Neonatal health including congenital malformation risk of 1072 children born after vitrified embryo transfer.

Does vitrification of Day 3 and Day 5 embryos adversely affect birth outcomes of singletons and twins in comparison with peers born after fresh embryo transfer? Neonatal health parameters, including the prevalence of congenital malformations, in singletons and twins born after embryo vitrification are similar to or slightly better than after fresh embryo transfer. Although vitrification, rather than slow-freezing, of embryos is routine practice nowadays, convincing evidence regarding the safety for the offspring is sparse. Literature data comprise results from mostly small-sized studies or studies including only Day 3 or only Day 5 vitrified embryo transfers. Overall, better or comparable perinatal outcomes, in terms of higher birthweight and lower risk for small-for-gestational age or for low birthweight, have been reported for singletons born after vitrified embryo transfer compared with fresh embryo transfer. According to the single available study with sufficient sample size, the congenital malformation rate was found to be comparable after vitrified and fresh embryo transfers. Data were collected from 960 cycles after transfer of embryos vitrified on Day 3 (n = 457) or Day 5 (n = 503) and from 1644 cycles after fresh embryo transfer on Day 3 (n = 853) or Day 5 (n = 791), performed between 2008 and 2013 at the Centre for Reproductive Medicine of the university hospital UZ Brussel. Outcome measures were neonatal health in terms of birthweight, small-for-gestational age, prematurity rate, perinatal death and major/minor/total malformation rate. Perinatal health parameters of 11 stillborns and 1061 live borns (827 singletons and 234 twins) in the vitrified group and of 28 stillborns and 1838 live borns (1374 singletons and 464 twins) in the fresh embryo group are reported. Within 3 months after birth, children in the two study groups were assessed clinically with special attention to congenital malformations by a paediatrician blinded to the type of embryo transfer. Data were analysed by multiple linear and logistic regression, adjusted for treatment variables and maternal characteristics. Mothers to infants in the vitrified group were on average slightly older and more often suffering from pregnancy-related hypertensive disorders than mothers to infants in the fresh transfer group. Singletons born after vitrification showed a higher birthweight standard deviation score (SDS) (-0.4 versus -0.7; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.0-0.3, P = 0.001) and a lower small-for-gestational age rate (AOR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.34-0.90) in comparison with peers born after fresh embryo transfer. Preterm birth rate and perinatal death rate were comparable between the two groups (AOR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.57-1.43 and AOR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.40-2.36). In twins, neonatal outcomes including birthweight SDS, small-for-gestational age and prematurity rates were comparable in the vitrified and the fresh groups, when adjusted for confounders. Furthermore, the rate of major congenital malformations in live borns was comparable between the vitrified group and the fresh group, both in singletons (2.6 versus 2.8%; AOR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.47-1.78) and in twins (2.4 versus 2.7%; AOR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.05-5.72). Also, the total malformation rate in the vitrified group (3.4%; 95% CI: 2.4-4.8) did not differ from the rate in the fresh embryo group (3.9%; 95% CI: 3.1-5.0). The embryonic stage at vitrification or fresh transfer (cleavage-stage embryo or blastocyst) did not influence the birth characteristics or malformation rate. The main limitation of this study is the rather small twin group. Therefore, the outcome results for twins should be interpreted cautiously. This study provides evidence that transfer of vitrified Day 3 and Day 5 embryos does not adversely affect the neonatal health of the offspring in comparison with transfer of fresh embryos. Furthermore, neonatal outcomes were not different after transfer of vitrified blastocysts compared with transfer of vitrified cleavage-stage embryos. Educational grants for establishing and organizing the data collection have come from IBSA, Ferring, Organon, Shering-Plough and Merck. Merck Belgium funded the data collection for outcomes after vitrification between 2012 and 2015. All co-authors, except M.B., declared no conflict of interest. M.B. has received consultancy fees from Organon, Serono Symposia and Merck.

Belva F ，Bonduelle M ，Roelants M ，Verheyen G ，Van Landuyt L ... -  《-》

Obstetric and neonatal outcomes after transfer of vitrified early cleavage embryos.

Liu SY ，Teng B ，Fu J ，Li X ，Zheng Y ，Sun XX ... -  《-》

Clinical outcomes following cryopreservation of blastocysts by vitrification or slow freezing: a population-based cohort study.

What are the clinical efficacy and perinatal outcomes following transfer of vitrified blastocysts compared with transfer of fresh or of slow frozen blastocysts? Compared with slow frozen blastocysts, vitrified blastocysts resulted in significantly higher clinical pregnancy and live delivery rates with similar perinatal outcomes at population level. Although vitrification has been reported to be associated with significantly increased post-thaw survival rates compared with slow freezing, there has been a lack of general consensus over which method of cryopreservation (vitrification versus slow freezing) is most appropriate for blastocysts. A population-based cohort of autologous fresh and initiated thaw cycles (a cycle where embryos were thawed with intention to transfer) performed between January 2009 and December 2011 in Australia and New Zealand was evaluated retrospectively. A total of 46 890 fresh blastocyst transfer cycles, 12 852 initiated slow frozen blastocyst thaw cycles and 20 887 initiated vitrified blastocyst warming cycles were included in the data analysis. Pairwise comparisons were made between the vitrified blastocyst group and slow frozen or fresh blastocyst group. A Chi-square test was used for categorical variables and t-test was used for continuous variables. Cox regression was used to examine the pregnancy outcomes (clinical pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate and live delivery rate) and perinatal outcomes (preterm delivery, low birthweight births, small for gestational age (SGA) births, large for gestational age (LGA) births and perinatal mortality) following transfer of fresh, slow frozen and vitrified blastocysts. The 46 890 fresh blastocyst transfers, 11 644 slow frozen blastocyst transfers and 19 978 vitrified blastocyst transfers resulted in 16 845, 2766 and 6537 clinical pregnancies, which led to 13 049, 2065 and 4955 live deliveries, respectively. Compared with slow frozen blastocyst transfer cycles, vitrified blastocyst transfer cycles resulted in a significantly higher clinical pregnancy rate (adjusted relative risk (ARR): 1.47, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.39-1.55) and live delivery rate (ARR: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.34-1.49). Compared with singletons born after transfer of fresh blastocysts, singletons born after transfer of vitrified blastocysts were at 14% less risk of being born preterm (ARR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.77-0.96), 33% less risk of being low birthweight (ARR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.58-0.78) and 40% less risk of being SGA (ARR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.53-0.68). A limitation of this population-based study is the lack of information available on clinic-specific cryopreservation protocols and processes for slow freezing-thaw and vitrification-warm of blastocysts and the potential impact on outcomes. This study presents population-based evidence on clinical efficacy and perinatal outcomes associated with transfer of fresh, slow frozen and vitrified blastocysts. Vitrified blastocyst transfer resulted in significantly higher clinical pregnancy and live delivery rates with similar perinatal outcomes compared with slow frozen blastocyst transfer. Comparably better perinatal outcomes were reported for singletons born after transfer of vitrified blastocysts than singletons born after transfer of fresh blastocysts. Elective vitrification could be considered as an alternative embryo transfer strategy to achieve better perinatal outcomes following Assisted Reproduction Technology (ART) treatment. No specific funding was obtained. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Li Z ，Wang YA ，Ledger W ，Edgar DH ，Sullivan EA ... -  《-》

Perinatal and maternal outcome after vitrification of blastocysts: a Nordic study in singletons from the CoNARTaS group.

Is transfer of vitrified blastocysts associated with higher perinatal and maternal risks compared with slow-frozen cleavage stage embryos and fresh blastocysts? Transfer of vitrified blastocysts is associated with a higher risk of preterm birth (PTB) when compared with slow-frozen cleavage stage embryos and with a higher risk of a large baby, hypertensive disorders in pregnancy (HDPs) and postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) but a lower risk of placenta previa when compared with fresh blastocysts. Transfer of frozen-thawed embryos (FETs) plays a central role in modern fertility treatment, limiting the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and multiple pregnancies. Following FET, several studies report a lower risk of PTB, low birth weight (LBW) and small for gestational age (SGA) yet a higher risk of fetal macrosomia and large for gestational age (LGA) compared with fresh embryos. In recent years, the introduction of new freezing techniques has increased treatment success. The slow-freeze technique combined with cleavage stage transfer has been replaced by vitrification and blastocyst transfer. Only few studies have compared perinatal and maternal outcomes after vitrification and slow-freeze and mainly in cleavage stage embryos, with most studies indicating similar outcomes in the two groups. Studies on perinatal and maternal outcomes following vitrified blastocysts are limited. This registry-based cohort study includes singletons born after frozen-thawed and fresh transfers following the introduction of vitrification in Sweden and Denmark, in 2002 and 2009, respectively. The study includes 3650 children born after transfer of vitrified blastocysts, 8123 children born after transfer of slow-frozen cleavage stage embryos and 4469 children born after transfer of fresh blastocysts during 2002-2015. Perinatal and maternal outcomes in singletons born after vitrified blastocyst transfer were compared with singletons born after slow-frozen cleavage stage transfer and singletons born after fresh blastocyst transfer. Main outcomes included PTB, LBW, macrosomia, HDP and placenta previa. Data were obtained from the CoNARTaS (Committee of Nordic ART and Safety) group. Based on national registries in Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Norway, the CoNARTaS cohort includes all children born after ART treatment in public and private clinics 1984-2015. Outcomes were assessed with logistic multivariable regression analysis, adjusting for the country and year of birth, maternal age, body mass index, parity, smoking, parental educational level, fertilisation method (IVF/ICSI), single embryo transfer, number of gestational sacs and the child's sex. A higher risk of PTB (<37 weeks) was noted in the vitrified blastocyst group compared with the slow-frozen cleavage stage group (adjusted odds ratio, aOR [95% CI], 1.33 [1.09-1.62]). No significant differences were observed for LBW (<2500 g), SGA, macrosomia (≥4500 g) and LGA when comparing the vitrified blastocyst with the slow-frozen cleavage stage group. For maternal outcomes, no significant difference was seen in the risk of HDP, placenta previa, placental abruption and PPH in the vitrified blastocyst versus the slow frozen cleavage stage group, although the precision was limited.When comparing vitrified and fresh blastocysts, we found higher risks of macrosomia (≥4500 g) aOR 1.77 [1.35-2.31] and LGA aOR 1.48 [1.18-1.84]. Further, the risks of HDP aOR 1.47 [1.19-1.81] and PPH aOR 1.68 [1.39-2.03] were higher in singletons born after vitrified compared with fresh blastocyst transfer while the risks of SGA aOR 0.58 [0.44-0.78] and placenta previa aOR 0.35 [0.25-0.48] were lower. Since vitrification was introduced simultaneously with blastocyst transfer in Sweden and Denmark, it was not possible to explore the effect of vitrification per se in this study. The results from the change of strategy to vitrification of blastocysts are reassuring, indicating that the freezing technique per se has no major influence on the perinatal and maternal outcomes. The higher risk of PTB may be related to the extended embryo culture rather than vitrification. The study is part of the ReproUnion Collaborative study, co-financed by the European Union, Interreg V ÖKS. The study was also financed by grants from the Swedish state under the agreement between the Swedish government and the county councils, the ALF agreement (LUA/ALF 70940), Hjalmar Svensson Research Foundation and NordForsk (project 71 450). There are no conflicts of interest to declare. ISRCTN11780826.

Ginström Ernstad E ，Spangmose AL ，Opdahl S ，Henningsen AA ，Romundstad LB ，Tiitinen A ，Gissler M ，Wennerholm UB ，Pinborg A ，Bergh C ，Malchau SS ... -  《-》

Birthweight of singletons born after cleavage-stage or blastocyst transfer in fresh and warming cycles.

Does extended culture to the blastocyst stage affect singleton birthweight after either fresh or vitrified-warmed embryo transfer? Singleton birthweight z-scores did not vary significantly after a fresh blastocyst transfer, whereas the additional effect of vitrification remains inconclusive. Observational studies have associated extended culture with an increased risk of preterm birth and low birthweight. On the contrary, in terms of birthweight and gestational age, singletons born after vitrification have been associated with a better perinatal outcome when compared to those born following a fresh transfer. Our post-hoc cohort analysis on neonatal outcomes included 447 liveborn singletons was derived from a recent retrospective analysis on cumulative live birth rates after cleavage-stage and blastocyst transfers. These babies were born following a fresh single cleavage-stage transfer (FCT Day 3, n = 113), fresh single blastocyst transfer (FBT Day 5, n = 218), vitrified-warmed cleavage-stage transfer (VCT Day 3, n = 58) or vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer (VBT Day 5, n = 58). Singleton birthweight was the primary outcome measure. Gestational age and gender of the newborn were accounted for by using birthweight z-scores in a multivariable linear regression analysis, adjusting for other confounders (maternal age, BMI, parity and smoking behaviour). Vanishing twins were excluded from the analysis. A significantly lower z-score was observed after blastocyst transfer compared to cleavage-stage transfer in the vitrified-warmed Day 5 group (P = 0.013), a difference not observed in the fresh transfer groups (P = 0.32). Following multivariable regression analysis [adjusted regression coefficient (95% confidence interval)], the FCT and FBT groups showed no significant influence on the birthweight z-scores after fresh transfer [-0.19 (-0.44; 0.05)], but the transfer of vitrified blastocysts (VBT) was associated with a lower birthweight [-0.52 (-0.90; -0.15)] compared with the transfer of vitrified cleavage-stage embryos (VCT). The present cohort was relatively small, especially in the vitrified-warmed subgroups. Pregnancy-associated factors possibly influencing birthweight (such as diabetes, hypertension, pre-eclampsia) were also not accounted for in the analysis. Different ART procedures, including extended culture and vitrification, may hold potential safety issues. These results require further confirmation in future larger studies. None. N/A.

De Vos A ，Santos-Ribeiro S ，Van Landuyt L ，Van de Velde H ，Tournaye H ，Verheyen G ... -  《-》