Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on September 9, 2004
Human Reproduction 2004 19(11):2442-2444; doi:10.1093/humrep/deh501
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction?
The cumulated singleton/twin delivery rates per oocyte pick-up: the CUSIDERA and CUTWIDERA
1 Reproductive Medicine Unit, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, CHUV, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland
2 To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: marc.germond{at}chuv.hospvd.ch
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionCryopreservation has to be...CUTWIDERA and CUSIDERA as...Twin deliveries should be...ConclusionReferences |
|---|
National and international registries are essential tools for establishing new standards and comparing success rates, but they do not take into account the total pregnancy/delivery rate per oocyte recovery. In Switzerland and Germany, because of legal constraints, a maximum of three two-pronuclear zygotes are allocated for transfer whereas all the supernumerary pronuclear zygotes are immediately cryopreserved, preventing selection of the transferred embryos. We report on a 10 years' experience (1993–2002) of our centre which performs transfers of unselected embryos and cryopreservation at the two-pronuclear zygote stage. As
30% of all deliveries are from cryo cycles, it is essential to take into account the contribution of the cryo transfers, and we propose therefore to evaluate, as a measure of IVF performance, the cumulated delivery rate per oocyte pick-up. This delivery rate is broken down further into the cumulated singleton delivery rate (CUSIDERA) and the cumulated twin delivery rate (CUTWIDERA). The sum (S) of these two rates is a measure of efficacy while the ratio CUTWIDERA/S as a percentage is a measure of safety of IVF treatments. Using these new indexes, the average 10 year efficacy and safety of our IVF programme were 26 and 19%, respectively. Both CUSIDERA and CUTWIDERA can be calculated easily in any clinical situation and yield useful parameters for patient counselling and internal/external benchmarking purposes.
Key words: cryopreservation/cumulated delivery rates/IVF/multiple pregnancies/treatment efficacy
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionCryopreservation has to be...CUTWIDERA and CUSIDERA as...Twin deliveries should be...ConclusionReferences |
|---|
The outcome measure of an IVF treatment has been critically reviewed in several recent issues of this journal (Davies et al., 2004
; Dickey et al., 2004; Griesinger et al., 2004; Land and Evers, 2004; Min et al., 2004). The debate has focused not only on the clinical performance in terms of pregnancy or delivery rates per any type of denominator, but also on other associated risks and complications, such as multiple births or other maternal risks. The safest approach to assisted reproduction has been proposed to be ‘Children for infertile couples, but one at a time’ (Adashi et al., 2003). Reducing the number of transferred embryos from three to two has been shown in several studies to reduce the multiple gestation rates without affecting the pregnancy rate per transfer (Staessen et al., 1995; Templeton and Morris, 1998). Along the same line of thought, the transfer of a single embryo has become a legal obligation in some countries with the objective of reducing the twin pregnancy rate (Gerris et al., 2002; Adashi et al., 2003). Elective single embryo transfer (eSET) is, however, technically dependent on an in vitro selection of the most suitable embryo (Martikainen et al., 2004), which is impossible to apply in some countries for legal reasons.
In Switzerland and Germany, the law restricts to three the number of embryos that may be kept in culture beyond the two-pronuclear (2PN) zygote stage (Germond and Senn, 1999; van der Ven et al., 2002). Furthermore, as cryopreservation of the second or third best cleavage stage embryo is forbidden, the transfer of a single embryo would imply the destruction of the non-transferred ones. eSET is thus in our context legally and ethically inapplicable. The remaining choices are to keep only two zygotes in culture and cryopreserve all supernumerary 2PN zygotes. The consequences of this attitude are a lower pregnancy rate per transfer compared with that obtained after the transfer of selected embryos and the necessity to establish a high standard cyropreservation programme at the 2PN zygote stage.
|
Cryopreservation has to be considered in evaluating IVF outcome |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionCryopreservation has to be...CUTWIDERA and CUSIDERA as...Twin deliveries should be...ConclusionReferences |
|---|
Most centres evaluate their IVF performance by measuring pregnancies or deliveries following fresh embryo transfers without including cryo transfers. Cumulating fresh and cryo transfers has been presented recently as a critical issue to evaluate outcome of IVF treatments (Davies et al., 2004
; Pinborg et al., 2004). In the Swiss and German context, it is essential to take into account the contribution of the cryo transfers, and we propose therefore to evaluate, as a measure of IVF performance, the cumulated delivery rates per oocyte pick-up (OPU). This measure can be broken down further into the cumulated singleton delivery rate (CUSIDERA) and the cumulated twin delivery rate (CUTWIDERA), as shown in Figure 1.
|
When only fresh transfers were considered, the singleton delivery rate per OPU obtained in our centre reached 13.1%, which was similar to the birth emphasizing successful singleton at term (BESST, 11.1%) reported by Min et al. (2004)
. However, when the corresponding frozen transfers were included, the CUSIDERA increased to 21.7%. The CUSIDERA increased over the years and has reached values close to 25% since 1998. The lower rate observed for the year 2002 is due to the fact that most zygotes frozen in 2002 have not been thawed and transferred yet. When calculated according to age at the time of OPU, both CUSIDERA and CUTWIDERA decreased with age (<35 years: 26.6 and 6.2%, 35–39 years: 19.9 and 5.0%, >39 years: 9.3 and 1.5%).
Policies concerning selection and cryopreservation of human embryos vary among different countries, mainly due to specific local ethical considerations and legal constraints. One of the main advantages of CUSIDERA and CUTWIDERA is that they may be used to evaluate outcomes independently of the freezing policy and the cleavage stage of the embryos at freezing. This may allow the strategy resulting in the best outcome to be determined. The benefits of freezing zygotes instead of embryos were already demonstrated (Senn et al., 2000), but a recent report on the improvement of blastocyst freezing (Gardner et al., 2003) is also promising.
|
CUTWIDERA and CUSIDERA as a measure of safety and efficacy |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionCryopreservation has to be...CUTWIDERA and CUSIDERA as...Twin deliveries should be...ConclusionReferences |
|---|
The sum of CUSIDERA and CUTWIDERA may be used as a measure of efficacy, and the ratio of CUTWIDERA/(CUSIDERA + CUTWIDERA)x100 may be considered as a measure of safety. This safety ratio is 19% [(5/(21 + 5))x100] in our centre. In order to approach the natural twin conception of 1–2% (Antoine et al., 2004
), the CUTWIDERA should be lowered to at least 1%, but this should be achieved without affecting the CUSIDERA.
Land and Evers (2004) compared efficacy (delivery rate per OPU) related to safety (number of embryos per transfer) between different countries. In their study, Switzerland, when only fresh transfers were included, presented a low efficacy (<20% delivery rate per OPU) combined with a high safety (
2 embryos per transfer). By determining efficacy with the CUSIDERA and CUTWIDERA, Switzerland would have appeared in the quadrant which combines both maximum efficacy and safety (26% efficacy with two transferred embryos), despite the lack of embryo selection. In our opinion, this increase in efficacy is due to the use of the 2PN zygote freezing policy, which maximizes the recovery of intact zygotes after thawing and minimizes the number of discarded embryos.
|
Twin deliveries should be reduced |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionCryopreservation has to be...CUTWIDERA and CUSIDERA as...Twin deliveries should be...ConclusionReferences |
|---|
Triplet pregnancies can be nearly eliminated by limiting the number of transferred embryos to two. Reducing the number of twin pregnancies is still a matter of debate, as the birth of twins may appear acceptable for a number of patients and clinicians (Dickey et al., 2004
). However, twin pregnancies are more likely to be responsible for premature birth and growth retardation than single pregnancies, resulting in a costly medical follow-up during gestation, the perinatal period and childhood (Adashi et al., 2003). In addition, the economic and psychological difficulties of parents after the birth of twins cannot be denied. To reduce twin pregnancies, the transfer of a single embryo is the only efficient policy. However, in order to avoid a drop in the outcome, eSET implies an accurate selection of the best embryo, combined with great expertise in clinical and laboratory work (Gerris et al., 2002). Under the pressure of neonatologists, the Swiss Reproductive Medicine Society has strongly encouraged centres since 1998 to reduce the number of transferred embryos to two. This change has not compromised the pregnancy outcome in our centre and had little impact on the CUTWIDERA, which remained close to 5% over the last 10 years. As a consequence, to reach a 1% CUTWIDERA, better selection tools at the patient, zygote and oocyte levels need to be developed.
|
Conclusion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionCryopreservation has to be...CUTWIDERA and CUSIDERA as...Twin deliveries should be...ConclusionReferences |
|---|
The combined use of CUSIDERA and CUTWIDERA should satisfy quality assurance by allowing a standardized evaluation of both efficacy and safety and by offering a benchmarking tool for internal/external audits. CUSIDERA and CUTWIDERA may be calculated in all clinical situations and allow counselling of patients more specifically and comparison of centres or countries in terms of efficacy/safety. Finally, this measure may also prove to be the most relevant standard of success when ethical and legal arguments or public health costs are considered.
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionCryopreservation has to be...CUTWIDERA and CUSIDERA as...Twin deliveries should be...ConclusionReferences |
|---|
Adashi EY, Barri PN, Berkowitz R, Braude P, Bryan E, Carr J, Cohen J, Collins J, Devroey P, Frydman R et al. (2003) Infertility therapy-associated multiple pregnancies (births): an ongoing epidemic. Reprod Biomed Online 7, 515–542.[Medline]
Antoine JM, Audebert A, Avril C, Belaisch-Allart J, Blondel B, Bréart G, Cohen J, Epelboin S, Fanchin R, Foix l'Hélias L et al. (2004) [Treatments of sterility and multiple pregnancies in France: analysis and recommendations]. Gynécol Obstet Fertil, in press.
Davies MJ, Wang JX and Norman RJ (2004) What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? Assessing the BESST index for reproduction treatment. Hum Reprod 19, 1049–1051.
Dickey RP, Sartor BM and Pyrzak R (2004) What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? No single outcome measure is satisfactory when evaluating success in assisted reproduction; both twin births and singleton births should be counted as successes. Hum Reprod 19, 783–787.
Gardner DK, Lane M, Stevens J and Schoolcraft WB (2003) Changing the start temperature and cooling rate in a slow-freezing protocol increases human blastocyst viability. Fertil Steril 79, 407–410.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Germond M and Senn A (1999) A law affecting medically assisted procreation is on the way in Switzerland. J Assist Reprod Genet 16, 341–343.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Gerris J, De Neubourg D, Mangelschots K, Van Royen E, Vercruyssen M, Barudy-Vasquez J, Valkenburg M and Ryckaert G (2002) Elective single day 3 embryo transfer halves the twinning rate without decrease in the ongoing pregnancy rate of an IVF/ICSI programme. Hum Reprod 17, 2626–2631.
Griesinger G, Dafopoulos K, Schultze-Mosgau A, Felberbaum R and Diedrich K (2004) What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? Is BESST (birth emphasizing a successful singleton at term) truly the best? Hum Reprod 19, 1239–1241.
Land JA and Evers JL (2004) What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? Defining outcome in ART: a Gordian knot of safety, efficacy and quality. Hum Reprod 19, 1046–1048.
Martikainen H, Orava M, Lakkakorpi J and Tuomivaara L (2004) Day 2 elective single embryo transfer in clinical practice: better outcome in ICSI cycles. Hum Reprod 19, 1364–1366.
Min JK, Breheny SA, MacLachlan V and Healy DL (2004) What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? The singleton, term gestation, live birth rate per cycle initiated: the BESST endpoint for assisted reproduction. Hum Reprod 19, 3–7.
Pinborg A, Loft A, Ziebe S and Nyboe Andersen A (2004) What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? Is there a single ‘parameter of excellence’? Hum Reprod 19, 1052–1054.
Senn A, Vozzi C, Chanson A, De Grandi P and Germond M (2000) Prospective randomized study of two cryopreservation policies avoiding embryo selection: the pronucleate stage leads to a higher cumulative delivery rate than the early cleavage stage. Fertil Steril 74, 946–952.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Staessen C, Nagy ZP, Liu J, Janssenswillen C, Camus M, Devroey P and Steirteghem AC (1995) One year's experience with elective transfer of two good quality embryos in the human in-vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection programmes. Hum Reprod 10, 3305–3312.
Templeton A and Morris JK (1998) Reducing the risk of multiple births by transfer of two embryos after in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med 339, 573–577.
van der Ven H, Montag M and van der Ven K (2002) [Performance of in vitro fertilization in Germany]. Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich 96, 369–374.[Medline]
Submitted on June 18, 2004; resubmitted on July 7, 2004; accepted on August 4, 2004.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  E.M. Kolibianakis, J. Collins, B.C. Tarlatzis, P. Devroey, K. Diedrich, and G. Griesinger Among patients treated for IVF with gonadotrophins and GnRH analogues, is the probability of live birth dependent on the type of analogue used? A systematic review and meta-analysis Hum. Reprod. Update, November 1, 2006; 12(6): 651 - 671. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B.C. Tarlatzis, B.C. Fauser, E.M. Kolibianakis, K. Diedrich, P. Devroey, and , On Behalf of the Brussels GnRH Antagonist Consen GnRH antagonists in ovarian stimulation for IVF Hum. Reprod. Update, July 1, 2006; 12(4): 333 - 340. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||