ART in Europe, 2016: results generated from European registries by ESHRE † – ScienceOpen
39
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      ART in Europe, 2016: results generated from European registries by ESHRE

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          STUDY QUESTION

          What are the reported data on cycles in ART, IUI and fertility preservation (FP) interventions in 2016 as compared to previous years, as well as the main trends over the years?

          SUMMARY ANSWER

          The 20th ESHRE report on ART and IUI shows a progressive increase in reported treatment cycle numbers in Europe, with a decrease in the number of transfers with more than one embryo causing a reduction of multiple delivery rates (DR), as well as higher pregnancy rates and DR after frozen embryo replacement (FER) compared to fresh IVF and ICSI cycles, while the outcomes for IUI cycles remained stable.

          WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

          Since 1997, ART aggregated data generated by national registries, clinics or professional societies have been collected, analysed by the European IVF-monitoring Consortium (EIM) and reported in 19 manuscripts published in Human Reproduction and Human Reproduction Open.

          STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

          Yearly collection of European medically assisted reproduction (MAR) data by EIM for ESHRE. The data on treatments performed between 1 January and 31 December 2016 in 40 European countries were provided by either National Registries or registries based on personal initiatives of medical associations and scientific organizations.

          PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

          In all, 1347 clinics offering ART services in 40 countries reported a total of 918 159 treatment cycles, involving 156 002 with IVF, 407 222 with ICSI, 248 407 with FER, 27 069 with preimplantation genetic testing, 73 927 with egg donation (ED), 654 with IVM of oocytes and 4878 cycles with frozen oocyte replacement (FOR). European data on IUI using husband/partner’s semen (IUI-H) and donor semen (IUI-D) were reported from 1197 institutions offering IUI in 29 and 24 countries, respectively. A total of 162 948 treatments with IUI-H and 50 467 treatments with IUI-D were included. A total of 13 689 FP interventions from 11 countries including oocyte, ovarian tissue, semen and testicular tissue banking in pre-and postpubertal patients were reported.

          MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

          In 20 countries (18 in 2015) with a total population of approximately 325 million inhabitants, in which all ART clinics reported to the registry, a total of 461 401 treatment cycles were performed, corresponding to a mean of 1410 cycles per million inhabitants (range 82–3088 per million inhabitants). In the 40 reporting countries, after IVF the clinical pregnancy rates (PR) per aspiration and per transfer in 2016 were similar to those observed in 2015 (28.0% and 34.8% vs 28.5% and 34.6%, respectively). After ICSI, the corresponding rates were also similar to those achieved in 2015 (25% and 33.2% vs 26.2% and 33.2%). After FER with own embryos, the PR per thawing is still on the rise, from 29.2% in 2015 to 30.9% in 2016. After ED, the PR per fresh embryo transfer was 49.4% (49.6% in 2015) and per FOR 43.6% (43.4% in 2015). In IVF and ICSI together, the trend towards the transfer of fewer embryos continues with the transfer of 1, 2, 3 and ≥4 embryos in 41.5%, 51.9%, 6.2% and 0.4% of all treatments, respectively (corresponding to 37.7%, 53.9%, 7.9% and 0.5% in 2015). This resulted in a proportion of singleton, twin and triplet DRs of 84.8%, 14.9% and 0.3%, respectively (compared to 83.1%, 16.5% and 0.4%, respectively in 2015). Treatments with FER in 2016 resulted in twin and triplet DR of 11.9% and 0.2%, respectively (vs 12.3% and 0.3% in 2015). After IUI, the DRs remained similar at 8.9% after IUI-H (7.8% in 2015) and at 12.4% after IUI-D (12.0% in 2015). Twin and triplet DRs after IUI-H were 8.8% and 0.3%, respectively (in 2015: 8.9% and 0.5%) and 7.7% and 0.4% after IUI-D (in 2015: 7.3% and 0.6%). The majority of FP interventions included the cryopreservation of ejaculated sperm ( n = 7877 from 11 countries) and of oocytes ( n = 4907 from eight countries).

          LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

          As the methods of data collection and levels of completeness of reported data vary among European countries, the results should be interpreted with caution. A number of countries failed to provide adequate data about the number of initiated cycles and deliveries.

          WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

          The 20th ESHRE report on ART and IUI shows a continuous increase of reported treatment numbers and MAR-derived livebirths in Europe. Being already the largest data collection on MAR in Europe, continuous efforts to stimulate data collection and reporting strive for future quality control of the data, transparency and vigilance in the field of reproductive medicine.

          STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

          The study has no external funding and all costs were covered by ESHRE. There are no competing interests.

