Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Jan 5;11(1):2.
doi: 10.1186/s13048-017-0378-4.

New national outcome data on fresh versus cryopreserved donor oocytes

Vitaly A Kushnir  1   2 , Sarah K Darmon  3 , David H Barad  3   4 , Norbert Gleicher  3   4   5   6
Affiliations

New national outcome data on fresh versus cryopreserved donor oocytes

Vitaly A Kushnir et al. J Ovarian Res. .

Abstract

Background: Improvements in oocyte cryopreservation techniques and establishment of cryopreserved donor oocyte banks have led to improved access to and lower cost of donor oocytes, upending the traditional practice of fresh oocyte donation. The objective of this study was to examine national trends in utilization and live birth rates with fresh versus cryopreserved donor oocytes.

Methods: A retrospective analysis of 2013 through 2015 aggregate U.S. national data reported by the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology which included 30,160 IVF cycles with either fresh or cryopreserved donor oocytes was performed.

Results: During the study period utilization of fresh oocyte donations rapidly declined by 32.9%, while cryopreserved oocyte donation increased by 44.4%. Fresh donor oocytes produced significantly higher live birth rates per recipient cycle start than cryopreserved donor oocytes (51.1% vs. 39.7%). Over the three-year study period fresh donor oocytes produced stable live birth rates per recipient cycle start while those with cryopreserved oocytes significantly declined year-by-year.

Conclusion: Despite rising popularity of cryopreserved donor oocytes, prospective patients should be counselled that fresh donor oocytes still represent standard of care due to higher live birth rates.

Keywords: Cryopreservation; In vitro fertilization; Oocyte donation; Vitrification.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Because this study investigated only publicly available anonymized data, it received expedited IRB approval.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

V.A.K. previously served as a consultant to the CDC. The Center for Human Reproduction (CHR) annually routinely reports IVF outcome data to CDC and SART. N.G., D.H.B., and V.A.K. are listed as co-owners of several already awarded and still pending U.S. patents, none related to the topic of this manuscript. N.G. is a shareholder in Fertility Nutraceuticals, LLC and owner of the CHR. N.G. and D.H.B. receive patent royalties from Fertility Nutraceuticals, LLC. N.G., and D.H.B have received research support, travel funding and lecture fees from various Pharma and medical device companies, none, in any way related to this manuscript.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Live birth rates with fresh versus cryopreserved donated oocytes, 2013–2015. * P < 0.001; Live birth rates were compared using the two-tailed Fisher’s exact test and Wilson confidence interval for binomial proportions. ^ 2015 data were calculated from a preliminary report distributed by SART
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Practice Committees of American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Mature oocyte cryopreservation: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(1):37–43. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.09.028. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kushnir VA, Barad DH, Albertini DF, Darmon SK, Gleicher N. Outcomes of fresh and Cryopreserved Oocyte donation. JAMA. 2015;314(6):623–624. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.7556. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Grifo JA, McCulloh DH, Statman LY. Fresh vs cryopreserved donor oocytes. JAMA. 2015;314(23):2569–2570. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.13447. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology, National Data Summary [Internet]. [cited 2017 May 10]. Available from: https://www.sartcorsonline.com/rptCSR_PublicMultYear.aspx?reportingYear=...
    1. Kushnir VA, Darmon SK, Shapiro AJ, Albertini DF, Barad DH, Gleicher N. Utilization of third-party in vitro fertilization in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;216(3):266–2e1. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources