Perinatal outcomes are similar in programmed and modified natural frozen embryo transfer cycles

IF 3.7 2区医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY

Reproductive biomedicine online Pub Date : 2024-06-27 DOI:10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.104347

Amanda S. Farrell , Megan Yuen , Laura E. Dodge , Denny Sakkas , Denis Vaughan , Thomas L. Toth

{"title":"Perinatal outcomes are similar in programmed and modified natural frozen embryo transfer cycles","authors":"Amanda S. Farrell , Megan Yuen , Laura E. Dodge , Denny Sakkas , Denis Vaughan , Thomas L. Toth","doi":"10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.104347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Research question</h3><p>How do perinatal outcomes differ between programmed and modified natural frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles?</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>A retrospective cohort study of 839 patients was undertaken at a university-affiliated fertility practice undergoing single blastocyst FET cycles between 2014 and 2020. The primary outcome measures were the incidence of ischaemic placental disease, small for gestational age (SGA), intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), preterm delivery, birth weight, and mode of delivery.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>When comparing programmed FET cycles with modified natural FET cycles, there was no increased risk of ischaemic placental disease [adjusted risk ratio (aRR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.61–1.14], IUGR (unadjusted RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.14–1.77), preterm delivery (aRR 1.11, 95% CI 0.72–1.70) or SGA (aRR 0.69, 95% CI 0.40–1.19). Patients in the programmed cohort had increased risk of caesarean delivery (aRR 1.32, 95% CI 1.10–1.59). These outcomes were unchanged when limited to patients undergoing their first FET cycle.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>There are no differences in patient and neonatal clinical outcomes between programmed and modified natural FET cycles. The choice of FET protocol should remain a shared decision between patient and provider.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":21134,"journal":{"name":"Reproductive biomedicine online","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reproductive biomedicine online","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1472648324005364","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research question

How do perinatal outcomes differ between programmed and modified natural frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles?

Design

A retrospective cohort study of 839 patients was undertaken at a university-affiliated fertility practice undergoing single blastocyst FET cycles between 2014 and 2020. The primary outcome measures were the incidence of ischaemic placental disease, small for gestational age (SGA), intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), preterm delivery, birth weight, and mode of delivery.

Results

When comparing programmed FET cycles with modified natural FET cycles, there was no increased risk of ischaemic placental disease [adjusted risk ratio (aRR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.61–1.14], IUGR (unadjusted RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.14–1.77), preterm delivery (aRR 1.11, 95% CI 0.72–1.70) or SGA (aRR 0.69, 95% CI 0.40–1.19). Patients in the programmed cohort had increased risk of caesarean delivery (aRR 1.32, 95% CI 1.10–1.59). These outcomes were unchanged when limited to patients undergoing their first FET cycle.

Conclusions

There are no differences in patient and neonatal clinical outcomes between programmed and modified natural FET cycles. The choice of FET protocol should remain a shared decision between patient and provider.

查看原文本刊更多论文

程序化和改良自然冷冻胚胎移植周期的围产期结果相似

研究问题程序化冷冻胚胎移植（FET）周期与改良自然冷冻胚胎移植（FET）周期的围产期结局有何不同？设计对 2014 年至 2020 年期间在一所大学附属生殖诊所接受单囊胚 FET 周期的 839 名患者进行了回顾性队列研究。主要结果指标为缺血性胎盘疾病、小于胎龄（SGA）、宫内生长受限（IUGR）、早产、出生体重和分娩方式的发生率。结果在比较程序化 FET 周期与改良自然 FET 周期时，缺血性胎盘疾病[调整风险比 (aRR) 0.83，95% CI 0.61-1.14]、宫内生长受限（未调整风险比 0.50，95% CI 0.14-1.77）、早产（aRR 1.11，95% CI 0.72-1.70）或 SGA（aRR 0.69，95% CI 0.40-1.19）的风险均未增加。程序队列中的患者剖腹产风险增加（aRR 1.32，95% CI 1.10-1.59）。结论程序化和改良自然FET周期的患者和新生儿临床结果没有差异。FET方案的选择仍应由患者和医疗服务提供者共同决定。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Reproductive biomedicine online 医学-妇产科学

CiteScore

7.20

自引率

7.50%

发文量

391

审稿时长

50 days

期刊介绍： Reproductive BioMedicine Online covers the formation, growth and differentiation of the human embryo. It is intended to bring to public attention new research on biological and clinical research on human reproduction and the human embryo including relevant studies on animals. It is published by a group of scientists and clinicians working in these fields of study. Its audience comprises researchers, clinicians, practitioners, academics and patients. Context: The period of human embryonic growth covered is between the formation of the primordial germ cells in the fetus until mid-pregnancy. High quality research on lower animals is included if it helps to clarify the human situation. Studies progressing to birth and later are published if they have a direct bearing on events in the earlier stages of pregnancy.