          Related collections

          Most cited references8

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Oocyte, embryo and blastocyst cryopreservation in ART: systematic review and meta-analysis comparing slow-freezing versus vitrification to produce evidence for the development of global guidance

          Abstract BACKGROUND Successful cryopreservation of oocytes and embryos is essential not only to maximize the safety and efficacy of ovarian stimulation cycles in an IVF treatment, but also to enable fertility preservation. Two cryopreservation methods are routinely used: slow-freezing or vitrification. Slow-freezing allows for freezing to occur at a sufficiently slow rate to permit adequate cellular dehydration while minimizing intracellular ice formation. Vitrification allows the solidification of the cell(s) and of the extracellular milieu into a glass-like state without the formation of ice. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE The objective of our study was to provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes following slow-freezing/thawing versus vitrification/warming of oocytes and embryos and to inform the development of World Health Organization guidance on the most effective cryopreservation method. SEARCH METHODS A Medline search was performed from 1966 to 1 August 2016 using the following search terms: (Oocyte(s) [tiab] OR (Pronuclear[tiab] OR Embryo[tiab] OR Blastocyst[tiab]) AND (vitrification[tiab] OR freezing[tiab] OR freeze[tiab]) AND (pregnancy[tiab] OR birth[tiab] OR clinical[tiab]). Queries were limited to those involving humans. RCTs and cohort studies that were published in full-length were considered eligible. Each reference was reviewed for relevance and only primary evidence and relevant articles from the bibliographies of included articles were considered. References were included if they reported cryosurvival rate, clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), live-birth rate (LBR) or delivery rate for slow-frozen or vitrified human oocytes or embryos. A meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model to calculate relative risk ratios (RR) and 95% CI. OUTCOMES One RCT study comparing slow-freezing versus vitrification of oocytes was included. Vitrification was associated with increased ongoing CPR per cycle (RR = 2.81, 95% CI: 1.05–7.51; P = 0.039; 48 and 30 cycles, respectively, per transfer (RR = 1.81, 95% CI 0.71–4.67; P = 0.214; 47 and 19 transfers) and per warmed/thawed oocyte (RR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.02–1.28; P = 0.018; 260 and 238 oocytes). One RCT comparing vitrification versus fresh oocytes was analysed. In vitrification and fresh cycles, respectively, no evidence for a difference in ongoing CPR per randomized woman (RR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.87–1.21; P = 0.744, 300 women in each group), per cycle (RR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.86–1.18; P = 0.934; 267 versus 259 cycles) and per oocyte utilized (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.82–1.26; P = 0.873; 3286 versus 3185 oocytes) was reported. Findings were consistent with relevant cohort studies. Of the seven RCTs on embryo cryopreservation identified, three met the inclusion criteria (638 warming/thawing cycles at cleavage and blastocyst stage), none of which involved pronuclear-stage embryos. A higher CPR per cycle was noted with embryo vitrification compared with slow-freezing, though this was of borderline statistical significance (RR = 1.89, 95% CI: 1.00–3.59; P = 0.051; three RCTs; I 2 = 71.9%). LBR per cycle was reported by one RCT performed with cleavage-stage embryos and was higher for vitrification (RR = 2.28; 95% CI: 1.17–4.44; P =  0.016; 216 cycles; one RCT). A secondary analysis was performed focusing on embryo cryosurvival rate. Pooled data from seven RCTs (3615 embryos) revealed a significant improvement in embryo cryosurvival following vitrification as compared with slow-freezing (RR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.30–1.93; P < 0.001; I 2 = 93%). WIDER IMPLICATIONS Data from available RCTs suggest that vitrification/warming is superior to slow-freezing/thawing with regard to clinical outcomes (low quality of the evidence) and cryosurvival rates (moderate quality of the evidence) for oocytes, cleavage-stage embryos and blastocysts. The results were confirmed by cohort studies. The improvements obtained with the introduction of vitrification have several important clinical implications in ART. Based on this evidence, in particular regarding cryosurvival rates, laboratories that continue to use slow-freezing should consider transitioning to the use of vitrification for cryopreservation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology.

            Advances in cell culture media have led to a shift in in vitro fertilisation (IVF) practice from cleavage stage embryo transfer to blastocyst stage transfer. The rationale for blastocyst transfer is to improve both uterine and embryonic synchronicity and enable self selection of viable embryos, thus resulting in better live birth rates.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              ART in Europe, 2015: results generated from European registries by ESHRE †

