Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

, Volume 25, Issue 9–10, pp 445–452 | Cite as

Effects of men and recipients’ age on the reproductive outcome of an oocyte donation program

  • Inmaculada Campos
  • Emilio GómezEmail author
  • Ana Lucia Fernández-Valencia
  • José Landeras
  • Rafaela González
  • Pilar Coy
  • Joaquín Gadea



The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of men and recipient age on the reproductive outcome of our oocyte donation program.


We retrospectively analyzed 915 cycles, taking into account men and recipient age, separately and together.


The significant cut off value for men and recipients age with incidence in the reproductive outcome was 39 years. Recipient older than 38 years presented a significantly lower pregnancy and implantation rates than others (44.92 vs. 55.75 ± 1.53%, 25.66 vs. 32.79 ± 1.64%). If men age was older than 38, a significant reduction in pregnancy and implantation rates was observed, too (46.0 vs. 54.65%, 26.00 ± 1.52 vs. 32.43 ± 1.65%). When men and recipient age was analyzed together, a reduction in pregnancy and implantation was detected only if both were older than 38.


Present study suggests that age has a detrimental effect on the reproductive outcome of oocyte donation cycles when both men and recipient are ≥ 39 years old.


Men and recipient ageing Oocyte donation Pregnancy and implantation rate 


  1. 1.
    Mathews TJ, Hamilton BE. Mean age of mother, 1970–2000. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2002;51:1–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Reynolds MA, Schieve LA, Martin JA, Jeng G, Macaluso M. Trends in multiple births conceived using assisted reproductive technology, United States, 1997–2000. Pediatrics. 2003;111:1159–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hansen JP. 198: Older maternal age and pregnancy outcome: a review of the literature. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1986;41:726–42. doi: 10.1097/00006254-198611000-00024.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Munne S. Chromosome abnormalities and their relationship to morphology and development of human embryos. Reprod Biomed Online. 2006;12:234–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Budak E, Garrido N, Soares SR, Melo MA, Meseguer M, Pellicer A, et al. Improvements achieved in an oocyte donation program over a 10-year period: sequential increase in implantation and pregnancy rates and decrease in high-order multiple pregnancies. Fertil Steril. 2007;88:342–9. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.11.118.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ford WC, North K, Taylor H, Farrow A, Hull MG, Golding J. Increasing paternal age is associated with delayed conception in a large population of fertile couples: evidence for declining fecundity in older men. The ALSPAC Study Team (Avon Longitudinal Study of Pregnancy and Childhood). Hum Reprod 2000;15:1703–8. doi: 10.1093/humrep/15.8.1703.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kidd SA, Eskenazi B, Wyrobek AJ. Effects of male age on semen quality and fertility: a review of the literature. Fertil Steril. 2001;75:237–48. doi: 10.1016/S0015-0282(00)01679-4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schmid TE, Eskenazi B, Baumgartner A, Marchetti F, Young S, Weldon R, Anderson D, Wyrobek AJ. The effects of male age on sperm DNA damage in healthy non-smokers. Hum Reprod. 2007;22:180–7. doi: 10.1093/humrep/del338.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Slama R, Bouyer J, Windham G, Fenster L, Werwatz A, Swan SH. Influence of paternal age on the risk of spontaneous abortion. Am J Epidemiol 2005;161:816–23. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwi097.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Astolfi P, De Pasquale A, Zonta LA. Late paternity and stillbirth risk. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:2497–501. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deh449.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Andersen AM, Vastrup P, Wohlfahrt J, Andersen PK, Olsen J, Melbye M. Fever in pregnancy and risk of fetal death. Results from the better health for mother and child-project. Ugeskr Laeger 2004;166:53–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yang Q, Wen SW, Leader A, Chen XK, Lipson J, Walker M. Paternal age and birth defects: how strong is the association? Hum Reprod. 2007;22:696–701. doi: 10.1093/humrep/del453.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eskenazi B, Wyrobek AJ, Sloter E, Kidd SA, Moore L, Young S, et al. The association of age and semen quality in healthy men. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:447–54. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deg107.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Abramsson L. On the investigation of men from infertile relations. A clinical study with special regard to anamnesis, physical examination, semen-, hormone- and chromosome analyses, from men with non-"normal" semen. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl 1988;113:1–47.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carlsen E, Giwercman A, Keiding N, Skakkebaek NE. Evidence for decreasing quality of semen during past 50 years. BMJ. 1992;305:609–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sloter E, Schmid TE, Marchetti F, Eskenazi B, Nath J, Wyrobek AJ. Quantitative effects of male age on sperm motion. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:2868–75. doi: 10.1093/humrep/del250.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gallardo E, Simon C, Levy M, Guanes PP, Remohí J, Pellicer A. Effect of age on sperm fertility potential: oocyte donation as a model. Fertil Steril. 1996;66:260–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Soares SR, Troncoso C, Bosch E, Serra V, Simón C, Remohí J, et al. Age and uterine receptiveness: predicting the outcome of oocyte donation cycles. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2005;90:4399–404. doi: 10.1210/jc.2004-2252.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bellver J, Rossal LP, Bosch E, Zúñiga A, Corona JT, Meléndez F, et al. Obesity and the risk of spontaneous abortion after oocyte donation. Fertil Steril. 2003;79:1136–40. doi: 10.1016/S0015-0282(03)00176-6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Alikani M, Cohen J, Tomkin G, Garrisi GJ, Mack C, Scott RT. Human embryo fragmentation in vitro and its implications for pregnancy and implantation. Fertil Steril. 1999;71:836–42. doi: 10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00092-8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    World Health Organization. WHO Laboratory manual for the examination of human semen and semen-cervical mucus interaction. 4th ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1999.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Menkveld R, Stander FS, Kotze TJ, Kruger TF, van Zyl JA. The evaluation of morphological characteristics of human spermatozoa according to stricter criteria. Hum Reprod. 1990;5:586–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Borini A, Bianchi L, Violini F, Maccolini A, Cattoli M, Flamigni C. Oocyte donation program: pregnancy and implantation rates in women of different ages sharing oocytes from single donor. Fertil Steril. 1996;65:94–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Toner JP, Grainger DA, Frazier LM. Clinical outcomes among recipients of donated eggs: an analysis of the U.S. national experience, 1996–1998. Fertil Steril 2002;78:1038–45. doi: 10.1016/S0015-0282(02)03371-X.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cano F, Simon C, Remohi J, Pellicer A. Effect of aging on the female reproductive system: evidence for a role of uterine senescence in the decline in female fecundity. Fertil Steril. 1995;64:584–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Navot D, Drews MR, Bergh PA, Guzman I, Karstaedt A, Scott RT Jr, et al. Age-related decline in female fertility is not due to diminished capacity of the uterus to sustain embryo implantation. Fertil Steril. 1994;61:97–101.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Abdalla HI, Wren ME, Thomas A, Korea L. Age of the uterus does not affect pregnancy or implantation rates; a study of egg donation in women of different ages sharing oocytes from the same donor. Hum Reprod. 1997;12:827–9. doi: 10.1093/humrep/12.4.827.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Noyes N, Hampton BS, Berkeley A, Licciardi F, Grifo J, Krey L. Factors useful in predicting the success of oocyte donation: a 3-year retrospective analysis. Fertil Steril. 2001;76:92–7. doi: 10.1016/S0015-0282(01)01823-4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Paulson RJ, Milligan RC, Sokol RZ. The lack of influence of age on male fertility. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;184:818–22. doi: 10.1067/mob.2001.113852.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Klonoff-Cohen HS, Natarajan L. The effect of advancing paternal age on pregnancy and live birth rates in couples undergoing in vitro fertilization or gamete intrafallopian transfer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:507–14. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.01.035.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Singh NP, Muller CH, Berger RE. Effects of age on DNA double-strand breaks and apoptosis in human sperm. Fertil Steril. 2003;80:1420–30. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.04.002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wyrobek AJ, Eskenazi B, Young S, Arnheim N, Tiemann-Boege I, Jabs EW, Glaser RL, Pearson FS, Evenson D. Advancing age has differential effects on DNA damage, chromatin integrity, gene mutations, and aneuploidies in sperm. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006;103:9601–6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0506468103.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Morris ID, Ilott S, Dixon L, Brison DR. The spectrum of DNA damage in human sperm assessed by single cell gel electrophoresis (Comet assay) and its relationship to fertilization and embryo development. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:990–8. doi: 10.1093/humrep/17.4.990.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Moskovtsev SI, Willis J, White J, Mullen JB. Sperm survival: relationship to age-related sperm DNA integrity in infertile men. Arch Androl. 2007;53:29–32. doi: 10.1080/01485010600908330.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Vagnini L, Baruffi RL, Mauri AL, Petersen CG, Massaro FC, Pontes A, et al. The effects of male age on sperm DNA damage in an infertile population. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;15:514–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Larson-Cook KL, Brannian JD, Hansen KA, Kasperson KM, Aamold ET, Evenson DP. Relationship between the outcomes of assisted reproductive techniques and sperm DNA fragmentation as measured by the sperm chromatin structure assay. Fertil Steril. 2003;80:895–902. doi: 10.1016/S0015-0282(03)01116-6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Virro MR, Larson-Cook KL, Evenson DP. Sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA) parameters are related to fertilization, blastocyst development, and ongoing pregnancy in in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles. Fertil Steril. 2004;81:1289–95. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.09.063.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Seli E, Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB, Moffatt O, Sakkas D. Extent of nuclear DNA damage in ejaculated spermatozoa impacts on blastocyst development after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2004;82:378–83. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.12.039.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Frattarelli JL, Miller KA, Miller BT, Elkind-Hirsch K, Scott RT Jr. Male age negatively impacts embryo development and reproductive outcome in donor oocyte assisted reproductive technology cycles. Fertil Steril. 2008;90:97–103. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.06.009.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Braude P, Bolton V, Moore S. Human gene expression first occurs between the four- and eight-cell stages of preimplantation development. Nature. 1988;332:459–61. doi: 10.1038/332459a0.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Dunson DB, Colombo B, Baird DD. Changes with age in the level and duration of fertility in the menstrual cycle. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:1399–403. doi: 10.1093/humrep/17.5.1399.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    de La Rochebrochard E, de Mouzon J, Thepot F, Thonneau P. French National IVF Registry (FIVNAT) Association: Fathers over 40 and increased failure to conceive: the lessons of in vitro fertilization in France. Fertil Steril. 2006;85:1420–4. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.11.040.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bulletti C, de Ziegler D. Uterine contractility and embryo implantation. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2005;17:265–76. doi: 10.1097/01.gco.0000169104.85128.0e.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Spandorfer SD, Avrech OM, Colombero LT, Palermo GD, Rosenwaks Z. Effect of parental age on fertilization and pregnancy characteristics in couples treated by intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 1998;13:334–8. doi: 10.1093/humrep/13.2.334.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Henkel R, Maass G, Schuppe HC, Jung A, Schubert J, Schill WB. Molecular aspects of declining sperm motility in older men. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:1430–7. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.05.020.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Inmaculada Campos
    • 1
  • Emilio Gómez
    • 2
    Email author
  • Ana Lucia Fernández-Valencia
    • 2
  • José Landeras
    • 3
  • Rafaela González
    • 1
  • Pilar Coy
    • 4
  • Joaquín Gadea
    • 4
  1. 1.AlmeríaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Cell Biology and Histology, Medical School, Campus de EspinardoUniversity of MurciaMurciaSpain
  3. 3.MurciaSpain
  4. 4.Dept. Physiology School of VeterinaryUniversity of MurciaMurciaSpain

Personalised recommendations