TY - JOUR
T1 - Frozen versus fresh embryo transfer in women with low prognosis for in vitro fertilisation treatment
T2 - pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial
AU - Wei, Daimin
AU - Sun, Yun
AU - Zhao, Han
AU - Yan, Junhao
AU - Zhou, Hong
AU - Gong, Fei
AU - Zhang, Aijun
AU - Wang, Ze
AU - Jin, Lei
AU - Bao, Hongchu
AU - Zhao, Shuyun
AU - Xiao, Zhuoni
AU - Qin, Yingying
AU - Geng, Ling
AU - Cui, Linlin
AU - Sheng, Yan
AU - Sun, Mei
AU - Liu, Peihao
AU - Ding, Lingling
AU - Liu, Hong
AU - Wu, Keliang
AU - Li, Yan
AU - Lu, Yao
AU - Xu, Bufang
AU - Xu, Bei
AU - Zhang, Luqing
AU - Zhang, Heping
AU - Legro, Richard S.
AU - Chen, Zi Jiang
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019.
PY - 2025
Y1 - 2025
N2 - Objective: To test the hypothesis that a freeze-all strategy would increase the chance of live birth compared with fresh embryo transfer in women with low prognosis for in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment. Design: Pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Setting: Nine academic fertility centres in China. Participants: 838 women with a low prognosis for IVF treatment defined by ≤9 oocytes retrieved or poor ovarian reserve (antral follicle count <5 or serum anti-Müllerian hormone level <8.6 pmol/L). Interventions: Eligible participants were randomised (1:1) to undergo either frozen embryo transfer or fresh embryo transfer on the day of oocyte retrieval. Participants in the frozen embryo transfer group had all of their embryos cryopreserved and underwent frozen embryo transfer later. Participants in the fresh embryo transfer group underwent fresh embryo transfer after oocyte retrieval. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was live birth, defined as the delivery of neonates with a heartbeat and respiration at ≥28 weeks' gestation. Secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy, singleton or twin pregnancy, pregnancy loss, ectopic pregnancy, birth weight, maternal and neonatal complications, and cumulative live birth after embryo transfers within one year after randomisation. Results: In an intention-to-treat analysis, the rate of live birth was lower in the frozen embryo transfer group than in the fresh embryo transfer group (32% (132 of 419) v 40% (168 of 419); relative ratio 0.79 (95% confidence interval 0.65 to 0.94); P=0.009). The frozen embryo group had a lower rate of clinical pregnancy than the fresh embryo group (39% (164 of 419) v 47% (197 of 419); 0.83 (0.71 to 0.97)). The cumulative live birth rate was lower in the frozen embryo transfer group compared with the fresh embryo transfer group (44% (185 of 419) v 51% (215 of 419), 0.86 (0.75 to 0.99)). No difference was observed in birth weight, incidence of obstetric complications, or risk of neonatal morbidities. Conclusions: Fresh embryo transfer may be a better choice for women with low prognosis in terms of live birth rate compared with a freeze-all strategy. The treatment strategies that prevent fresh embryo transfers, such as accumulating embryos with back-to-back cycles or performing routine preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy, warrant further studies in women with a low prognosis.
AB - Objective: To test the hypothesis that a freeze-all strategy would increase the chance of live birth compared with fresh embryo transfer in women with low prognosis for in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment. Design: Pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Setting: Nine academic fertility centres in China. Participants: 838 women with a low prognosis for IVF treatment defined by ≤9 oocytes retrieved or poor ovarian reserve (antral follicle count <5 or serum anti-Müllerian hormone level <8.6 pmol/L). Interventions: Eligible participants were randomised (1:1) to undergo either frozen embryo transfer or fresh embryo transfer on the day of oocyte retrieval. Participants in the frozen embryo transfer group had all of their embryos cryopreserved and underwent frozen embryo transfer later. Participants in the fresh embryo transfer group underwent fresh embryo transfer after oocyte retrieval. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was live birth, defined as the delivery of neonates with a heartbeat and respiration at ≥28 weeks' gestation. Secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy, singleton or twin pregnancy, pregnancy loss, ectopic pregnancy, birth weight, maternal and neonatal complications, and cumulative live birth after embryo transfers within one year after randomisation. Results: In an intention-to-treat analysis, the rate of live birth was lower in the frozen embryo transfer group than in the fresh embryo transfer group (32% (132 of 419) v 40% (168 of 419); relative ratio 0.79 (95% confidence interval 0.65 to 0.94); P=0.009). The frozen embryo group had a lower rate of clinical pregnancy than the fresh embryo group (39% (164 of 419) v 47% (197 of 419); 0.83 (0.71 to 0.97)). The cumulative live birth rate was lower in the frozen embryo transfer group compared with the fresh embryo transfer group (44% (185 of 419) v 51% (215 of 419), 0.86 (0.75 to 0.99)). No difference was observed in birth weight, incidence of obstetric complications, or risk of neonatal morbidities. Conclusions: Fresh embryo transfer may be a better choice for women with low prognosis in terms of live birth rate compared with a freeze-all strategy. The treatment strategies that prevent fresh embryo transfers, such as accumulating embryos with back-to-back cycles or performing routine preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy, warrant further studies in women with a low prognosis.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85216836452&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85216836452&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bmj-2024-081474
DO - 10.1136/bmj-2024-081474
M3 - Article
C2 - 39880462
AN - SCOPUS:85216836452
SN - 0959-8146
JO - BMJ
JF - BMJ
M1 - 081474
ER -