自体卵母细胞冷冻保存后的母体移植年龄与活产率无关。

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
ACS Applied Electronic Materials Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-13 DOI:10.1007/s10815-024-03149-y
Francesca G Barrett, Sarah D Cascante, David McCulloh, James A Grifo, Jennifer K Blakemore
{"title":"自体卵母细胞冷冻保存后的母体移植年龄与活产率无关。","authors":"Francesca G Barrett, Sarah D Cascante, David McCulloh, James A Grifo, Jennifer K Blakemore","doi":"10.1007/s10815-024-03149-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Our aim was to evaluate if maternal age at transfer following autologous oocyte cryopreservation is associated with live birth rate (LBR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients who thawed autologous oocytes and then underwent a single frozen euploid embryo transfer between 2011 and 2021 at a large urban university-affiliated fertility center. Each oocyte thaw patient was matched 2:1 to in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients who underwent single embryo transfer < 1 year after retrieval. Primary outcome was LBR. Secondary outcomes included implantation rates (IR) and spontaneous abortion rates (SABR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 169 oocyte thaw patients were matched to 338 IVF patients. As expected, oocyte thaw patients were older (median age 42.5 vs. 37.6 years, p < 0.001) and waited longer between retrieval and transfer than in vitro fertilization patients (median time 59 vs. 1 month, p < 0.001). In univariate analysis, implantation and LBR differed among oocyte thaw and IVF patients (p < 0.05), but SABR did not (p = 0.57). Transfer outcomes in oocyte thaw patients did not differ based on transfer age group (IR: p = 0.18; SABR: p = 0.12; LBR: p = 0.24). In a multiple logistic regression model, age at transfer was not predictive of live birth when controlling for age at retrieval, embryo morphology, and day of blastulation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Maternal age at transfer after oocyte cryopreservation is not predictive of LBR; this suggests that \"an aging womb\" does not impair LBR after oocyte thaw and empowers patients to return for transfer when ready for childbearing.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11339225/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Maternal age at transfer following autologous oocyte cryopreservation is not associated with live birth rates.\",\"authors\":\"Francesca G Barrett, Sarah D Cascante, David McCulloh, James A Grifo, Jennifer K Blakemore\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10815-024-03149-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Our aim was to evaluate if maternal age at transfer following autologous oocyte cryopreservation is associated with live birth rate (LBR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients who thawed autologous oocytes and then underwent a single frozen euploid embryo transfer between 2011 and 2021 at a large urban university-affiliated fertility center. Each oocyte thaw patient was matched 2:1 to in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients who underwent single embryo transfer < 1 year after retrieval. Primary outcome was LBR. Secondary outcomes included implantation rates (IR) and spontaneous abortion rates (SABR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 169 oocyte thaw patients were matched to 338 IVF patients. As expected, oocyte thaw patients were older (median age 42.5 vs. 37.6 years, p < 0.001) and waited longer between retrieval and transfer than in vitro fertilization patients (median time 59 vs. 1 month, p < 0.001). In univariate analysis, implantation and LBR differed among oocyte thaw and IVF patients (p < 0.05), but SABR did not (p = 0.57). Transfer outcomes in oocyte thaw patients did not differ based on transfer age group (IR: p = 0.18; SABR: p = 0.12; LBR: p = 0.24). In a multiple logistic regression model, age at transfer was not predictive of live birth when controlling for age at retrieval, embryo morphology, and day of blastulation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Maternal age at transfer after oocyte cryopreservation is not predictive of LBR; this suggests that \\\"an aging womb\\\" does not impair LBR after oocyte thaw and empowers patients to return for transfer when ready for childbearing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11339225/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-024-03149-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-024-03149-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:我们的目的是评估自体卵母细胞冷冻保存后移植时的母体年龄是否与活产率(LBR)有关:我们对 2011 年至 2021 年间在一家大型城市大学附属生殖中心解冻自体卵母细胞并进行单次冷冻优胚移植的所有患者进行了一项回顾性队列研究。每位卵母细胞解冻患者与接受单胚胎移植的体外受精(IVF)患者进行了 2:1 匹配:共有 169 名卵细胞解冻患者与 338 名体外受精患者进行了配对。不出所料,卵母细胞解冻患者的年龄更大(中位年龄 42.5 岁对 37.6 岁,p 结论:卵母细胞解冻后移植时的母体年龄比体外受精患者更大:卵母细胞冷冻保存后移植时的母体年龄并不能预测 LBR;这表明 "子宫老化 "并不会影响卵母细胞解冻后的 LBR,并能让患者在准备好生育时再进行移植。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Maternal age at transfer following autologous oocyte cryopreservation is not associated with live birth rates.

Maternal age at transfer following autologous oocyte cryopreservation is not associated with live birth rates.

Purpose: Our aim was to evaluate if maternal age at transfer following autologous oocyte cryopreservation is associated with live birth rate (LBR).

Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients who thawed autologous oocytes and then underwent a single frozen euploid embryo transfer between 2011 and 2021 at a large urban university-affiliated fertility center. Each oocyte thaw patient was matched 2:1 to in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients who underwent single embryo transfer < 1 year after retrieval. Primary outcome was LBR. Secondary outcomes included implantation rates (IR) and spontaneous abortion rates (SABR).

Results: A total of 169 oocyte thaw patients were matched to 338 IVF patients. As expected, oocyte thaw patients were older (median age 42.5 vs. 37.6 years, p < 0.001) and waited longer between retrieval and transfer than in vitro fertilization patients (median time 59 vs. 1 month, p < 0.001). In univariate analysis, implantation and LBR differed among oocyte thaw and IVF patients (p < 0.05), but SABR did not (p = 0.57). Transfer outcomes in oocyte thaw patients did not differ based on transfer age group (IR: p = 0.18; SABR: p = 0.12; LBR: p = 0.24). In a multiple logistic regression model, age at transfer was not predictive of live birth when controlling for age at retrieval, embryo morphology, and day of blastulation.

Conclusions: Maternal age at transfer after oocyte cryopreservation is not predictive of LBR; this suggests that "an aging womb" does not impair LBR after oocyte thaw and empowers patients to return for transfer when ready for childbearing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
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