The Outcome of Pregnancy Rate after the Embryo Donation in Natural Cycle at Hamadan Infertility Center

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Abstract

Introduction: Today, the donation of embryos, produced in vitro, is a common way to help the infertile cases who
cannot produce embryo themselves by any of assisted reproductive procedures. The quality of endometrium and the time of embryo transfer are the most important factors in achieveing high pregnancy rate in these cases. The aim of this study was the assessment of pregnancy rate after embryo donation in natural cycle.
 
Material and Methods: This descriptive study was carried out in the year 2005 at Hamadan Infetility Center on 24 couples. A total of 24 couples went through the treatment cycles with embryos donated by 17 couples. Embryo donation was done on days of 14-17 of natural cycle and 2-3 days after the progesterone administration to the recipients. A pregnancy test was performed 2 weeks after ET, and positive results were confirmed by sonographic evaluation of the embryo. Individual, hormone administration results and embryo donation data were collected in a questionnaire, analyzed by descriptive statistics and frequency distribution tables.
 
Results: The mean age of the recipient and donor women were 32.2 and 26.2 years respectively.An average of 2.3 embryos were transferred on each occasion. The clinical pregnancy rate in the recipients was 30% (8.24) per embryo transfer.
 
Conclusion: Transfer of donated embryos in natural cycle, results in a high pregnancy rate and is an easy, acceptable and cost-effective way of treatment for infertility.

Keywords

References

1. American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Guidelines for gamete and embryo donation: a
practice committee report .Fertil Steril.2002; 77:S1.
2. Lee J,Yap C. Embryo donation: a review. Acta obstet Gynecol Scand. 2003 Nov; 82(11):991-96.
3. Trounson V, Leeton J, Besanko M, Wood C ,A Conti. Pregnancy established in an infertile patient
after transfer of a donated embryo fertilised in vitro. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1983 March 12;
286(6368): 835–838.
4. Van Voorish B, Grinstead D, Sparks A. Establishment of a successful dono embryo program:
medical,ethical and policy issues. Fert. Steril.April 1999,71(4) :604-608.
5. De Lacey S. Decision for the fate of frozen embryos: Feresh insights into patients thinking and their rationales for
donating or discarding embryos. Hum Reprod. 2007 Jun; 22(6): 1751-8. [Epub ahead of print].
6. Bettahar-Lebugle K, Wittemer C, Firtion C, Rongieres C, Ohi J, Nisand I. et al . Embryo donation in
France: practice and difficulties.Strasbourg experience. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2007 Feb;35(2): 114-
20
7. Fasouliotis SJ, Schenker JG.Cryopreservation of embryos:medical,ethical,and legalissues. J Assist.
Reprod Genet 1996;13: 756-761.
8. Edwards RG ,Beard HK. Destruction of cryopreserved embryos.UK law dictated the destruction of
3000 cryopreserved human embryos. Hum Reprod. 1997 ; 12: 3-11.
9. Navot D, Scott RT, Droesh K,Veeck LL, Liu HC, Rosenwaks Z. The window of embryo transfer and
efficency of human conception in vitro. Fertil Steril 1991; 55:114 -120
10. Viveca Söderström-Anttila, Tuija Foudila, Ulla-Riitta Ripatti and Rita Siegberg Embryo donation:
outcome and attitudes among embryo donors and recipients Human Reproduction.2001; Vol. 16,
6:20-28.
11. Paulson RJ, Hatch IE ,Lobo RA, Sauer MV. Cumulative conception and live birth rates after oocyte
donation :implication regarding endometrial receptivity ,Hum Reprod. 1997;12:835-42.
12. Li TC,Cook ID,Warren MA,Goolamallee M,Graham RA,Aplin JD,Endometrial responses in
artificial cycles: aprospective study comparing four difference oesterogen dosage . Br J Obstet
Gynecol 1992; 99:751.
13. Shapiro H, Cowell C, Casper RF. The use of vaginal ultrasound for monitoring endometrial
prepration in adonor oocyte program. Fertil Steril1993; 59:1055-61
14. Gonen Y,Casper RF, Jacobson W,B lankier J. Endometrial thickness and growth during ovarian
stimulation :a possible predictor of implantation in invitro fertilization ,Fertil Steril.1989; 52:446-53.
15. Mellon RW, Taney FH, Kuhar MJ, Colon JM, Weiss G. Transfer of cryopreserved-thawed embryos:
the natural cycle versus controlled preparation of the endometrium with gonadotropin-releasing
hormone agonist and exogenous estradiol and progesterone (GEEP). Fertil Steril 1989; 52(4):609-16.
16. Cattoli M, Ciotti,P, Seracchioli R,. Casadio v, Bianchi L.,Preti S, et al.. A randomized prospective
study on cryopreserved-thawed embryo-transfer: natural versus hormone replacement cycles. Human
Reprod 1994; 9 :139–140.
17. Dal Prato L, Borini A, Cattoli M, Bonu, M.A, Sciajno R , Flamigni, C. Endometrial preparation for
frozen-thawed embryo transfer with or without pretreatment with gonadotropin-releasing hormone
agonist. Fertil Steril 2002; 77 : 956–960
18. El-Toukhy T, Taylor A, Khalaf Y, Al-Darazi K, Rowell P, Seed P, et al.. Pituitary suppression in
ultrasound-monitored frozen embryo replacement cycles A randomised study. Hum Reprod 2004;19,
874–879.
19. Gelbaya TA, Nardo LG, Hunter HR, Fitzgerald CT, Horne G ,Pease EE et al. Cryopreserved-thawed
embryo transfer in natural or down-regulated hormonally controlled cycles: a retrospective
study,.Fertil Steril 2006; 85 : 603–609.
20. Bilotas M, Baranao RI, Buquet R., Sueldo C, Tesone M, Meresman G. Effects of GnRH analogues
on apoptosis and expression of Bcl-2, Bax, Fas and FasL proteins in endometrial epithelial cell
cultures from patients with endometriosis and controls. Hum Reprod 2007, 22 (3): 644–5. 

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics