Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38615016›Full record

ArticleReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2024

Age-related increase in live-birth rates of first frozen thaw embryo versus first fresh transfer in initial assisted reproductive technology cycles without PGT.

Sarah F Wang, David B Seifer

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06741748 (A Pragmatic, Multi-centre, Double-blinded, Two-arm Randomized Controlled Trial on a Direct Warming Frozen Embryo Transfer in Assisted Reproductive Technologies Treatment Outcome), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06741748 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

A Pragmatic, Multi-centre, Double-blinded, Two-arm Randomized Controlled Trial on a Direct Warming Frozen Embryo Transfer in Assisted Reproductive Technologies Treatment Outcome

TypeinterventionalSponsorChinese University of Hong KongRan2025 to 2027Enrolled578ConditionsFrozen Embryo Transfer (FET), Assisted Reproductive Techniques, In Vitro Fertilization (IVF), Cryopreservation of EmbryosArmsDirect Warming Method, Conventional Multi-step Thawing Method
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sarah F WangDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, USA. sarah.f.wang@yale.edu.
David B SeiferDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe landscape of assisted reproductive technology (ART) has seen a significant shift towards frozen-thawed embryo transfers (FET) over fresh transfers, driven by technological advancements and clinical considerations. This study aimed to compare live birth outcomes between primary FET and fresh transfers, focusing on cycles without preimplantation genetic testing (PGT), using United States national data from the SART CORS database spanning from 2014 to 2020.

methodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of autologous first ART cycles without PGT comparing primary embryo transfer (frozen thaw vs. fresh) success rates from the 2014-2020 SARTCORS database. Live-birth rates (LBR) and cumulative live-birth rates (CLBR) were compared between first FET versus first fresh embryo transfer from an index retrieval. Multivariate logistic regression (MLR) determined association between live birth outcomes and method of transfer. In a subsequent sub-analysis, we compared these two embryo transfer methods among patients with either diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) or male factor infertility.

results228,171 first ART cycles resulted in primary embryo transfer. 62,100 initial FETs and 166,071 fresh transfers were compared. Initial FETs demonstrated higher LBR and CLBR compared to fresh transfers (LBR 48.3% vs. 39.8%, p < 0.001; CLBR 74.0% vs. 60.0%, p < 0.0001). MLR indicated greater chances of live birth with FET across all age groups, with adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of live-birth incrementally increasing with advancing age groups. For DOR cycles, LBR and CLBR were significantly higher for FET compared to fresh (33.9% vs. 26.0%, p < 0.001, 44.5% vs. 37.6%, p < 0.0001), respectively. MF cycles also demonstrated higher LBR and CLBR with FET (52.3% vs. 44.2%, p < 0.001, 81.2% vs. 68.9%, p < 0.0001), respectively. MLR demonstrated that in DOR cycles, initial FET was associated with greater chance of live birth in age groups ≥ 35yo (p < 0.01), with aOR of live birth increasingly considerably for those > 42yo (aOR 2.63, p < 0.0001).

conclusionsOverall LBR and CLBR were greater for first FET than fresh transfers with incremental increases in odds of live birth with advancing age, suggesting the presence of a more favorable age-related change in endometrial receptivity present in frozen-thawed cycles. For both DOR and MF cycles, LBR and CLBR after primary transfer were greater for first FET than fresh. However, this was particularly evident in older ages for DOR cycles. This suggests that supraphysiologic stimulation in older DOR cycles may be detrimental to endometrial receptivity, which is in part corrected for in FET cycles.

Indexed as

Infertility, MaleOvarian DiseasesAgedBirth RateEmbryo TransferFemaleGenetic TestingHumansMaleReproductive Techniques, AssistedRetrospective StudiesAssisted reproductive technologyCumulative live birth ratesEndometrial receptivityFresh embryo transferFrozen thaw embryo transferLive birth rates

Identifiers

PMID38615016
PMCPMC11015537

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.