              Abstract STUDY QUESTION What are the European trends and developments in ART and IUI in 2015 as compared to previous years? SUMMARY ANSWER The 19th ESHRE report on ART shows a continuing expansion of treatment numbers in Europe, and this increase, the variability in treatment modalities and the rising contribution to the birth rates in most participating countries all point towards the increasing impact of ART on European society. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Since 1997, the ART data generated by national registries have been collected, analysed and reported in 18 manuscripts published in Human Reproduction. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION Collection of European data by the European IVF-Monitoring Consortium (EIM) for ESHRE. The data for treatments performed between 1 January and 31 December 2015 in 38 European countries were provided by national registries or on a voluntary basis by clinics or professional societies. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTINGS, METHODS From 1343 institutions in 38 countries offering ART services a total of 849 811 treatment cycles, involving 155 960 with IVF, 385676 with ICSI, 218098 with frozen embryo replacement (FER), 21 041 with preimplantation genetic testing (PGT), 64 477 with egg donation (ED), 265 with IVM and 4294 with FOR were recorded. European data on IUI using husband/partner’s semen (IUI-H) and donor semen (IUI-D) were reported from 1352 institutions offering IUI in 25 countries and 21 countries, respectively. A total of 139 050 treatments with IUI-H and 49 001 treatments with IUI-D were included. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE In 18 countries (14 in 2014) with a population of approximately 286 million inhabitants, in which all institutions contributed to their respective national registers, a total of 409 771 treatment cycles were performed, corresponding to 1432 cycles per million inhabitants (range: 727–3068 per million). After IVF the clinical pregnancy rates (PRs) per aspiration and per transfer were slightly lower in 2015 as compared to 2014, at 28.5 and 34.6% versus 29.9 and 35.8%, respectively. After ICSI, the corresponding PR achieved per aspiration and per transfer in 2015 were also slightly lower than those achieved in 2014 (26.2 and 33.2% versus 28.4 and 35.0%, respectively). On the other hand, after FER with own embryos the PR per thawing continued to rise from 27.6% in 2014 to 29.2% in 2015. After ED a slightly lower PR per embryo transfer was achieved: 49.6% per fresh transfer (50.3% in 2014) and 43.4% for FOR (48.7% in 2014). The delivery rates (DRs) after IUI remained stable at 7.8% after IUI-H (8.5% in 2014) and at 12.0% after IUI-D (11.6% in 2014). In IVF and ICSI together, 1, 2, 3 and ≥4 embryos were transferred in 37.7, 53.9, 7.9 and in 0.5% of all treatments, respectively (corresponding to 34.9, 54.5, 9.9 and in 0.7% in 2014). This evolution towards the transfer of fewer embryos in both IVF and ICSI resulted in a proportion of singleton, twin and triplet DR of 83.1, 16.5 and 0.4%, respectively (compared to 82.5, 17.0 and 0.5%, respectively, in 2014). Treatments with FER in 2015 resulted in twin and triplet DR of 12.3 and 0.3%, respectively (versus 12.4 and 0.3% in 2014). Twin and triplet delivery rates after IUI-H were 8.9 and 0.5%, respectively (in 2014: 9.5 and 0.3%), and 7.3 and 0.6% after IUI-D (in 2014: 7.7 and 0.3%). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION The methods of data collection and reporting vary among European countries. The EIM receives aggregated data from various countries with variable levels of completeness. Registries from a number of countries have failed to provide adequate data about the number of initiated cycles and deliveries. As long as incomplete data are provided, the results should be interpreted with caution. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The 19th EIM report on ART shows a continuing expansion of treatment numbers in Europe. The number of treatments reported, the variability in treatment modalities and the rising contribution to the birth rates in most participating countries point towards the increasing impact of ART on reproduction in Europe. Being the largest data collection on ART worldwide, detailed information about ongoing developments in the field is provided. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The study has no external funding and all costs are covered by ESHRE. There are no competing interests.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Hum Reprod Open
                Hum Reprod Open
                hropen
                Human Reproduction Open
                Oxford University Press
                2399-3529
                2020
                31 July 2020
                31 July 2020
                : 2020
                : 3
                : hoaa032
                Affiliations
                [h1 ] Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain , Brussels, Belgium
                [h2 ] Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Göteborg University , Göteborg, Sweden
                [h3 ] Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Lisboa , Lisbon, Portugal
                [h4 ] Reproductive Medicine and Gynecological Endocrinology (RME), University Hospital, University of Basel , Basel, Switzerland
                [h5 ] Fertility Center—Gynaekologicum , Hamburg, Germany
                [h6 ] Human Reproduction Center Budva , Budva, Montenegro
                [h7 ] National Transplant Agency , Slovakia, Romania
                [h8 ] Elisabeth Twee Steden Ziekenhuis , Tilburg, the Netherlands
                [h9 ] Fertility Center Berlin , Berlin, Germany
                [h10 ] Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Clinical Center Serbia «GAK» , Belgrade, Serbia
                [h11 ] ESHRE Central Office , Meerstraat 60, Grimbergen, Belgium
                Author notes
                [†]

                ESHRE Pages content is not externally peer reviewed. The manuscript has been approved by the Executive Committee of ESHRE.

                [‡]

                EIM Committee 2019–2021: chairman: C.W.; chairman elect: J.S.; past chairman: C.D. members: C.B., C.C.-J., M.K., T.M., A.R., A.T.-S. and S.V., V.G. is a science manager at ESHRE Central Office, Brussels. See also Appendix for contributing centres and contact persons representing the data collection programmes in the participating European countries.

                Correspondence address. Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Service FIV-Andrology, Avenue Hippocrate 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium. Tel: +32-2-7646576; E-mail: christine.wyns@ 123456uclouvain.be
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6581-5003
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9342-2143
                Article
                hoaa032
                10.1093/hropen/hoaa032
                7394132
                32760812
                1756756b-49b8-41b3-871f-cc93857422e0
                © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

                History
                : 12 May 2020
                Page count
                Pages: 17
                Categories
                ESHRE Pages
                AcademicSubjects/MED00905

                ivf / icsi / iui / egg donation / frozen embryo replacement / surveillance / vigilance / registry / data collection / fertility preservation

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                176
                1
                96
                2
                Smart Citations
                176
                1
                96
                2
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content67

                Cited by82

                Most referenced authors236