4.7 Article

The status of oocyte cryopreservation in the United States

期刊

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
卷 94, 期 7, 页码 2642-2646

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.04.079

关键词

Oocyte cryopreservation; elective indications; regional trends; ART; survey; statistics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To determine the current status of oocyte cryopreservation across the United States, and the perceived indications for its use. Design: Cross-sectional survey of all IVF Centers in the United States. Setting: Telephone and fax based survey of all IVF practice or laboratory directors, conducted March to June of 2009. Patient(s): None. Intervention(s): None. Main Outcome Measure(s): Prevalence of oocyte cryopreservation, acceptable indications and age groups, number of oocyte cryopreservation cycles performed and thawed, fertilization and pregnancy rates, number of live births. Result(s): Of 442 centers contacted, 282 (64%) responded in 49 states. In these centers 143 (51%) programs currently offer oocyte cryopreservation, with a geographic trend toward the western-located clinics. Of all programs, 36% offer oocyte cryopreservation only for cancer patients or as an alternative to embryo cryopreservation after IVF, whereas 64% of programs offer it electively in women of advancing maternal age. For elective indications, 87% of programs accept patients aged 35-37 years, 49% consider age 38-40 years as acceptable, whereas only 26% of programs cryopreserve oocytes beyond age 40 years. Three hundred thirty-seven live births resulting from 857 thawed cycles (39.3% pregnancy rate [PR]) were reported across all centers. Conclusion(s): Oocyte cryopreservation is offered in more than 50% of ART clinics in the United States. Most programs that perform oocyte cryopreservation for cancer indications offer it for elective delay of childbearing as well. These data suggest a growing acceptance for this technology within our field. (Fertil Steril (R) 2010;94:2642-6. (C) 2010 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据