Comparison of live birth rate and fetal outcomes between fresh embryo and frozen-thawed embryo transfers: a prospective study.

IF 2.8 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Seyedeh Farinaz Fattahpour, Parvin Hakimi, Fatemeh Tabatabaei, Mahsa Hejazad, Maryam Amoozadeh, Leila Sadeghi, Negin Rezaie, Razih Vejdani, Hosein Azizi
{"title":"Comparison of live birth rate and fetal outcomes between fresh embryo and frozen-thawed embryo transfers: a prospective study.","authors":"Seyedeh Farinaz Fattahpour, Parvin Hakimi, Fatemeh Tabatabaei, Mahsa Hejazad, Maryam Amoozadeh, Leila Sadeghi, Negin Rezaie, Razih Vejdani, Hosein Azizi","doi":"10.1186/s12884-025-07247-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The study aimed to compare the pregnancy, prenatal, and postnatal outcomes between fresh and frozen embryo transfer (ET) in intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles at Al-Zahra Referral Women's Hospital in northwest Iran.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective study was conducted among all infertile women (N = 469) who underwent embryo transfer between 2018 and 23 at Al-Zahra referral infertility center. Patients in cycles with fresh embryo transfer and patients for whom frozen embryos were transferred were compared in terms of live birth rate and fetal outcomes. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (AORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority of the participants were primary infertility 83.3%. The rate of chemical and clinical pregnancy was (21.8% vs. 17.2%) and (19% vs. 13.4%) in the fresh embryo and the frozen embryo transfers, respectively. Likewise, the rate of live births was (14.1% vs. 9.1%), respectively. The number of retrieved oocytes was significantly higher in frozen ET compared to fresh ET (P = 0.001). In the final analysis, after adjusting for potential confounders, no significant associations were found for clinical pregnancy (AOR = 1.51; 95% CI: 0.90-2.5; P = 0.125) and chemical pregnancy (AOR = 1.31; 95% CI: 0.81-2.3; P = 0.238) rates between fresh and frozen ETs. Similarly, there were no significant differences in live birth rate (AOR = 1.6; 95% CI: 0.54-12.4), preterm birth (AOR = 0.62; 95% CI: 0.33-5.5), and primary infertility (AOR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.34-1.6) between fresh and frozen ETs. The incidence of multiple pregnancies and spontaneous abortion was (5% vs. 13.8%) and (22.2% vs. 30.2%) in the fresh embryo and frozen embryo groups, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No significant differences in perinatal and postnatal outcomes were found between fresh and frozen embryo transfers.</p>","PeriodicalId":9033,"journal":{"name":"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth","volume":"25 1","pages":"122"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11800545/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-025-07247-2","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

Background: The study aimed to compare the pregnancy, prenatal, and postnatal outcomes between fresh and frozen embryo transfer (ET) in intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles at Al-Zahra Referral Women's Hospital in northwest Iran.

Methods: A prospective study was conducted among all infertile women (N = 469) who underwent embryo transfer between 2018 and 23 at Al-Zahra referral infertility center. Patients in cycles with fresh embryo transfer and patients for whom frozen embryos were transferred were compared in terms of live birth rate and fetal outcomes. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (AORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results: The majority of the participants were primary infertility 83.3%. The rate of chemical and clinical pregnancy was (21.8% vs. 17.2%) and (19% vs. 13.4%) in the fresh embryo and the frozen embryo transfers, respectively. Likewise, the rate of live births was (14.1% vs. 9.1%), respectively. The number of retrieved oocytes was significantly higher in frozen ET compared to fresh ET (P = 0.001). In the final analysis, after adjusting for potential confounders, no significant associations were found for clinical pregnancy (AOR = 1.51; 95% CI: 0.90-2.5; P = 0.125) and chemical pregnancy (AOR = 1.31; 95% CI: 0.81-2.3; P = 0.238) rates between fresh and frozen ETs. Similarly, there were no significant differences in live birth rate (AOR = 1.6; 95% CI: 0.54-12.4), preterm birth (AOR = 0.62; 95% CI: 0.33-5.5), and primary infertility (AOR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.34-1.6) between fresh and frozen ETs. The incidence of multiple pregnancies and spontaneous abortion was (5% vs. 13.8%) and (22.2% vs. 30.2%) in the fresh embryo and frozen embryo groups, respectively.

Conclusion: No significant differences in perinatal and postnatal outcomes were found between fresh and frozen embryo transfers.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.50%
发文量
845
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of pregnancy and childbirth. The journal welcomes submissions on the biomedical aspects of pregnancy, breastfeeding, labor, maternal health, maternity care, trends and sociological aspects of pregnancy and childbirth.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信