Advertisement

Deferred frozen embryo transfer: what benefits can be expected from this strategy in patients with and without endometriosis?

Deferred frozen embryo transfer: what benefits can be expected from this strategy in patients with and without endometriosis?

J Endometr Pelvic Pain Disord 2017; 9(2): 87 - 97

Article Type: REVIEW

DOI:10.5301/jeppd.5000281

Authors

Mathilde Bourdon, Pietro Santulli, Vanessa Gayet, Chloé Maignien, Louis Marcellin, Charles Chapron

Abstract

Progress with cryopreservation techniques have enabled development of the deferred frozen-thawed embryo transfer (DET) strategy as an alternative to relying on fresh embryo transfers.

With DET, the entire embryo cohort is cryopreserved, and embryo transfer is then performed in a subsequent cycle that takes place separately from the controlled ovarian stimulation (COS).

Initially developed to limit the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome that occurs with high responders, this strategy has been applied extensively with other populations in an effort to improve implantation rates. The assumption is that COS, which is essential for in vitro fertilization/intra cytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) procedures to obtain a multi-follicular development, could have a detrimental impact on the endometrium as a result of greatly elevated levels of steroids. It is currently not clear whether the DET strategy can be generally applied to all women requiring an IVF/ICSI procedure.

The objectives of this literature review regarding DET, were hence: (i) to present the scientific background that contributed to extensive adoption of this technique, (ii) to detail the pregnancy outcomes and potential obstetric and neonatal consequences, (iii) to report on its ability to prevent risks induced by COS, and (iv) to propose indications for the DET strategy in clinical practice.

Article History

Disclosures

Financial support: No grants or funding have been received for this study.
Conflict of interest: None of the authors has financial interest related to this study to disclose.

This article is available as full text PDF.

  • If you are a Subscriber, please log in now.

  • Article price: Eur 36,00
  • You will be granted access to the article for 72 hours and you will be able to download any format (PDF or ePUB). The article will be available in your login area under "My PayPerView". You will need to register a new account (unless you already own an account with this journal), and you will be guided through our online shop. Online purchases are paid by Credit Card through PayPal.
  • If you are not a Subscriber you may:
  • Subscribe to this journal
  • Unlimited access to all our archives, 24 hour a day, every day of the week.

Authors

Affiliations

  • Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Faculté de Médecine, Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris (AP–HP), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Cochin, Département de Gynécologie, Obstétrique II et Médecine de la Reproduction, Paris - France
  • Institut Cochin, INSERM U1016, Laboratoire d’Immunologie, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris - France
  • Institut Cochin, Inserm, Département de “Génetique, Développement et Cancer”, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris - France
  • Mathilde Bourdon and Pietro Santulli contributed equally to this work and should be regarded as joint first authors.

Article usage statistics

The blue line displays unique views in the time frame indicated.
The yellow line displays unique downloads.
Views and downloads are counted only once per session.

No supplementary material is available for this article.