↓ Skip to main content

High FSH dosing is associated with reduced live birth rate in fresh but not subsequent frozen embryo transfers

Overview of attention for article published in Human Reproduction, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
High FSH dosing is associated with reduced live birth rate in fresh but not subsequent frozen embryo transfers
Published in
Human Reproduction, May 2017
DOI 10.1093/humrep/dex094
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Do live birth rates (LBRs) differ between fresh embryo transfer (fresh ET) cycles and their subsequent paired frozen ET (FET) cycles, when comparing cycles based on the total FSH dose used during the fresh cycle? When compared to the paired frozen embryo transfer cycles, the LBR in the fresh cycle of the highest total FSH dose group (>2500 IU) was reduced by 38%. There may be a negative association with high gonadotropin doses and LBR after fresh ET. It is unknown whether a similar effect is seen in FET cycles, which are done with increasing frequency. In this retrospective observational paired study, we studied IVF cycles between 10 January 2005 and 19 September 2015, for all patients who underwent a fresh, autologous IVF cycle that resulted in at least one fresh ET and at least one FET. The study included 862 women, treated in our academic medical centre, who underwent 935 fresh ET and 1274 FET cycles. Cycles were allocated into three groups based on the total gonadotropin dose they received during their fresh IVF cycle: Group 1 (≤1800 IU FSH), Group 2 (1801-2500 IU), Group 3 (>2500 IU). The primary outcome was LBR after fresh ET and its subsequent paired FET(s), as well as LBR among fresh ETs and FETs as independent samples, based on the total FSH dose used. Implantation rates obtained from fresh and FET cycles were also compared. The unadjusted fresh LBR was similar between Groups 1 and 2 (46.0% [95% CI: 40.4-51.6] versus 43.8% [38.3-49.4], respectively) but significantly lower in Group 3 (34.4% [29.5-39.8]). The unadjusted frozen transfer LBR was similar among all groups (51.4% [46.7-56.1] versus 46.3% [41.3-51.4] versus 47.5% [42.5-52.4], respectively). When logistic regression analysis with generalized estimating equations was used to control for confounders, the adjusted LBR was found to be similar between the groups both for fresh (odds ratio [OR] = 0.97 [95% CI: 0.61-1.56] Group 2 versus Group 1, OR = 0.69 [0.39-1.21] Group 3 versus Group 1) and FET cycles (OR = 0.87 [0.58-1.31] Group 2 versus Group 1, OR = 0.95 [0.58-1.55] Group 3 versus Group 1). However, for Group 3, the adjusted fresh LBR was 38% lower than its subsequent frozen transfer LBR (OR = 0.62 [0.41-0.93]); this was a statistically significant difference, which was not observed in Group 1 (OR = 0.85 [0.56-1.27]) or Group 2 (OR = 0.95 [0.64-1.41]). This study is a retrospective cohort, with all of the associated inherent biases. Fresh LBR is negatively impacted by a high dose of total FSH used, as compared to the LBR in subsequent paired FET cycles. Frozen transfer LBR seems unaffected by the total FSH dose used in the fresh cycle, suggesting that the endometrium may be adversely affected, probably indirectly, by high dose gonadotropin use in the fresh IVF cycle only. No funding source was used for the completion of this project. There are no conflicts of interest.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Other 5 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 9%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 4%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 12 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 36%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 13 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 May 2017.
All research outputs
#18,349,015
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Human Reproduction
#5,773
of 6,495 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#223,735
of 312,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Reproduction
#47
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,495 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,163 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.