BACKGROUND Successful cryopreservation of oocytes and embryos is essential not only to maximize the safety and efficacy of ovarian stimulation cycles in an IVF treatment, but also to enable fertility preservation. Two cryopreservation methods are routinely used: slow-freezing or vitrification. Slow-freezing allows for freezing to occur at a sufficiently slow rate to permit adequate cellular dehydration while minimizing intracellular ice formation. Vitrification allows the solidification of the cell(s) and of the extracellular milieu into a glass-like state without the formation of ice. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE The objective of our study was to provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes following slow-freezing/thawing versus vitrification/warming of oocytes and embryos and to inform the development of World Health Organization guidance on the most effective cryopreservation method. SEARCH METHODS A Medline search was performed from 1966 to 1 August 2016 using the following search terms: (Oocyte(s) [tiab] OR (Pronuclear[tiab] OR Embryo[tiab] OR Blastocyst[tiab]) AND (vitrification[tiab] OR freezing[tiab] OR freeze[tiab]) AND (pregnancy[tiab] OR birth[tiab] OR clinical[tiab]). Queries were limited to those involving humans. RCTs and cohort studies that were published in full-length were considered eligible. Each reference was reviewed for relevance and only primary evidence and relevant articles from the bibliographies of included articles were considered. References were included if they reported cryosurvival rate, clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), live-birth rate (LBR) or delivery rate for slow-frozen or vitrified human oocytes or embryos. A meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model to calculate relative risk ratios (RR) and 95% CI. OUTCOMES One RCT study comparing slow-freezing versus vitrification of oocytes was included. Vitrification was associated with increased ongoing CPR per cycle (RR = 2.81, 95% CI: 1.05-7.51; P = 0.039; 48 and 30 cycles, respectively, per transfer (RR = 1.81, 95% CI 0.71-4.67; P = 0.214; 47 and 19 transfers) and per warmed/thawed oocyte (RR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.02-1.28; P = 0.018; 260 and 238 oocytes). One RCT comparing vitrification versus fresh oocytes was analysed. In vitrification and fresh cycles, respectively, no evidence for a difference in ongoing CPR per randomized woman (RR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.87-1.21; P = 0.744, 300 women in each group), per cycle (RR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.86-1.18; P = 0.934; 267 versus 259 cycles) and per oocyte utilized (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.82-1.26; P = 0.873; 3286 versus 3185 oocytes) was reported. Findings were consistent with relevant cohort studies. Of the seven RCTs on embryo cryopreservation identified, three met the inclusion criteria (638 warming/thawing cycles at cleavage and blastocyst stage), none of which involved pronuclear-stage embryos. A higher CPR per cycle was noted with embryo vitrification compared with slow-freezing, though this was of borderline statistical significance (RR = 1.89, 95% CI: 1.00-3.59; P = 0.051; three RCTs; I2 = 71.9%). LBR per cycle was reported by one RCT performed with cleavage-stage embryos and was higher for vitrification (RR = 2.28; 95% CI: 1.17-4.44; P =  0.016; 216 cycles; one RCT). A secondary analysis was performed focusing on embryo cryosurvival rate. Pooled data from seven RCTs (3615 embryos) revealed a significant improvement in embryo cryosurvival following vitrification as compared with slow-freezing (RR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.30-1.93; P < 0.001; I2 = 93%). WIDER IMPLICATIONS Data from available RCTs suggest that vitrification/warming is superior to slow-freezing/thawing with regard to clinical outcomes (low quality of the evidence) and cryosurvival rates (moderate quality of the evidence) for oocytes, cleavage-stage embryos and blastocysts. The results were confirmed by cohort studies. The improvements obtained with the introduction of vitrification have several important clinical implications in ART. Based on this evidence, in particular regarding cryosurvival rates, laboratories that continue to use slow-freezing should consider transitioning to the use of vitrification for cryopreservation.

Oocyte, embryo and blastocyst cryopreservation in ART: systematic review and meta-analysis comparing slow-freezing versus vitrification to produce evidence for the development of global guidance

Background Elective frozen-embryo transfer has been shown to result in a higher live-birth rate than fresh-embryo transfer among anovulatory women with the polycystic ovary syndrome. It is uncertain whether frozen-embryo transfer increases live-birth rates among ovulatory women with infertility. Methods In this multicenter, randomized trial, we randomly assigned 2157 women who were undergoing their first in vitro fertilization cycle to undergo either fresh-embryo transfer or embryo cryopreservation followed by frozen-embryo transfer. Up to two cleavage-stage embryos were transferred in each participant. The primary outcome was a live birth after the first embryo transfer. Results The live-birth rate did not differ significantly between the frozen-embryo group and the fresh-embryo group (48.7% and 50.2%, respectively; relative risk, 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89 to 1.06; P=0.50). There were also no significant between-group differences in the rates of implantation, clinical pregnancy, o...

https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa1705334

Transfer of Fresh versus Frozen Embryos in Ovulatory Women

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

Background
In general, in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) implies a single fresh and one or more frozen-thawed embryo transfers. Alternatively, the 'freeze-all' strategy implies transfer of frozen-thawed embryos only, with no fresh embryo transfers. In practice, both strategies can vary technically including differences in freezing techniques and timing of transfer of cryopreservation, that is vitrification versus slow freezing, freezing of two pro-nucleate (2pn) versus cleavage-stage embryos versus blastocysts, and transfer of cleavage-stage embryos versus blastocysts.

In the freeze-all strategy, embryo transfers are disengaged from ovarian stimulation in the initial treatment cycle. This could avoid a negative effect of ovarian hyperstimulation on the endometrium and thereby improve embryo implantation. It could also reduce the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) in the ovarian stimulation cycle by avoiding a pregnancy.

We compared the benefits and risks of the two treatment strategies.

Objectives
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the freeze-all strategy compared to the conventional IVF/ICSI strategy in women undergoing assisted reproductive technology.

Search methods
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Studies (CRSO), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and two registers of ongoing trials in November 2016 together with reference checking and contact with study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies.

Selection criteria
We included randomised clinical trials comparing a freeze-all strategy with a conventional IVF/ICSI strategy which includes fresh transfer of embryos in women undergoing IVF or ICSI treatment.

Data collection and analysis
We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary review outcomes were cumulative live birth and OHSS. Secondary outcomes included other adverse effects (miscarriage rate).

Main results
We included four randomised clinical trials analysing a total of 1892 women comparing a freeze-all strategy with a conventional IVF/ICSI strategy. The evidence was of moderate to low quality due to serious risk of bias and (for some outcomes) serious imprecision. Risk of bias was associated with unclear blinding of investigators for preliminary outcomes of the study, unit of analysis error, and absence of adequate study termination rules.

There was no clear evidence of a difference in cumulative live birth rate between the freeze-all strategy and the conventional IVF/ICSI strategy (odds ratio (OR) 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91 to 1.31; 4 trials; 1892 women; I2 = 0%; moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that if the cumulative live birth rate is 58% following a conventional IVF/ICSI strategy, the rate following a freeze-all strategy would be between 56% and 65%.

The prevalence of OHSS was lower after the freeze-all strategy compared to the conventional IVF/ICSI strategy (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.38; 2 trials; 1633 women; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the OHSS rate is 7% following a conventional IVF/ICSI strategy, the rate following a freeze-all strategy would be between 1% and 3%.

The freeze-all strategy was associated with fewer miscarriages (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.86; 4 trials; 1892 women; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence) and a higher rate of pregnancy complications (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.92; 2 trials; 1633 women; low-quality evidence). There was no difference in multiple pregnancies per woman after the first transfer (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.44; 2 trials; 1630 women; low-quality evidence), and no data were reported for time to pregnancy.

Authors' conclusions
We found moderate-quality evidence showing that one strategy is not superior to the other in terms of cumulative live birth rates. Time to pregnancy was not reported, but it can be assumed to be shorter using a conventional IVF/ICSI strategy in the case of similar cumulative live birth rates, as embryo transfer is delayed in a freeze-all strategy. Low-quality evidence suggests that not performing a fresh transfer lowers the OHSS risk for women at risk of OHSS.

/pdf/fresh-versus-frozen-embryo-transfers-in-assisted-3sxpytmqkt.pdf

Fresh versus frozen embryo transfers in assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND Cryopreservation has been extensively used in assisted reproductive technology, agriculture and conservation programmes for endangered species. The literature reports largely positive results regarding the survival of frozen-thawed cells and clinical outcomes. Nonetheless, it is unclear whether or not cryopreservation of sperm, oocytes and embryos causes any disruption in their genetic integrity. Drawing on the available published evidence, this review paper describes in detail the physical and biochemical factors of cryopreservation that could potentially affect genomic integrity. METHODS A critical review of the published literature using PubMed with particular emphasis on studies which include assessment of genetic stability after cryopreservation of oocyte, sperm and embryos. The search was performed in 2014 and covered the period from the beginning of electronic records until July 2014. No language restrictions were applied. RESULTS Cryopreservation is associated with extensive damage to cell membranes, and results in alteration of the functional and metabolic status of the cells and mitochondria. Some evidence suggests an increase in DNA single-strand breaks, and degree of DNA condensation or fragmentation in sperm after cryopreservation. The extent of these changes may vary between different individuals and different techniques. The addition of antioxidants to the cryopreservation media and the use of well-controlled cooling regimes could potentially improve such outcomes. Limited numbers of studies on oocytes provide controversial results regarding the effect on DNA fragmentation, sister chromatid exchange (SCE) and aneuploidy. The only study on human embryos suggested that vitrification affects DNA integrity to a much lesser extent than slow freezing. Animal studies show increases in mitochondrial DNA mutations in embryos after cryopreservation. The limited numbers of long-term follow-up studies in humans provide reassurance that derives mostly from retrospective studies with some methodological weaknesses. CONCLUSIONS This review provides an overview of studies performed to date on the effect of cryopreservation on the oocyte, sperm and embryos. Controversy of the reported data has highlighted the gaps in our knowledge not only for clinical studies, but also for basic research in human embryos. New perspectives for future research are proposed.

/pdf/the-effect-of-cryopreservation-on-the-genome-of-gametes-and-pisg9trds7.pdf

The effect of cryopreservation on the genome of gametes and embryos: principles of cryobiology and critical appraisal of the evidence

Background Improvements in vitrification now make frozen embryo transfers (FETs) a viable alternative to fresh embryo transfer, with reports from observational studies and randomized controlled trials suggesting that: (i) the endometrium in stimulated cycles is not optimally prepared for implantation; (ii) pregnancy rates are increased following FET and (iii) perinatal outcomes are less affected after FET. Methods This review integrates and discusses the available clinical and scientific evidence supporting embryo transfer in a natural cycle. Results Laboratory-based studies demonstrate morphological and molecular changes to the endometrium and reduced responsiveness of the endometrium to hCG, resulting from controlled ovarian stimulation. The literature demonstrates reduced endometrial receptivity in controlled ovarian stimulation cycles and supports the clinical observations that FET reduces the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and improves outcomes for both the mother and baby. Conclusions This review provides the basis for an evidence-based approach towards changes in routine IVF, which may ultimately result in higher delivery rates of healthier term babies.

Peter Lutjen

Papers

Fresh versus frozen embryo transfer: backing clinical decisions with scientific and clinical evidence