Comparison of fresh and frozen ejaculated spermatozoa in sibling oocyte recipient cycles.


Journal

Reproductive biomedicine online
ISSN: 1472-6491
Titre abrégé: Reprod Biomed Online
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101122473

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
02 2022
Historique:
received: 11 03 2021
revised: 29 08 2021
accepted: 24 09 2021
pubmed: 25 12 2021
medline: 19 4 2022
entrez: 24 12 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Do IVF and intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles using fresh and frozen ejaculated spermatozoa result in similar pregnancy outcomes in couples with non-male factor infertility? Retrospective cohort study; patients undergoing donor egg recipient cycles, in which oocytes from a single ovarian stimulation were split between two recipients, were reviewed. Two recipients of oocytes from a single donor were paired and categorized based on the type of ejaculated spermatozoa (fresh/frozen). Outcomes included delivery rate, implantation, pregnancy, pregnancy loss and fertilization rates. Of the 408 patients who received oocytes from a split donor oocyte cycle, 45 pairs of patients used discrepant types of ejaculated spermatozoa and were included in the study. Fertilization rate: fresh (74.8%); frozen (68.6%) (P = 0.13). Pregnancy rate: fresh (76%); frozen (67%); delivery rate: fresh (69%); frozen (44%); implantation rate was significantly higher: fresh (64%); frozen (36%) (P = 0.04). Rate of pregnancy loss was significantly higher in the frozen group compared with the fresh group (33% versus 5.9%, P = 0.013). Adjusted odds for delivery was 67% lower in the frozen group (95% CI 0.12, 0.89). Adjusted odds of pregnancy (adjusted OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.20, 2.27) and implantation (adjusted OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.12, 2.12) were not significantly different between the frozen and fresh sperm groups. In this model that controls for oocyte quality by using paired recipients from the same donor, frozen ejaculated spermatozoa resulted in lower delivery rates than those using fresh spermatozoa.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34949536
pii: S1472-6483(21)00479-X
doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2021.09.020
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

333-339

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Kelly McCarter (K)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, New York Presbyterian/Weill Cornell, 525 E 68th Street, New York New York 10065, USA. Electronic address: kelly.mccarter.med@gmail.com.

Robert Setton (R)

The Ronald O Perelman and Claudia Cohen Center for Reproductive Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, 1305 York Avenue 6th Floor, New York New York 10021, USA.

Alice Chung (A)

The Ronald O Perelman and Claudia Cohen Center for Reproductive Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, 1305 York Avenue 6th Floor, New York New York 10021, USA.

Anjile An (A)

Division of Biostatistics, Department of Population Health Science, Weill Cornell Medicine, 402 E 67th St, New York New York 10065, USA.

Zev Rosenwaks (Z)

The Ronald O Perelman and Claudia Cohen Center for Reproductive Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, 1305 York Avenue 6th Floor, New York New York 10021, USA.

Steven Spandorfer (S)

The Ronald O Perelman and Claudia Cohen Center for Reproductive Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, 1305 York Avenue 6th Floor, New York New York 10021, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH