Loading…
Clinical outcomes and utilization from over a decade of planned oocyte cryopreservation
•Only 7.4% of patients returned to use their cryopreserved oocytes•One-third of patients achieved a live birth using cryopreserved oocytes•No patient age 40 or older had a live birth with their cryopreserved oocytes What is the clinical experience of patients who have undergone planned oocyte cryopr...
Saved in:
Published in: | Reproductive biomedicine online 2021-10, Vol.43 (4), p.671-679 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | •Only 7.4% of patients returned to use their cryopreserved oocytes•One-third of patients achieved a live birth using cryopreserved oocytes•No patient age 40 or older had a live birth with their cryopreserved oocytes
What is the clinical experience of patients who have undergone planned oocyte cryopreservation and oocyte thawing and warming?
Retrospective observational cohort study. All women who completed planned oocyte cryopreservation at a single large university-affiliated fertility centre between June 2006 and October 2020 were identified, including the subset who returned to use their oocytes. Patients who underwent oocyte cryopreservation for medical reasons were excluded. Baseline demographics, oocyte cryopreservation and thawing–warming cycle parameters, and clinical outcomes, were extracted from the electronic medical record. The primary outcome was cumulative live birth rate (LBR), and secondary outcomes were cumulative clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), and CPR and LBR per transfer. Results were stratified by age at time of cryopreservation ( |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1472-6483 1472-6491 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.rbmo.2021.06.024 |