Weekend‐free scheduled IVF/ICSI procedures and single embryo transfer do not reduce live‐birth rates in a general infertile population

Introduction Scheduling of ovum pickup only on weekdays may result in cases of apparently suboptimal timing for human chorionic gonadotropin and ovum pickup. This study aimed to assess whether live‐birth rates were reduced in women with a potentially suboptimal day for human chorionic gonadotropin a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica 2017-12, Vol.96 (12), p.1423-1429
Hauptverfasser: Feichtinger, Michael, Karlström, Per O., Olofsson, Jan I., Rodriguez‐Wallberg, Kenny A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1429
container_issue 12
container_start_page 1423
container_title Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica
container_volume 96
creator Feichtinger, Michael
Karlström, Per O.
Olofsson, Jan I.
Rodriguez‐Wallberg, Kenny A.
description Introduction Scheduling of ovum pickup only on weekdays may result in cases of apparently suboptimal timing for human chorionic gonadotropin and ovum pickup. This study aimed to assess whether live‐birth rates were reduced in women with a potentially suboptimal day for human chorionic gonadotropin and ovum pickup to avoid weekend work, according to ultrasonographic data on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin planning. Material and methods An evaluation of the optimal human chorionic gonadotropin priming date was performed in treatment protocols of 1000 consecutive patients undergoing their first in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmatic sperm injection with single‐embryo transfer. An ideal ovum pickup day was characterized by human chorionic gonadotropin‐scheduling when three or more follicles reached 17 mm (day 0) or with one day of delay (day +1) (n = 760). A non‐ideal ovum pickup was either early (day −1, −2, −3) (n = 24) or delayed (day +2, +3, +4) (n = 216). Live‐birth rates in the ideal and non‐ideal ovum pickup groups was set as primary outcome measure. Results Early‐ovum pickups were excluded as they were infrequent. No differences between ideal and delayed ovum pickup groups were found regarding number of oocytes retrieved (9.87 vs. 9.78, p = 0.990), pregnancy rates (28.3% vs. 29.6%, p = 0.701) or live‐birth rates (26.2% vs. 25.9%, p = 0.939). However, sub analyses indicated that treatment with gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonists resulted in significantly lower clinical pregnancy rates in delayed ovum pickups (odds ratio 0.46, p = 0.014), compared with agonist treatments. Conclusions Weekend work may not be needed for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmatic sperm injection single‐embryo transfer treatments. However, in gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist cycles, delaying ovum pickup more than one day may result in unfavorable outcomes.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/aogs.13235
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_swepu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_swepub_primary_oai_swepub_ki_se_493863</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1967211845</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4865-553090b0f343e8f89b202a5e9d7599fcca2fd8e452d2bc38df1300eb7bc086833</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kk1v1DAQhi0EotvChR-ALHFBSGn9mdgXpGpFy0qVeigfR8txJrtps_ZiJ632xrknfiO_BC9ZKsoBX-yZeebV2H4RekXJMc3rxIZlOqaccfkEzWhJSEEEZU_RjBBCi5ILfYAOU7rOEauEeo4OmNKCUE1n6P4rwA345uf3H20EwMmtoBl7aPDiy9nJYn61wJsYXM5FSNj6BqfOL3vAsK7jNuAhWp9aiLgJ2IcBx0w6wH13C1my7uKwwtEOubfz2OIleIi2z0HuGbqsswmbsbdDF_wL9Ky1fYKX-_0IfT778Gn-sbi4PF_MTy8KJ1QpCyk50aQmLRccVKt0zQizEnRTSa1b5yxrGwVCsobVjqumpZwQqKvaEVUqzo9QMemmO9iMtdnEbm3j1gTbmX3qJp_ACM1VuePfT3yurKFx4POl-0dtjyu-W5lluDUlkVLqKgu83QvE8G2ENJh1lxz0vfUQxmSoFqwipZQ0o2_-Qa_DGH1-jkyVFaNUCZmpdxPlYkgpQvswDCVmZwmzs4T5bYkMv_57_Af0jwcyQCfgLv_H9j9S5vTy_GoS_QWoO8YI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1967211845</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Weekend‐free scheduled IVF/ICSI procedures and single embryo transfer do not reduce live‐birth rates in a general infertile population</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>SWEPUB Freely available online</source><creator>Feichtinger, Michael ; Karlström, Per O. ; Olofsson, Jan I. ; Rodriguez‐Wallberg, Kenny A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Feichtinger, Michael ; Karlström, Per O. ; Olofsson, Jan I. ; Rodriguez‐Wallberg, Kenny A.</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction Scheduling of ovum pickup only on weekdays may result in cases of apparently suboptimal timing for human chorionic gonadotropin and ovum pickup. This study aimed to assess whether live‐birth rates were reduced in women with a potentially suboptimal day for human chorionic gonadotropin and ovum pickup to avoid weekend work, according to ultrasonographic data on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin planning. Material and methods An evaluation of the optimal human chorionic gonadotropin priming date was performed in treatment protocols of 1000 consecutive patients undergoing their first in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmatic sperm injection with single‐embryo transfer. An ideal ovum pickup day was characterized by human chorionic gonadotropin‐scheduling when three or more follicles reached 17 mm (day 0) or with one day of delay (day +1) (n = 760). A non‐ideal ovum pickup was either early (day −1, −2, −3) (n = 24) or delayed (day +2, +3, +4) (n = 216). Live‐birth rates in the ideal and non‐ideal ovum pickup groups was set as primary outcome measure. Results Early‐ovum pickups were excluded as they were infrequent. No differences between ideal and delayed ovum pickup groups were found regarding number of oocytes retrieved (9.87 vs. 9.78, p = 0.990), pregnancy rates (28.3% vs. 29.6%, p = 0.701) or live‐birth rates (26.2% vs. 25.9%, p = 0.939). However, sub analyses indicated that treatment with gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonists resulted in significantly lower clinical pregnancy rates in delayed ovum pickups (odds ratio 0.46, p = 0.014), compared with agonist treatments. Conclusions Weekend work may not be needed for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmatic sperm injection single‐embryo transfer treatments. However, in gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist cycles, delaying ovum pickup more than one day may result in unfavorable outcomes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0001-6349</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1600-0412</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/aogs.13235</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28940191</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Androgens ; assisted reproductive technology ; Birth Rate ; Chorionic Gonadotropin - therapeutic use ; Female ; Fertility ; Fertilization in Vitro ; Humans ; In vitro fertilization ; intracytoplasmatic sperm injection ; live births ; Oocyte Retrieval ; Original ; Ovulation Induction - methods ; Ovum pickup ; Pregnancy ; pregnancy rates ; Single Embryo Transfer ; Sperm ; Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2017-12, Vol.96 (12), p.1423-1429</ispartof><rights>2017 The Authors. published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd on behalf of Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology (NFOG)</rights><rights>2017 The Authors. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd on behalf of Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology (NFOG).</rights><rights>Copyright © 2017 Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4865-553090b0f343e8f89b202a5e9d7599fcca2fd8e452d2bc38df1300eb7bc086833</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4865-553090b0f343e8f89b202a5e9d7599fcca2fd8e452d2bc38df1300eb7bc086833</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6453-9281 ; 0000-0003-4378-6181 ; 0000-0003-0534-5158</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Faogs.13235$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Faogs.13235$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,550,776,780,881,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28940191$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://kipublications.ki.se/Default.aspx?queryparsed=id:137093836$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Feichtinger, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karlström, Per O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olofsson, Jan I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodriguez‐Wallberg, Kenny A.</creatorcontrib><title>Weekend‐free scheduled IVF/ICSI procedures and single embryo transfer do not reduce live‐birth rates in a general infertile population</title><title>Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica</title><addtitle>Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand</addtitle><description>Introduction Scheduling of ovum pickup only on weekdays may result in cases of apparently suboptimal timing for human chorionic gonadotropin and ovum pickup. This study aimed to assess whether live‐birth rates were reduced in women with a potentially suboptimal day for human chorionic gonadotropin and ovum pickup to avoid weekend work, according to ultrasonographic data on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin planning. Material and methods An evaluation of the optimal human chorionic gonadotropin priming date was performed in treatment protocols of 1000 consecutive patients undergoing their first in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmatic sperm injection with single‐embryo transfer. An ideal ovum pickup day was characterized by human chorionic gonadotropin‐scheduling when three or more follicles reached 17 mm (day 0) or with one day of delay (day +1) (n = 760). A non‐ideal ovum pickup was either early (day −1, −2, −3) (n = 24) or delayed (day +2, +3, +4) (n = 216). Live‐birth rates in the ideal and non‐ideal ovum pickup groups was set as primary outcome measure. Results Early‐ovum pickups were excluded as they were infrequent. No differences between ideal and delayed ovum pickup groups were found regarding number of oocytes retrieved (9.87 vs. 9.78, p = 0.990), pregnancy rates (28.3% vs. 29.6%, p = 0.701) or live‐birth rates (26.2% vs. 25.9%, p = 0.939). However, sub analyses indicated that treatment with gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonists resulted in significantly lower clinical pregnancy rates in delayed ovum pickups (odds ratio 0.46, p = 0.014), compared with agonist treatments. Conclusions Weekend work may not be needed for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmatic sperm injection single‐embryo transfer treatments. However, in gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist cycles, delaying ovum pickup more than one day may result in unfavorable outcomes.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Androgens</subject><subject>assisted reproductive technology</subject><subject>Birth Rate</subject><subject>Chorionic Gonadotropin - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fertility</subject><subject>Fertilization in Vitro</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>In vitro fertilization</subject><subject>intracytoplasmatic sperm injection</subject><subject>live births</subject><subject>Oocyte Retrieval</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Ovulation Induction - methods</subject><subject>Ovum pickup</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>pregnancy rates</subject><subject>Single Embryo Transfer</subject><subject>Sperm</subject><subject>Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>0001-6349</issn><issn>1600-0412</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>D8T</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kk1v1DAQhi0EotvChR-ALHFBSGn9mdgXpGpFy0qVeigfR8txJrtps_ZiJ632xrknfiO_BC9ZKsoBX-yZeebV2H4RekXJMc3rxIZlOqaccfkEzWhJSEEEZU_RjBBCi5ILfYAOU7rOEauEeo4OmNKCUE1n6P4rwA345uf3H20EwMmtoBl7aPDiy9nJYn61wJsYXM5FSNj6BqfOL3vAsK7jNuAhWp9aiLgJ2IcBx0w6wH13C1my7uKwwtEOubfz2OIleIi2z0HuGbqsswmbsbdDF_wL9Ky1fYKX-_0IfT778Gn-sbi4PF_MTy8KJ1QpCyk50aQmLRccVKt0zQizEnRTSa1b5yxrGwVCsobVjqumpZwQqKvaEVUqzo9QMemmO9iMtdnEbm3j1gTbmX3qJp_ACM1VuePfT3yurKFx4POl-0dtjyu-W5lluDUlkVLqKgu83QvE8G2ENJh1lxz0vfUQxmSoFqwipZQ0o2_-Qa_DGH1-jkyVFaNUCZmpdxPlYkgpQvswDCVmZwmzs4T5bYkMv_57_Af0jwcyQCfgLv_H9j9S5vTy_GoS_QWoO8YI</recordid><startdate>201712</startdate><enddate>201712</enddate><creator>Feichtinger, Michael</creator><creator>Karlström, Per O.</creator><creator>Olofsson, Jan I.</creator><creator>Rodriguez‐Wallberg, Kenny A.</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>ADTPV</scope><scope>AOWAS</scope><scope>D8T</scope><scope>ZZAVC</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6453-9281</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4378-6181</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0534-5158</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201712</creationdate><title>Weekend‐free scheduled IVF/ICSI procedures and single embryo transfer do not reduce live‐birth rates in a general infertile population</title><author>Feichtinger, Michael ; Karlström, Per O. ; Olofsson, Jan I. ; Rodriguez‐Wallberg, Kenny A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4865-553090b0f343e8f89b202a5e9d7599fcca2fd8e452d2bc38df1300eb7bc086833</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Androgens</topic><topic>assisted reproductive technology</topic><topic>Birth Rate</topic><topic>Chorionic Gonadotropin - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fertility</topic><topic>Fertilization in Vitro</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>In vitro fertilization</topic><topic>intracytoplasmatic sperm injection</topic><topic>live births</topic><topic>Oocyte Retrieval</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Ovulation Induction - methods</topic><topic>Ovum pickup</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>pregnancy rates</topic><topic>Single Embryo Transfer</topic><topic>Sperm</topic><topic>Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Feichtinger, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karlström, Per O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olofsson, Jan I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodriguez‐Wallberg, Kenny A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>SwePub</collection><collection>SwePub Articles</collection><collection>SWEPUB Freely available online</collection><collection>SwePub Articles full text</collection><jtitle>Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Feichtinger, Michael</au><au>Karlström, Per O.</au><au>Olofsson, Jan I.</au><au>Rodriguez‐Wallberg, Kenny A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Weekend‐free scheduled IVF/ICSI procedures and single embryo transfer do not reduce live‐birth rates in a general infertile population</atitle><jtitle>Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand</addtitle><date>2017-12</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>96</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>1423</spage><epage>1429</epage><pages>1423-1429</pages><issn>0001-6349</issn><eissn>1600-0412</eissn><abstract>Introduction Scheduling of ovum pickup only on weekdays may result in cases of apparently suboptimal timing for human chorionic gonadotropin and ovum pickup. This study aimed to assess whether live‐birth rates were reduced in women with a potentially suboptimal day for human chorionic gonadotropin and ovum pickup to avoid weekend work, according to ultrasonographic data on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin planning. Material and methods An evaluation of the optimal human chorionic gonadotropin priming date was performed in treatment protocols of 1000 consecutive patients undergoing their first in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmatic sperm injection with single‐embryo transfer. An ideal ovum pickup day was characterized by human chorionic gonadotropin‐scheduling when three or more follicles reached 17 mm (day 0) or with one day of delay (day +1) (n = 760). A non‐ideal ovum pickup was either early (day −1, −2, −3) (n = 24) or delayed (day +2, +3, +4) (n = 216). Live‐birth rates in the ideal and non‐ideal ovum pickup groups was set as primary outcome measure. Results Early‐ovum pickups were excluded as they were infrequent. No differences between ideal and delayed ovum pickup groups were found regarding number of oocytes retrieved (9.87 vs. 9.78, p = 0.990), pregnancy rates (28.3% vs. 29.6%, p = 0.701) or live‐birth rates (26.2% vs. 25.9%, p = 0.939). However, sub analyses indicated that treatment with gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonists resulted in significantly lower clinical pregnancy rates in delayed ovum pickups (odds ratio 0.46, p = 0.014), compared with agonist treatments. Conclusions Weekend work may not be needed for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmatic sperm injection single‐embryo transfer treatments. However, in gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist cycles, delaying ovum pickup more than one day may result in unfavorable outcomes.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>28940191</pmid><doi>10.1111/aogs.13235</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6453-9281</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4378-6181</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0534-5158</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0001-6349
ispartof Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2017-12, Vol.96 (12), p.1423-1429
issn 0001-6349
1600-0412
language eng
recordid cdi_swepub_primary_oai_swepub_ki_se_493863
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; SWEPUB Freely available online
subjects Adult
Androgens
assisted reproductive technology
Birth Rate
Chorionic Gonadotropin - therapeutic use
Female
Fertility
Fertilization in Vitro
Humans
In vitro fertilization
intracytoplasmatic sperm injection
live births
Oocyte Retrieval
Original
Ovulation Induction - methods
Ovum pickup
Pregnancy
pregnancy rates
Single Embryo Transfer
Sperm
Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic
Time Factors
title Weekend‐free scheduled IVF/ICSI procedures and single embryo transfer do not reduce live‐birth rates in a general infertile population
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-20T23%3A21%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_swepu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Weekend%E2%80%90free%20scheduled%20IVF/ICSI%20procedures%20and%20single%20embryo%20transfer%20do%20not%20reduce%20live%E2%80%90birth%20rates%20in%20a%20general%20infertile%20population&rft.jtitle=Acta%20obstetricia%20et%20gynecologica%20Scandinavica&rft.au=Feichtinger,%20Michael&rft.date=2017-12&rft.volume=96&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=1423&rft.epage=1429&rft.pages=1423-1429&rft.issn=0001-6349&rft.eissn=1600-0412&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/aogs.13235&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_swepu%3E1967211845%3C/proquest_swepu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1967211845&rft_id=info:pmid/28940191&rfr_iscdi=true