Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Frozen blastocyst embryo transfer using a supplemented natural cycle protocol has a similar live birth rate compared to a programmed cycle protocol

  • Assisted Reproduction Technologies
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes for a supplemented natural cycle with a programmed cycle protocol for frozen blastocyst transfer.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed of frozen autologous blastocyst transfers, at a single academic fertility center (519 supplemented natural cycles and 106 programmed cycles). Implantation, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth and birth weight were compared using Pearson’s Chi-squared test, T-test, or Fisher’s exact test.

Results

There was no significant difference between natural and programmed frozen embryo transfers with respect to implantation (21.9 vs. 18.1 %), clinical pregnancy (35.5 vs. 29.2 %), and live birth rates (27.7 vs. 23.6 %). Mean birth weights were also similar between natural and programmed cycles for singletons (3354 vs. 3340 g) and twins (2422 vs. 2294 g)

Conclusion

Frozen blastocyst embryo transfers using supplemented natural or programmed protocols experience similar success rates. Patient preference should be considered in choosing a protocol.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology website https://www.sartcorsonline.com/rptCSR_PublicMultYear.aspx?ClinicPKID=0. Accessed December 7, 2014.

  2. Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, Barner FC, Aguirre M, Hudson C. Clinical rationale for cryopreservation of entire embryo cohorts in lieu of fresh transfer. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:3–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Groenewoud ER, Cantineau AE, Kollen BJ, Macklon NS, Cohlen BJ. What is the optimal means of preparing the endometrium in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2013;19(5):458–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Veleva Z, Orava M, Nuojua-Huttunen S, Tapanainen JS, Martikainen H. Factors affecting the outcome of frozen-thawed embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(9):2425–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ghobara T, Vandekerckhove P. Cycle regimens for frozen-thawed embryo transfer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;1:CD003414.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gelbaya TA, Nardo LG, Hunter HR, Fitzgerald CT, Horne G, Pease EE, et al. Cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer in natural or down-regulated hormonally controlled cycles: a retrospective study. Fertil Steril. 2006;85(3):603–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. El-Toukhy T, Taylor A, Khalaf Y, Al-Darazi K, Rowell P, Seed P, et al. Pituitary suppression in ultrasound-monitored frozen embryo replacement cycles. A randomised study. Hum Reprod. 2004;19(4):874–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dal Prato L, Borini A. Best protocol for frozen-thawed embryo transfer-cost benefit analysis needed. Fertil Steril. 2006;86(5):1554–5. author reply 5–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hancke K, More S, Kreienberg R, Weiss JM. Patients undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer have similar live birth rates in spontaneous and artificial cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012;29(5):403–7.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tomas C, Alsbjerg B, Martikainen H, Humaidan P. Pregnancy loss after frozen—embryo transfer—a comparison of three protocols. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(5):1165–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Konc J, Kanyo K, Varga E, Kriston R, Cseh S. The effect of cycle regimen used for endometrium preparation on the outcome of day 3 frozen embryo transfer cycle. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(2):767–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Givens CR, Markun LC, Ryan IP, Chenette PE, Herbert CM, Schriock ED. Outcomes of natural cycles versus programmed cycles for 1677 frozen-thawed embryo transfers. Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;19(3):380–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Xiao Z, Zhou X, Xu W, Yang J, Xie Q. Natural cycle is superior to hormone replacement therapy cycle for vitrificated-preserved frozen-thawed embryo transfer. Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2012;58(2):107–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Levron J, Yerushalmi GM, Brengauz M, Gat I, Katorza E. Comparison between two protocols for thawed embryo transfer: natural cycle versus exogenous hormone replacement. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2014. doi:10.3109/09513590.2014.900032.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Morozov V, Ruman J, Kenigsberg D, Moodie G, Brenner S. Natural cycle cryo-thaw transfer may improve pregnancy outcome. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2007;24(4):119–23.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hill MJ, Miller KA, Frattarelli JL. A GnRH agonist and exogenous hormone stimulation protocol has a higher live-birth rate than a natural endogenous hormone protocol for frozen-thawed blastocyst-stage embryo transfer cycles: an analysis of 1391 cycles. Fertil Steril. 2010;93(2):416–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Zheng Y, Li Z, Xiong M, Luo T, Dong X, Huang B, et al. Hormonal replacement treatment improves clinical pregnancy in frozen-thawed embryos transfer cycles: a retrospective cohort study. Am J Transl Res. 2014;6(1):85–90.

    CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Tanos V, Friedler S, Zajicek G, Neiger M, Lewin A, Schenker JG. The impact of endometrial preparation on implantation following cryopreserved-thawed-embryo transfer. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 1996;41(4):227–31.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Fatemi HM, Kyrou D, Bourgain C, Van den Abbeel E, Griesinger G, Devroey P. Cryopreserved-thawed human embryo transfer: spontaneous natural cycle is superior to human chorionic gonadotropin-induced natural cycle. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(6):2054–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Weissman A, Horowitz E, Ravhon A, Steinfeld Z, Mutzafi R, Golan A, et al. Spontaneous ovulation versus HCG triggering for timing natural-cycle frozen-thawed embryo transfer: a randomized study. Reprod Biomed Online. 2011;23(4):484–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Weissman A, Levin D, Ravhon A, Eran H, Golan A, Levran D. What is the preferred method for timing natural cycle frozen-thawed embryo transfer? Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;19(1):66–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Direito A et al. Relationships between the luteinizing hormone surge and other characteristics of the menstrual cycle in normally ovulating women. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:279–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Conrad KP, Baker VL. Corpus luteal contribution to maternal pregnancy physiology and outcomes in assisted reproductive technologies. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2013;304(2):R69–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology and its members for providing the clinical information, which allowed this analysis to be performed.

Funding

This study was funded by Award Number P01 HD 065647 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USA

    Ruth B. Lathi & Valerie L. Baker

  2. Department of Biostatistics, University of Florida College of Public Health and Health Professions & College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA

    Yueh-Yun Chi

  3. Department of Biostatistics, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA

    Jing Liu

  4. University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA

    Briana Saravanabavanandhan

  5. Urogynecology and Pelvic Health Institute, Gurgaon, Delhi, India

    Aparna Hegde

  6. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology & Infertility Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Stanford School of Medicine, 900 Welch Road Suite 20, Palo Alto, CA, 94304, USA

    Ruth B. Lathi

Authors
  1. Ruth B. Lathi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yueh-Yun Chi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jing Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Briana Saravanabavanandhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Aparna Hegde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Valerie L. Baker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ruth B. Lathi.

Additional information

Capsule Supplemented natural cycle with hCG trigger and luteal progesterone support is equivalent to hormone replacement cycles for frozen blastocyst transfer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lathi, R.B., Chi, YY., Liu, J. et al. Frozen blastocyst embryo transfer using a supplemented natural cycle protocol has a similar live birth rate compared to a programmed cycle protocol. J Assist Reprod Genet 32, 1057–1062 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-015-0499-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-015-0499-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation