ArticleFertility and sterility2026
Freezing first: insights from 8 years of planned oocyte cryopreservation at an "egg freezing clinic".
Article in Fertility and sterility, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the outcomes of oocyte warming (OW) and embryo transfer in individuals who underwent planned oocyte cryopreservation (OC).
designRetrospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: This study includes all planned OC cycles performed at Extend Fertility before December 31, 2023, and subsequent OW cycles performed before August 2024. EXPOSURE: Age at the time of OC and number of metaphase (M)II oocytes warmed.
main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was cumulative ongoing pregnancy/live birth (OP/LB) rate per OW cycle, stratified by age and number of MII oocytes warmed. Secondary outcomes included OW survival and fertilization rates and the number of euploid embryos per MII oocyte, categorized by age at the time of OC.
resultsBetween 2016 and 2023, 4,659 OC cycles were completed for 3,138 patients, with the mean OC start age decreasing from 36.9 ± 2.8 years at the onset to 35.0 ± 3.5 years in the final year of the study. The mean length of time between OC and first OW was 3.4 ± 1.9 years. The mean age at first OW was 39.9 ± 3.5 years, with a median (interquartile range) of 40 (39, 42) years. Among patients who had completed at least one OC cycle before 2020 (n = 2,163), allowing for a minimum follow-up period of 4 years, 10.4% (n = 226) returned for OW. Across 271 OW cycles, the mean number of MII oocytes warmed was 15, with survival and fertilization rates of 90.7% and 77.2%, respectively. Among patients who underwent OC at ≤40 years of age, warming a higher number of MII oocytes was associated with increased euploid embryo yield. The cumulative ongoing pregnancy/live birth rate (OP/LB) rate for the cohort was 70.3%, ranging from 58.3% for 1-9 MII oocytes warmed to 81.8% for >20 MII oocytes warmed.
conclusionDriven by increased awareness and access, patients are undergoing planned OC at younger ages. This study demonstrates high success rates achieved at an "egg freezing clinic", especially among patients who pursue OC at younger ages. It also establishes a framework to estimate the number of euploid embryos from MII oocytes, as well as the likelihood of live birth, stratified by age at OC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.