Abstract
To determine the ectopic pregnancy (EP) rate with fresh versus frozen embryo transfers (ET) after elective freeze all strategy (eFET) in patients undergoing IVF/ICSI-ET for non-tubal factor infertility. Retrospective cohort study. This study includes the data of 8772 embryo replacement cycles performed between July 2010 and November 2014. Cases with tubal factor infertility and frozen-thaw cycles performed with previously cryopreserved supernumerary embryos were excluded. For analysis, patients were grouped as fresh day 2 embryos (F-D2 group), fresh day 3 embryos (F-D3 group), fresh day 5 embryos (F-D5group), elective frozen-thawed day 2 (eT-D2 group), elective frozen-thawed day 3 embryos (eT-D3 group), elective frozen-thawed day 5 embryos (eT-D5 group). All patients participating in fresh cycles underwent controlled ovarian stimulation employing GnRH antagonist. Cryopreservation was performed by vitrification. Hormone replacement treatment was used for all eFET cycles. The number of transferred embryos were ≤ 2 according to the current national legal framework. The data were analysed with SPSS for windows 21 package program. Chi square test was used to compare differences in rates. Statistical significance was defined as p< 0.05. For the fresh ET group, 3306 cycles were evaluated and 1316 of these cycles (39.8%) resulted in clinical pregnancy. For the eFET group, 2301 cycles were evaluated and 1018 of these patients had a clinical pregnancy rate of 44.2%. Overall, in fresh ET group, 17 EPs (1.29%) and in eFET cycles 10 EPs (0.98%) were reported. There was no statistical difference between fresh and eFET groups with respect to EP rates (p<0.05). When the data is subgrouped according to the day of ET, EP rates were 0.9%(1/102) in F-D2 group, 1.21%(4/332) in F-D3, 1.36%(12/882) in F-D5, 0%(0/70) in eT-D2, 0.6%(1/171) eT-D3, 1.16%(9/777) in eT-D5. Also, no significant difference could be demonstrated on the incidence of EP in the subgroups in fresh vs eFET cycles. Our data shows that if tubal factor ethiology is excluded in the analysis, EP risk were found to be minimal and not different between fresh ET and eFET.Tabled 1Intrauterine pregnancy (IUP), EP rates in fresh and eFET cycles.Fresh ET (n,%)EFET (n,%)pIUP12991008<0.05EP1710<0.05 Open table in a new tab
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
