Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

, Volume 36, Issue 2, pp 277–282 | Cite as

Achieving the “ideal” family size at advanced reproductive ages through oocyte cryopreservation

  • Shannon DeVoreEmail author
  • Nicole Noyes
  • James A. Grifo
  • Alan S. Berkeley
  • Frederick Licciardi
  • Kara N. Goldman
Assisted Reproduction Technologies


Women are increasingly delaying pregnancy, and in 2014 the mean age at first birth in the USA had risen from 25.2 years in 2000 to 26.3 years [1]. Despite advances in IVF technology, advanced reproductive age remains a significant impediment to success with a live birth rate of 3.6% per oocyte retrieval in women over 42 years [2]. Concurrent with the trend of delayed childbearing has been an increase in the use of donor oocytes [3] to overcome age-related fertility decline and diminished ovarian reserve. Oocyte cryopreservation (OC), no longer considered experimental for women with medical indications but widely utilized to defer reproduction, is allowing women to conceive using autologous oocytes at ages when donor oocytes would have previously been required. The success of the technology has been demonstrated as women increasingly return for oocyte thaw/warming and embryo transfer [4, 5, 6, 7].

Findings from a 2013 Gallup poll indicate that Americans view the ideal...



The authors wish to thank the dedicated members of the NYU Langone Fertility Center Embryology Laboratory as well as the patients who have entrusted their care to NYULFC.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Mathews TJ, Hamilton BE. Mean age of mothers is on the rise: United States, 2000–2014. NCHS data brief, no 232. Hyattsville: National Center for Health Statistics; 2016.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. National summary report. Accessed 13 June 2018.
  3. 3.
    Kushnir VA, Darmon SK, Barad DH, Gleicher N. New national outcome data on fresh versus cryopreserved donor oocytes. J Ovarian Res. 2018;11:2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Doyle JO, Richter KS, Lim J, Stillman RJ, Graham JR, Tucker MJ. Successful elective and medically indicated oocyte vitrification and warming for autologous in vitro fertilization, with predicted birth probabilities for fertility preservation according to number of cryopreserved oocytes and age at retrieval. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:459–66.e2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goldman KN, Noyes NL, Knopman JM, McCaffrey C, Grifo JA. Oocyte efficiency: does live birth rate differ when analyzing cryopreserved and fresh oocytes on a per-oocyte basis? Fertil Steril. 2013;100:712–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ho JR, Woo I, Louie K, Salem W, Jabara SI, Bendikson KA, et al. A comparison of live birth rates and perinatal outcomes between cryopreserved oocytes and cryopreserved embryos. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017;34:1359–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Anzola AB, Pauly V, Geoffroy-Siraudin C, Gervoise-Boyer MJ, Montjean D, Boyer P. The first 50 live births after autologous oocyte vitrification in France. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015;32:1781–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Newport F, Wilke J. Desire for children still norm in U.S. Gallup, 2013. Accessed 31 May 2018.
  9. 9.
    Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Oocyte or embryo donation to women of advanced reproductive age: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:e3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sauer MV. Reproduction at an advanced maternal age and maternal health. Fertil Steril. 2015;103:1136–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Paulson RJ, Boostanfar R, Saadat P, Mor E, Tourgeman DE, Slater CC, et al. Pregnancy in the sixth decade of life: obstetric outcomes in women of advanced reproductive age. JAMA. 2002;288:2320–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fitzpatrick KE, Tuffnell D, Kurinczuk JJ, Knight M. Pregnancy at very advanced maternal age: a UK population-based cohort study. BJOG. 2016;124:1097–106.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hodes-Wertz B, Druckenmiller S, Smith M, Noyes N. What do reproductive-age women who undergo oocyte cryopreservation think about the process as a means to preserve fertility? Fertil Steril. 2013;100:1343–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lucas N, Rosario R, Shelling A. New Zealand University students’ knowledge of fertility decline in women via natural pregnancy and assisted reproductive technologies. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2015;18:208–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Revelli A, Razzano A, Delle Piane L, Casano S, Benedetto C. Awareness of the effects of postponing motherhood among hospital gynecologists: is their knowledge sufficient to offer appropriate help to patients? J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016;33:215–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yu L, Peterson B, Inhorn MC, Boehm JK, Patrizio P. Knowledge, attitudes, and intentions toward fertility awareness and oocyte cryopreservation among obstetrics and gynecology resident physicians. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:403–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Greenwood EA, Pasch LA, Hastie J, Cedars MI, Huddleston HG. To freeze or not to freeze: decision regret and satisfaction following elective oocyte cryopreservation. Fertil Steril. 2018;109:1097–1104.e1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goldman KN. Elective oocyte cryopreservation: an ounce of prevention? Fertil Steril. 2018;109:1014–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Devine K, Mumford SL, Goldman KN, Hodes-Wertz B, Druckenmiller S, Propst AM, et al. Baby budgeting: oocyte cryopreservation in women delaying reproduction can reduce cost per live birth. Fertil Steril. 2015;103:1446–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Goldman RH, Racowsky C, Farland LV, Munné S, Ribustello L, Fox JH. Predicting likelihood of live birth for elective oocyte cryopreservation: a counseling tool for physicians and patients. Hum Reprod. 2017;32:853–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shannon DeVore
    • 1
    Email author
  • Nicole Noyes
    • 1
  • James A. Grifo
    • 1
  • Alan S. Berkeley
    • 1
  • Frederick Licciardi
    • 1
  • Kara N. Goldman
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyNew York University School of MedicineNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations