Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of perinatal outcomes following frozen embryo transfer cycles using autologous versus donor oocytes in women 40 to 43 years old: analysis of SART CORS data

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

Abstract

Objective

To study the differences in perinatal outcomes after frozen embryo transfer cycles using autologous or donor oocytes in women of advanced maternal age.

Design

Historical cohort study.

Setting

US national database from the Society of Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System (SART CORS) from 2009 to 2013.

Patient(s)

Women at 40–43 years of age undergoing autologous frozen embryo transfers (a-FET) or donor oocyte frozen embryo transfers (d-FET) resulting in singleton pregnancies that were entered in the SART CORS database from 2009 to 2013.

Results

a-FET resulted in 4402 singleton live births whereas d-FET resulted in 2703 singleton live births. d-FET resulted in a higher risk of preterm births (< 37 weeks), with adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.33 (95% CI 1.02–1.75), but similar risk of small for gestational age (SGA), with aOR 1.75 (95% CI 0.85–3.7), when compared to a-FET. However, when only single blastocyst transfer cycles are considered, d-FET and a-FET showed no difference in preterm births or other adverse perinatal outcomes.

Conclusions

Singletons resulting from d-FET are at increased risk for perinatal morbidity. However, the risk was diminished in single blastocyst transfer cycles. Our study supports the current American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) guidelines of transferring a single blastocyst in d-FET cycles.

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. Mathews TJ, Hamilton BE. Mean age of mothers is on the rise: United States, 2000–2014. NCHS Data Brief 2016 (232):1–8.

  2. Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology 2015 [Available from: www.sart.org/SART_Success_Rates/].

  3. Cleary-Goldman J, Malone FD, Vidaver J, Ball RH, Nyberg DA, Comstock CH, et al. Impact of maternal age on obstetric outcome. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105(5 Pt 1):983–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Jacobsson B, Ladfors L, Milsom I. Advanced maternal age and adverse perinatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(4):727–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hassold T, Abruzzo M, Adkins K, Griffin D, Merrill M, Millie E, et al. Human aneuploidy: incidence, origin, and etiology. Environ Mol Mutagen. 1996;28(3):167–75.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Dude AM, Yeh JS, Muasher SJ. Donor oocytes are associated with preterm birth when compared to fresh autologous in vitro fertilization cycles in singleton pregnancies. Fertil Steril. 2016;106(3):660–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Henne MB, Zhang M, Paroski S, Kelshikar B, Westphal LM. Comparison of obstetric outcomes in recipients of donor oocytes vs. women of advanced maternal age with autologous oocytes. J Reprod Med. 2007;52(7):585–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Klatsky PC, Delaney SS, Caughey AB, Tran ND, Schattman GL, Rosenwaks Z. The role of embryonic origin in preeclampsia: a comparison of autologous in vitro fertilization and ovum donor pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(6):1387–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Malchau SS, Loft A, Larsen EC, Aaris Henningsen AK, Rasmussen S, Andersen AN, et al. Perinatal outcomes in 375 children born after oocyte donation: a Danish national cohort study. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(6):1637–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Krieg SA, Henne MB, Westphal LM. Obstetric outcomes in donor oocyte pregnancies compared with advanced maternal age in in vitro fertilization pregnancies. Fertil Steril. 2008;90(1):65–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Stoop D, Baumgarten M, Haentjens P, Polyzos NP, De Vos M, Verheyen G, et al. Obstetric outcome in donor oocyte pregnancies: a matched-pair analysis. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2012;10:42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Mascarenhas M, Sunkara SK, Antonisamy B, Kamath MS. Higher risk of preterm birth and low birth weight following oocyte donation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017;218:60–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Mikolajczyk RT, Zhang J, Betran AP, Souza JP, Mori R, Gulmezoglu AM, et al. A global reference for fetal-weight and birthweight percentiles. Lancet. 2011;377(9780):1855–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Barsky M, St Marie P, Rahil T, Markenson GR, Sites CK. Are perinatal outcomes affected by blastocyst vitrification and warming? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(5):603 e1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jeve YB, Potdar N, Opoku A, Khare M. Three-arm age-matched retrospective cohort study of obstetric outcomes of donor oocyte pregnancies. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016;133(2):156–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Vidal M, Vellve K, Gonzalez-Comadran M, Robles A, Prat M, Torne M, et al. Perinatal outcomes in children born after fresh or frozen embryo transfer: a Catalan cohort study based on 14,262 newborns. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(4):940–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Masoudian P, Nasr A, de Nanassy J, Fung-Kee-Fung K, Bainbridge SA, El Demellawy D. Oocyte donation pregnancies and the risk of preeclampsia or gestational hypertension: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214(3):328–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Electronic address Aao, Practice Committee of the Society for Assisted Reproductive T. Guidance on the limits to the number of embryos to transfer: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(4):901–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of OBGYN, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific Street, Box 356460, Seattle, WA, 98195-6460, USA

    Bo Yu

  2. Department of OBGYN and Women’s Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA

    Mario Vega, Sahar Zaghi, Rani Fritz, Sangita Jindal & Erkan Buyuk

  3. Montefiore’s Institute for Reproductive Medicine and Health, Hartsdale, NY, USA

    Mario Vega, Sahar Zaghi, Rani Fritz, Sangita Jindal & Erkan Buyuk

Authors
  1. Bo Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mario Vega
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sahar Zaghi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rani Fritz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sangita Jindal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Erkan Buyuk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bo Yu.

Additional information

Bo Yu and Mario Vega are co-first authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yu, B., Vega, M., Zaghi, S. et al. Comparison of perinatal outcomes following frozen embryo transfer cycles using autologous versus donor oocytes in women 40 to 43 years old: analysis of SART CORS data. J Assist Reprod Genet 35, 2025–2029 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1287-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1287-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation