Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To assess the impact of sperm source on cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) after oocyte thaw in autologous oocyte cryopreservation (AOC) patients. METHODS:A retrospective cohort study of autologous oocyte thaw patients at an urban academic fertility center from 2006 to 2021. Patients were stratified by sperm source [partner sperm (PS) vs. donor sperm (DS)]. The primary outcome was CLBR per patient. Secondary outcomes were the oocyte survival rate and usable embryo rate. Statistics included Mann-Whitney U, Kruskal-Wallis, Fisher's exact, chi-square, two-sample t-tests, and multiple logistic regression (p < 0.05). RESULTS:A total of 653 patients were included; 455 (69.7%) used PS and 198 (30.3%) used DS. Time from the first AOC to the first thaw did not differ among DS and PS users (56.8 vs. 54.0 months, p = 0.20). PS users were younger at AOC (37.9 vs. 38.5 years, p < 0.001) and thaw (42.3 vs. 43.1 years, p < 0.001). There were equivalent overall CLBRs (39.9% PS vs. 40.6% DS, p = 0.85) and CLBRs in patients < 35 years at AOC (51.2% PS vs. 100% DS, p = 0.18), 35-37 years at AOC (45.9% PS vs. 60.4% DS, p = 0.10), 38-40 years at AOC (35.4% PS vs. 35.2% DS, p = 0.93), 41-42 years at AOC (28.9% PS vs 14.3% DS, p = 0.21), and > 43 years at AOC (12.5% PS vs 16.7% DS, p = 0.83) among PS and DS users. There were no significant differences in the oocyte survival (79% PS vs 80.5% DS, p = 0.08) or the proportion of patients with usable embryos (27.3% vs 27.8%, p = 0.70) between PS and DS groups. CONCLUSIONS:In AOC patients, CLBR, oocyte survival rate, and usable embryo rate did not differ based on sperm source.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To investigate pregnancy outcomes resulting from transfer of embryos with non-mosaic (NM) segmental aneuploid (SA) results following preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A). METHODS:All patients who underwent frozen embryo transfer (FET) of at least one embryo with a NM-SA between March 2021 and April 2024 were retrospectively reviewed. Primary outcomes included live birth rate (LBR) and results of prenatal diagnosis. Embryos with NM-SA results were also compared to those with NM whole chromosome aneuploid (WCA) and mosaic SA results. RESULTS:Out of 25 NM-SA embryos transferred, the LBR was 24%. Prenatal diagnosis by amniocentesis and/or chorionic villus sampling was performed in 3/6 pregnancies, and results were normal. Embryos with duplications produced more live births compared to those with deletions. NM-SA embryos had a significantly higher ongoing pregnancy (OP)/LBR compared to embryos with NM-WCA results and a significantly lower OP/LBR compared to embryos with mosaic SA results; however, when compared to embryos with high-level SA mosaicism > 40%, the OP/LBR was not significantly different. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Embryos with NM-SAs can result in euploid live births, albeit at reduced rates compared to those with mosaic SAs. These data can be used to aid in patient counseling about PGT-A results and embryo transfer decisions.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Our aim was to evaluate if maternal age at transfer following autologous oocyte cryopreservation is associated with live birth rate (LBR). METHODS:We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients who thawed autologous oocytes and then underwent a single frozen euploid embryo transfer between 2011 and 2021 at a large urban university-affiliated fertility center. Each oocyte thaw patient was matched 2:1 to in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients who underwent single embryo transfer < 1 year after retrieval. Primary outcome was LBR. Secondary outcomes included implantation rates (IR) and spontaneous abortion rates (SABR). RESULTS:A total of 169 oocyte thaw patients were matched to 338 IVF patients. As expected, oocyte thaw patients were older (median age 42.5 vs. 37.6 years, p < 0.001) and waited longer between retrieval and transfer than in vitro fertilization patients (median time 59 vs. 1 month, p < 0.001). In univariate analysis, implantation and LBR differed among oocyte thaw and IVF patients (p < 0.05), but SABR did not (p = 0.57). Transfer outcomes in oocyte thaw patients did not differ based on transfer age group (IR: p = 0.18; SABR: p = 0.12; LBR: p = 0.24). In a multiple logistic regression model, age at transfer was not predictive of live birth when controlling for age at retrieval, embryo morphology, and day of blastulation. CONCLUSIONS:Maternal age at transfer after oocyte cryopreservation is not predictive of LBR; this suggests that "an aging womb" does not impair LBR after oocyte thaw and empowers patients to return for transfer when ready for childbearing.

KEY WORDS/BACKGROUND:postpartum hemorrhage, thromboelastography, coagulopathy, fibrinogen, massive transfusion. OBJECTIVE:Thromboelastography, a point-of-care test that measures blood's dynamic viscoelastic properties, is routinely used to guide resuscitation in surgical specialties with high hemorrhage risk. Patients with ongoing postpartum hemorrhage often develop coagulopathy and hypofibrinogenemia. Timely assessment of fibrinogen is crucial because cryoprecipitate for repletion requires thawing prior to administration. Thromboelastography may provide rapid assessment of coagulopathy in ongoing hemorrhage but this has not been thoroughly studied. Our objective was to determine if thromboelastography accurately reflects coagulopathy in ongoing postpartum hemorrhage when compared to standard assays. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort study of people with ongoing postpartum hemorrhage (quantified blood loss >1000 mL), from 1/1/16-12/31/19. Thromboelastography variables and standard coagulation parameters were compared in patients who had both assays drawn simultaneously. As a secondary analysis, patients who had thromboelastography were compared to those who did not. Mann-Whitney, Fisher's Exact, Kruskal-Wallis, Spearman's Rho, and logistic regression tests were used for analysis. Significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS:A total of 680 patients were included. 69 had thromboelastography and coagulation parameters drawn simultaneously and were included in the primary analysis. The remainder were included in the secondary analysis. Thromboelastography variables and coagulation assays correlated significantly - prolonged R with increased PTT (rho 0.25, p=0.04), prolonged K and decreased alpha angle with decreased fibrinogen (rho -0.61, p<0.001; rho 0.24, p<0.001), and decreased maximum amplitude with decreased platelets (rho 0.62, p<0.001). Those who had thromboelastographic assays had higher blood loss and need for interventions to manage hemorrhage than those who did not. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Thromboelastography correlated significantly with standard laboratory assays in ongoing postpartum hemorrhage, including for patients with hypofibrinogenemia Given the point-of-care nature and rapid turnaround time, thromboelastography should be considered for timely hemorrhage evaluation and directed resuscitation of coagulopathy.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To explore whether letrozole improved outcomes in subsequent controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) cycles. METHODS:This was a retrospective repeated measures cohort study examining COH cycles. Patients were included if they underwent two cycles for unexplained infertility, male factor infertility, or planned oocyte/embryo cryopreservation. The first cycles for all patients implemented a non-letrozole, conventional gonadotropin protocol. Second cycles for the study group included letrozole (2.5-7.5 mg for 5 days) with no medication change to second cycles amongst controls. Our primary objective was to compare oocyte yield. Cohorts were then subdivided by pursuit of oocyte (OC) or embryo (IVF) cryopreservation. Secondary outcome amongst the OC subgroup was oocyte maturation index (metaphase II (MII)/total oocytes). Secondary outcomes amongst the IVF subgroup were normal fertilization rate (2-pronuclear zygotes (2PN)/oocytes exposed to sperm), blastocyst formation rate (blastocysts/2PNs), and embryo ploidy (%euploid and aneuploid). RESULTS:Fifty-four cycles (n = 27) were included in letrozole and 108 cycles (n = 54) were included in control. Oocyte yield was higher in second cycles (p < 0.008) in the letrozole group but similar in second cycles (p = 0.26) amongst controls. Addition of letrozole did not impact MII index (p = 0.90); however, MII index improved in second cycles amongst controls (p < 0.001). Both groups had similar rates of normal fertilization (letrozole: p = 0.52; control: p = 0.61), blast formation (letrozole: p = 0.61; control: p = 0.84), euploid (letrozole: p = 0.29; control: p = 0.47), and aneuploid embryos (letrozole: p = 0.17; control: p = 0.78) between cycles. CONCLUSIONS:Despite improved oocyte yield, letrozole did not yield any difference in oocyte maturation or embryo outcomes.

STUDY QUESTION/OBJECTIVE:What structural (logistical) and psychological challenges do patients who cryopreserve oocytes or embryos for medical reasons face, including possible barriers to using their frozen materials? SUMMARY ANSWER/CONCLUSIONS:The majority of women who underwent oocyte or embryo cryopreservation for medical reasons reported a desire to use their frozen oocytes or embryos but had been impeded by ongoing medical issues, the need for a gestational carrier, or the lack of a partner. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY/BACKGROUND:Current data suggest that many women who have frozen oocytes or embryos for medical indications are concerned about the prospect of infertility and have unique emotional and financial needs that differ from patients with infertility. Further, most patients have not returned to use their cryopreserved materials. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION/METHODS:This is a qualitative interview study of 42 people who cryopreserved between January 2012 and December 2021. Interviews were conducted between March 2021 and March 2022. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS/METHODS:All participants were cisgender women who had undergone oocyte or embryo cryopreservation for medical indications at an academic fertility center. Participants were invited to interview by email if they were younger than 40 years old when their oocytes or embryos were cryopreserved. Interviews were conducted over the internet and transcribed verbatim. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis with the constant comparison method. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE/RESULTS:Saturation was reached at 42 interviews. The median age of participants was 35 years old (range 28-43) at interview and 31 years old (range 25-39) at cryopreservation. Of the 42 women, 30 had a cancer diagnosis, while 7 had non-cancer chronic medical conditions, and 5 had hereditary cancer susceptibility syndromes. There were 12 women who banked embryos and 30 who banked oocytes. The majority of women indicated a desire to use their cryopreserved materials, but many were unsure about how or when. Four had already used their frozen oocytes or embryos, while another four had conceived without assisted reproduction. The cryopreservation experience was described by the majority as highly emotionally challenging because they felt out of place among couples receiving infertility treatment and, for cancer patients, overwhelmed by the complex decisions to be made in a short time period. Common reported barriers to using frozen materials included ongoing medical issues preventing pregnancy, the need for a gestational carrier, the lack of a partner, and the desire for unassisted conception. Some were glad to have frozen oocytes or embryos to allow more time to meet a partner or if they were considering becoming single parents. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION/CONCLUSIONS:The majority of participants had their oocytes or embryos frozen at a single, urban, academic fertility center, which may limit generalizability. We also could not calculate a response rate because the snowball technique was used to identify additional participants, so did not know the total number of people invited to participate. Like other interview studies, our study may be subject to response bias because those who agreed to participate may have particularly positive or negative views about their experiences. Furthermore, the mean follow-up time since freezing was relatively short (3.3 years, median 2.7 years), which may not have been enough time for some patients to use their frozen materials. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS/CONCLUSIONS:Learning about the experiences of patients undergoing medically indicated oocyte and embryo cryopreservation can help clinicians better counsel these patients regarding decisions and hurdles they may encounter. We found that most patients had not returned to use their frozen materials because of ongoing medical issues, the need for a gestational carrier, lack of a partner, or the desire to attempt unassisted reproduction. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)/BACKGROUND:This study did not receive any funding. The authors of this study have no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER/BACKGROUND:N/A.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To evaluate live birth rates (LBRs) for in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles with ≤5 follicles at trigger, with the goal of helping patients with low follicle counts decide whether to proceed to retrieval. METHODS:This is a retrospective cohort study from an urban, university-affiliated fertility center. All IVF cycles that yielded <10 oocytes between 2016 and 2020 were reviewed. Cycles were included if <5 follicles measuring >14 mm were verified on trigger day. The primary outcome was LBR per retrieval after fresh or frozen transfer. Secondary outcomes were number of oocytes, mature oocytes, 2-pronuclear zygotes (2-PNs), blastocysts for transfer/biopsy, and euploid blastocysts (if preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) was used). RESULTS:1502 cycles (900 with PGT-A) from 972 patients were included. Mean number of oocytes, mature oocytes, 2-PNs, blastocysts for transfer/biopsy, and euploid blastocysts differed by follicle number (p < 0.001). Across all age groups, there were differences in LBR associated with follicle number (p < 0.001). However, within age groups, not all results were significant. For example, for patients <35 years, LBR did not differ by follicle number and among patients 35-37 years; LBR with two or three follicles was lower than with five (p < 0.02). LBR for patients 35-40 years was <20% with 1-3 follicles and 25-40% with 4-5 follicles. LBR for patients >41 years was <5% with 1-3 follicles and <15% with 4-5 follicles. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:As expected, LBR is higher with more follicles. Providing patients with <5 follicles with specific data can help them weigh the emotional, physical, and financial costs of retrieval.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To evaluate pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) outcomes in patients without infertility compared to infertile patients. METHODS:We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients without an infertility diagnosis ("fertile" patients) who utilized PGT-A at a large university-affiliated fertility center between 2016 and 2021. Fertile patients were 1-to-3 matched to infertile controls by age and number of oocytes retrieved. The primary outcome was blastocyst aneuploidy rate. Secondary outcomes included ovarian reserve markers, laboratory outcomes, and other PGT-A outcomes [rates of euploidy, mosaicism, and potentially transferrable (euploid + mosaic) embryos]. RESULTS:283 fertile and 849 infertile patients were included. Median age, anti-Mullerian hormone, and day 2 estradiol levels were equivalent among groups; day 2 follicle-stimulating hormone levels were higher in fertile patients (6.9 vs. 6.5 IU/mL, p < 0.01). The aneuploidy rate was similar among fertile and infertile patients (33.7% vs. 31.8%, p = 0.11); the euploidy rate was higher (50.8% vs. 47.0%, p < 0.01), and the mosaicism rate was lower in fertile patients (13.3% vs. 19.2%, p < 0.01). The rate of transferrable embryos was similar among groups (64.0% vs. 66.3%, p = 0.07), as was the percentage of patients yielding ≥ 1 euploid embryo (90.1% vs. 87.3%, p = 0.25). When controlling for significant covariates, multiple linear regression showed that aneuploidy rate was equivalent in both cohorts. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Aneuploidy rate was similar in fertile and infertile patients. Fertile patients had slightly higher euploidy and lower mosaicism than infertile patients. Still, compared to fertile patients, infertile patients had equivalent rates of transferrable embryos and were just as likely to yield ≥ 1 euploid embryo.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Our aim was to describe the reproductive decisions and outcomes of BRCA-positive patients who used preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disorders (PGT-M). METHODS:We performed a retrospective case series of all PGT-M cycles for BRCA variants between 2010-2021 at a large urban academic fertility center. All patients who underwent ≥ 1 cycle of IVF with PGT-M for BRCA1 or BRCA2 were included. The primary outcome was total number of BRCA-negative euploid embryos per patient. RESULTS:Sixty four patients underwent PGT-M for BRCA variants. Forty-five percent (29/64) were BRCA1-positive females, 27% (17/64) were BRCA2-positive females, 16% (10/64) were BRCA1-positive males, 11% (7/64) were BRCA2-positive males, and one was a BRCA1 and BRCA2-positive male. There were 125 retrieval cycles with PGT-M, and all cycles included PGT for aneuploidy (PGT-A). Eighty-six percent (55/64) of patients obtained at least one BRCA- negative euploid embryo, with median of 1 (range 0-10) BRCA-negative euploid embryo resulted per cycle and median 3 (range 0-10) BRCA-negative euploid embryos accumulated per patient after a median of 2 (range 1-7) oocyte retrievals. Sixty-four percent (41/64) of patients attempted at least one frozen embryo transfer (FET) with a total of 68 FET cycles. Fifty-nine percent (40/68) of embryos transferred resulted in live births. Subgroup analysis revealed different reproductive pathways for BRCA1-positive females, BRCA2-positive females, and BRCA1/2-positive males (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:PGT-M is a viable option for BRCA-positive patients to avoid transmission while building their families. Most patients in our cohort achieved pregnancy with BRCA-negative euploid embryos.