft A, Bergh C, Wennerholm UB, Soderstrom-Anttila V, Romundstad LB, et al. Obstetric and neonatal complications in pregnancies conceived after oocyte donation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2017;124(4):561–72.CrossRefPubMed Storgaard M, Loft A, Bergh C, Wennerholm UB, Soderstrom-Anttila V, Romundstad LB, et al. Obstetric and neonatal complications in pregnancies conceived after oocyte donation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2017;124(4):561–72.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Simchen MJ, Shulman A, Wiser A, Zilberberg E, Schiff E. The aged uterus: multifetal pregnancy outcome after ovum donation in older women. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2009;24(10):2500–3.CrossRef Simchen MJ, Shulman A, Wiser A, Zilberberg E, Schiff E. The aged uterus: multifetal pregnancy outcome after ovum donation in older women. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2009;24(10):2500–3.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Crawford S, Boulet SL, Kawwass JF, Jamieson DJ, Kissin DM. Cryopreserved oocyte versus fresh oocyte assisted reproductive technology cycles, United States, 2013. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(1):110–8.CrossRefPubMed Crawford S, Boulet SL, Kawwass JF, Jamieson DJ, Kissin DM. Cryopreserved oocyte versus fresh oocyte assisted reproductive technology cycles, United States, 2013. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(1):110–8.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Wang A, Santistevan A, Hunter Cohn K, Copperman A, Nulsen J, Miller BT, et al. Freeze-only versus fresh embryo transfer in a multicenter matched cohort study: contribution of progesterone and maternal age to success rates. Fertility and Sterility. 2017. Wang A, Santistevan A, Hunter Cohn K, Copperman A, Nulsen J, Miller BT, et al. Freeze-only versus fresh embryo transfer in a multicenter matched cohort study: contribution of progesterone and maternal age to success rates. Fertility and Sterility. 2017.
Metadata
Title
Live birth and multiple birth rates in US in vitro fertilization treatment using donor oocytes: a comparison of single-embryo transfer and double-embryo transfer
Authors
V. E. Klenov
S. L. Boulet
R. B. Mejia
D. M. Kissin
E. Munch
A. Mancuso
B. J. Van Voorhis
Publication date
01-09-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 9/2018
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1243-0

Other articles of this Issue 9/2018

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 9/2018 Go to the issue