Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Frozen-thawed embryo transfers: time to adopt a more “natural” approach?

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

Abstract

The increasing use of frozen–thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles has magnified the focus on endometrial preparation protocols in assisted reproduction. Emerging evidence suggests that natural cycle (NC) FETs are associated with improved outcomes, and that providers should consider increasing the utilization of NC FET at the expense of the currently favored artificial cycle (AC) FET as primary method for endometrial preparation.

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. Celada P, Bosch E. Freeze-all, for whom, when, and how. Ups J Med Sci. 2020;125(2):104–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Chen ZJ, Legro RS. Fresh versus frozen embryos in polycystic ovary syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(20):e42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Healy MW, Patounakis G, Connell MT, Devine K, DeCherney AH, Levy MJ, et al. Does a frozen embryo transfer ameliorate the effect of elevated progesterone seen in fresh transfer cycles? Fertil Steril. 2016;105(1):93–9 e1.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Quaas AM, Hansen KR. Time to “cool off”? Examining indications for “elective deferred frozen embryo transfer”. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016;33(12):1551–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Maheshwari A, Pandey S, Amalraj Raja E, Shetty A, Hamilton M, Bhattacharya S. Is frozen embryo transfer better for mothers and babies? Can cumulative meta-analysis provide a definitive answer? Hum Reprod Update. 2018;24(1):35–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Wu H, et al. Endometrial preparation for frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-021-02125.

  7. Sunderam S, Kissin DM, Zhang Y, Jewett A, Boulet SL, Warner L, et al. Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance - United States, 2017. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2020;69(9):1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wyns C, et al. ART in Europe, 2016: results generated from European registries by ESHRE. Hum Reprod Open. 2020;2020(3).

  9. Hipp H, Crawford S, Kawwass JF, Boulet SL, Grainger DA, Kissin DM, et al. National trends and outcomes of autologous in vitro fertilization cycles among women ages 40 years and older. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017;34(7):885–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gaume R, et al. Large for gestational age following frozen embryo transfer: an evaluation of the possible causes for this relationship. F&S Rev. 2020.

  11. Alur-Gupta S, Hopeman M, Berger DS, Gracia C, Barnhart KT, Coutifaris C, et al. Impact of method of endometrial preparation for frozen blastocyst transfer on pregnancy outcome: a retrospective cohort study. Fertil Steril. 2018;110(4):680–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ginstrom Ernstad E, et al. Neonatal and maternal outcome after frozen embryo transfer: increased risks in programmed cycles. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;221(2):126 e1–126 e18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Makhijani R, Bartels C, Godiwala P, Bartolucci A, Nulsen J, Grow D, et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes in programmed versus natural vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer cycles. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;41(2):300–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Zhang J, Wei M, Bian X, Wu L, Zhang S, Mao X, et al. Letrozole-induced frozen embryo transfer cycles are associated with a lower risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy among women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021.

  15. Singh B, Reschke L, Segars J, Baker VL. Frozen-thawed embryo transfer: the potential importance of the corpus luteum in preventing obstetrical complications. Fertil Steril. 2020;113(2):252–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Reproductive Medicine, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, WA, USA

    Bruce D. Pier & Logan M. Havemann

  2. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, WA, 98431, USA

    Bruce D. Pier

  3. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA

    Alexander M. Quaas

  4. Reproductive Partners San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA

    Alexander M. Quaas

  5. Center for Reproductive Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA

    Ryan J. Heitmann

Authors
  1. Bruce D. Pier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Logan M. Havemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alexander M. Quaas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ryan J. Heitmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bruce D. Pier.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pier, B.D., Havemann, L.M., Quaas, A.M. et al. Frozen-thawed embryo transfers: time to adopt a more “natural” approach?. J Assist Reprod Genet 38, 1909–1911 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-021-02151-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-021-02151-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation