The Science of Egg Freezing & IVF: A Comprehensive Guide

June 15, 2025

Whether you're considering preserving your fertility for the future or exploring assisted reproductive technology to start your family now, understanding the science behind egg freezing and IVF empowers you to make informed decisions. These revolutionary technologies have transformed reproductive medicine, offering hope to millions worldwide while continuing to evolve with cutting-edge research.

Understanding Reproductive Aging and the Need for Intervention

To appreciate why egg freezing and IVF exist, we must first understand the biological reality of female fertility. Unlike men, who produce new sperm throughout their lives, women are born with their entire lifetime supply of eggs—approximately 1-2 million at birth, declining to about 400,000 at puberty.

Women lose approximately 1,000 eggs per month through natural cell death, regardless of whether they ovulate, use contraception, or are pregnant.

Research published in Human Reproduction shows that by age 30, women have lost about 90% of their original egg supply, with accelerated decline after age 35. This isn't just about quantity—egg quality also deteriorates significantly with age.

The chromosomal abnormality rate in eggs increases dramatically from approximately 10-15% in women under 30 to over 50% by age 42. This biological reality drives the need for fertility preservation technologies like egg freezing, and explains why IVF success rates vary significantly with maternal age.

The Science of Egg Freezing (Oocyte Cryopreservation)

Historical Development and Breakthrough Technologies

Egg freezing technology has undergone revolutionary changes since the first successful pregnancy from a frozen egg in 1986. The game-changer came with the development of vitrification—a ultra-rapid freezing process that prevents ice crystal formation.

Vitrification, introduced in the early 2000s, increased egg survival rates from 60-70% with slow freezing to over 90% with modern protocols.

This breakthrough led the American Society for Reproductive Medicine to remove the "experimental" label from egg freezing in 2012, declaring it an established fertility preservation option.

The Cellular Science of Cryopreservation

Understanding why egg freezing works requires examining the cellular challenges involved. Eggs are the largest cells in the human body, containing high water content that makes them vulnerable to ice crystal damage during freezing.

Modern vitrification protocols use cryoprotectants at concentrations of 15-20% and cooling rates exceeding 20,000°C per minute to achieve glass-like solidification without ice formation.

The process involves replacing intracellular water with cryoprotectants like ethylene glycol and dimethyl sulfoxide. These chemicals prevent ice formation but must be carefully balanced—too little and ice crystals form, too much and the chemicals themselves become toxic.

Step-by-Step Egg Freezing Process

Phase 1: Initial Consultation and Testing (1-2 weeks)

The journey begins with comprehensive fertility assessment including anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) testing, antral follicle count via ultrasound, and screening for infectious diseases. AMH levels correlate strongly with ovarian reserve and predict response to stimulation medications.

Research shows women with AMH levels above 1.5 ng/mL typically respond well to ovarian stimulation, while those below 0.5 ng/mL may require modified protocols or multiple cycles.

Phase 2: Ovarian Stimulation (10-14 days)

Rather than collecting the single egg that would naturally ovulate, fertility specialists use hormonal medications to stimulate multiple eggs to mature simultaneously. This process, called controlled ovarian hyperstimulation, typically involves:

Gonadotropins (FSH and LH): These injectable hormones, identical to those naturally produced by the pituitary gland, stimulate follicle development. Modern recombinant versions offer precise dosing and reduced side effects compared to earlier urinary-derived medications.

GnRH Antagonists or Agonists: These medications prevent premature ovulation, ensuring eggs aren't released before retrieval. Antagonist protocols have largely replaced agonist protocols due to reduced risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).

Studies show that antagonist protocols reduce OHSS risk by 50% compared to agonist protocols while maintaining similar egg yield and quality.

Monitoring Protocol: Women undergo regular blood tests (every 2-3 days) to measure estradiol levels and ultrasounds to track follicle development. When follicles reach 17-20mm diameter, a "trigger shot" of hCG or GnRH agonist initiates final egg maturation.

Phase 3: Egg Retrieval (Single procedure)

The retrieval procedure, performed approximately 35-36 hours after the trigger shot, is a minimally invasive surgery typically done under conscious sedation. Using transvaginal ultrasound guidance, a thin needle aspirates follicular fluid containing eggs.

The timing of retrieval is critical—too early and eggs are immature, too late and they may ovulate naturally or become overripe.

The procedure typically lasts 20-30 minutes, with women able to return home the same day. Embryologists immediately examine the follicular fluid under microscopes to identify and collect eggs.

Phase 4: Laboratory Processing and Vitrification

Once collected, eggs undergo immediate assessment for maturity. Only metaphase II (MII) eggs—those that have completed their first meiotic division—are suitable for freezing. These mature eggs are then processed through a multi-step vitrification protocol:

Equilibration: Eggs are placed in gradually increasing concentrations of cryoprotectants, allowing cellular dehydration and cryoprotectant penetration.

Vitrification: Eggs are loaded onto specialized devices and plunged into liquid nitrogen at -196°C within seconds, achieving vitrification.

Storage: Vitrified eggs are stored in liquid nitrogen tanks with continuous monitoring and backup systems.

Modern protocols achieve egg survival rates of 90-95% upon thawing, with fertilization rates of 70-80% when used with intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).

Success Rates and Realistic Expectations

Understanding egg freezing success requires examining multiple metrics: egg survival, fertilization rates, embryo development, and ultimate live birth rates.

Research from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology shows that women who freeze eggs at age 25 have approximately 95% chance of at least one live birth from 20 frozen eggs, compared to 85% at age 30, 75% at age 35, and 50% at age 40.

The number of eggs needed for a reasonable chance of live birth varies significantly by age. Studies suggest women under 35 need approximately 15-20 eggs for a 70% chance of one live birth, while women over 38 may need 25-30 eggs for similar odds.

In Vitro Fertilization: The Complete Scientific Process

IVF Fundamentals: Beyond Basic Conception

In vitro fertilization literally means "fertilization in glass," referring to the laboratory setting where sperm and egg unite outside the human body. While conceptually simple, IVF involves sophisticated reproductive biology, advanced laboratory techniques, and precise medical protocols.

IVF bypasses multiple potential barriers to natural conception, including fallopian tube blockages, severe male factor infertility, advanced maternal age, and unexplained infertility.

Since Louise Brown's birth in 1978—the world's first IVF baby—over 8 million children have been born through assisted reproductive technology worldwide, with success rates improving dramatically through scientific advances.

The Complete IVF Process: A Detailed Scientific Journey

Phase 1: Comprehensive Evaluation and Protocol Selection

Modern IVF begins with extensive testing to identify optimal treatment approaches. This includes detailed medical histories, genetic screening, infectious disease testing, and assessment of ovarian reserve and uterine anatomy.

Ovarian Reserve Testing: AMH levels, day 3 FSH and estradiol, and antral follicle counts provide crucial information for medication dosing and cycle expectations.

Genetic Screening: Carrier screening for genetic conditions helps inform treatment decisions and counseling. Some couples may require preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) of embryos.

Male Factor Evaluation: Comprehensive semen analysis including sperm concentration, motility, morphology, and DNA fragmentation testing determines whether ICSI will be necessary.

Studies show that 40-50% of IVF cycles now use ICSI, even in cases without severe male factor infertility, due to improved fertilization rates and reduced risk of fertilization failure.

Phase 2: Ovarian Stimulation and Monitoring

IVF stimulation protocols are carefully individualized based on patient characteristics, previous responses, and specific fertility diagnoses. Modern approaches include:

Antagonist Protocols: Starting stimulation on day 2-3 of the menstrual cycle with gonadotropins, adding GnRH antagonist when follicles reach 12-14mm to prevent premature luteinization.

Microflare Protocols: Used for poor responders, involving brief GnRH agonist followed by gonadotropins to maximize follicle recruitment.

Natural and Modified Natural IVF: Minimal stimulation approaches collecting the naturally selected dominant follicle, used for specific patient populations.

The ideal stimulation response yields 8-15 mature eggs, balancing success rates with minimizing risks of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

Advanced monitoring includes not just follicle size and hormone levels, but also assessment of endometrial thickness and pattern, which impacts implantation success.

Phase 3: Egg Retrieval and Laboratory Fertilization

The retrieval procedure for IVF follows the same process as egg freezing, but eggs immediately proceed to fertilization rather than cryopreservation.

Conventional Insemination: For normal sperm parameters, approximately 50,000-100,000 motile sperm are placed with each egg in specialized culture medium, allowing natural fertilization.

Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI): For male factor infertility or previous fertilization failure, a single sperm is directly injected into each mature egg using micromanipulation techniques.

ICSI fertilization rates typically range from 70-80% of mature eggs, compared to 60-70% with conventional insemination in optimal cases.

Phase 4: Embryo Development and Culture

Following fertilization, embryos develop in specialized incubators that precisely control temperature, humidity, CO2, and oxygen levels. Modern time-lapse imaging systems monitor development continuously without disturbing embryos.

Day 1: Assessment of fertilization—normal embryos show two pronuclei (one from egg, one from sperm).

Days 2-3: Early cleavage stages with 2-8 cells. Some programs perform day 3 transfers, though this is becoming less common.

Days 5-6: Blastocyst development, representing the most viable embryos. Blastocysts contain 200-300 cells organized into inner cell mass (future fetus) and trophectoderm (future placenta).

Blastocyst transfer significantly improves pregnancy rates compared to day 3 transfers—from approximately 30-35% to 45-55% per transfer in women under 35.

Phase 5: Preimplantation Genetic Testing (Optional)

For couples at risk of genetic conditions or advanced maternal age, preimplantation genetic testing provides crucial information before transfer.

PGT-A (Aneuploidy Screening): Tests for correct chromosome number, reducing miscarriage risk and improving success rates in older women.

PGT-M (Monogenic Disease): Tests for specific genetic conditions like cystic fibrosis or sickle cell disease.

PGT-SR (Structural Rearrangements): For couples with chromosomal translocations or inversions.

Studies show PGT-A reduces miscarriage rates from 20-25% to 8-12% in women over 35, while maintaining similar overall pregnancy rates with fewer transfers needed.

Phase 6: Embryo Transfer and Luteal Phase Support

Embryo transfer is a critical procedure requiring precise timing and technique. The endometrium must be optimally prepared, typically occurring 3-5 days after ovulation in natural cycles or following specific hormone protocols in medicated cycles.

Transfer Technique: Using ultrasound guidance, embryos are loaded into a soft catheter and deposited 1-2cm from the uterine fundus. The procedure is typically painless and takes only minutes.

Single vs. Multiple Embryo Transfer: Modern practice strongly favors single embryo transfer (SET) to reduce multiple pregnancy risks while maintaining high success rates.

Single embryo transfer rates have increased from 15% in 2007 to over 80% in 2020 in women under 35, dramatically reducing twin and triplet rates while maintaining overall success.

Luteal Phase Support: Progesterone supplementation supports implantation and early pregnancy development. Various formulations (vaginal gels, suppositories, injections) show similar efficacy.

Advanced IVF Technologies and Innovations

Time-lapse Embryo Monitoring

Modern embryology laboratories increasingly use time-lapse incubators that photograph embryos every 10-15 minutes throughout development. This technology allows assessment of division timing, morphology changes, and developmental patterns without disturbing embryos.

Research suggests time-lapse monitoring may improve embryo selection, with some studies showing 5-10% improvement in pregnancy rates compared to traditional morphology assessment.

Assisted Hatching

Some embryos benefit from assisted hatching—creating a small opening in the zona pellucida (protective shell) to facilitate implantation. This technique is particularly useful for older women, embryos with thick zona pellucida, or previously failed cycles.

Endometrial Receptivity Analysis

The ERA (Endometrial Receptivity Array) test analyzes gene expression patterns to identify the optimal window for embryo transfer. Some women have displaced implantation windows, and ERA testing can personalize transfer timing.

Studies suggest ERA testing may improve pregnancy rates by 10-15% in women with repeated implantation failure, though routine use remains controversial.

Success Rates: Understanding the Numbers

IVF Success Rates by Age and Cycle Number

IVF success rates must be understood in context—age is the single most important factor, but cycle-specific factors also matter significantly.

According to 2021 CDC data, live birth rates per embryo transfer are approximately 55% for women under 35, 40% for ages 35-37, 26% for ages 38-40, 13% for ages 41-42, and 4% for women over 42 using their own eggs.

However, cumulative success rates tell a more optimistic story. Studies following couples through multiple IVF cycles show much higher overall success rates:

Research published in JAMA found cumulative live birth rates after six IVF cycles were 65% for women under 35, 51% for ages 35-37, 38% for ages 38-40, and 23% for ages 41-42.

Factors Affecting IVF Success Beyond Age

Ovarian Reserve: AMH levels and antral follicle counts strongly predict both response to stimulation and pregnancy rates. Women with higher ovarian reserve typically need fewer cycles to achieve success.

Body Mass Index: Both underweight (BMI <18.5) and obesity (BMI >30) negatively impact IVF success. Optimal BMI ranges from 20-25 for best outcomes.

Smoking and Lifestyle: Smoking reduces IVF success rates by approximately 50%. Other factors like excessive alcohol consumption, recreational drugs, and high stress levels also impact outcomes.

Male Factor Severity: While ICSI can overcome most male factor issues, severe DNA fragmentation may require additional interventions or donor sperm consideration.

Legal and Ethical Considerations

Ownership and Disposition of Frozen Eggs and Embryos

The legal landscape surrounding reproductive materials varies significantly by jurisdiction and continues evolving as technology advances.

In most jurisdictions, frozen eggs belong to the woman who produced them, but embryos created with a partner typically require mutual consent for use or disposition.

Storage Limitations: Many countries impose storage limits—typically 10 years for eggs and embryos, though some allow extensions for medical reasons. The UK increased limits to 55 years in 2022 for fertility preservation cases.

Decision-Making Authority: Clear legal documentation is essential, especially for embryos. Disputes over embryo ownership in cases of divorce or separation have reached supreme courts in multiple countries.

International Legal Variations

Age Restrictions: Countries vary widely in age limits for treatment. While some have no restrictions, others limit IVF to women under 42-50. Several European countries fund treatment only until specific ages.

Marital Status Requirements: Some jurisdictions restrict treatment to married couples or those in long-term relationships, while others have no such requirements.

Posthumous Use: Laws governing use of genetic material after death vary dramatically. Some countries allow posthumous use with prior consent, while others prohibit it entirely.

A 2020 international survey found that 31% of countries have no specific ART legislation, 23% permit posthumous use with consent, and 46% have varying restrictions or prohibitions.

Insurance Coverage and Access

Access to fertility treatments varies enormously based on location, insurance coverage, and socioeconomic factors.

Mandated Coverage: In the United States, 19 states have laws requiring insurance coverage for fertility treatments, though specific requirements vary. Coverage may require medical necessity documentation.

Public Funding: Countries like Denmark, Belgium, and Israel provide extensive public funding for IVF. In contrast, many developing nations have limited access to these technologies.

Elective Egg Freezing: Insurance rarely covers elective fertility preservation, with patients typically paying $8,000-15,000 per cycle plus annual storage fees.

Emerging Legal Issues

Genetic Testing Requirements: Some jurisdictions are considering mandatory genetic screening for certain conditions, raising questions about reproductive autonomy and discrimination.

Cross-Border Reproductive Care: Patients increasingly travel internationally for treatments unavailable or restricted in their home countries, creating complex legal and medical challenges.

AI and Algorithm Use: As artificial intelligence increasingly assists in embryo selection and treatment protocols, questions arise about liability, consent, and decision-making authority.

Financial Considerations and Cost Analysis

Comprehensive Cost Breakdown

Understanding the true financial investment in fertility treatments requires examining all components:

Egg Freezing Costs: Initial cycles typically cost $8,000-15,000 including medications, monitoring, retrieval, and initial storage. Annual storage fees range from $300-800.

IVF Cycle Costs: Complete IVF cycles range from $12,000-20,000 per attempt, with additional costs for ICSI ($1,500-2,500), genetic testing ($3,000-6,000), and frozen embryo transfers ($3,000-5,000).

Research from 2023 shows the average couple undergoes 2.2 IVF cycles before achieving success, with total treatment costs averaging $35,000-50,000 including all associated procedures.

Hidden Costs: Time off work, travel expenses for treatment, psychological counseling, and potential complications can add thousands to treatment costs.

Economic Models and Return on Investment

Some economic analyses attempt to quantify the "return on investment" for fertility treatments, particularly for younger women considering egg freezing.

Economic modeling suggests egg freezing at age 25-27 may be cost-effective for women planning to delay childbearing until after 35, considering reduced pregnancy complications and improved success rates.

Financing Options and Support

Financing Programs: Many clinics offer payment plans, loans, or shared-risk programs where patients pay higher upfront costs but receive refunds if treatments fail.

Employer Benefits: Progressive employers increasingly offer fertility benefits, with over 40% of large employers providing some coverage as of 2023.

Grants and Scholarships: Various organizations provide grants for fertility treatments, particularly for cancer patients or those with specific medical needs.

Psychological and Social Considerations

Emotional Impact of Fertility Treatments

The psychological aspects of fertility treatments are increasingly recognized as crucial components of comprehensive care.

Studies show that women undergoing fertility treatments experience stress levels comparable to those facing serious medical conditions like cancer or heart disease.

Decision-Making Stress: The complexity of treatment options, timing decisions, and uncertain outcomes create significant psychological burden.

Relationship Impacts: Fertility treatments can strain partnerships, with different coping styles and decision-making preferences creating conflict.

Social Isolation: The private nature of fertility struggles can lead to isolation, particularly when treatments require significant time commitments.

Psychological Support and Interventions

Counseling Services: Professional counseling, both individual and couples-based, significantly improves treatment experiences and outcomes.

Support Groups: Peer support through groups or online communities provides valuable emotional support and practical advice.

Mind-Body Interventions: Stress reduction techniques, including meditation, yoga, and acupuncture, may improve both well-being and treatment outcomes.

Research suggests that psychological interventions during fertility treatment may improve pregnancy rates by 10-15% while significantly reducing stress and improving quality of life.

Future Directions in Reproductive Technology

Emerging Technologies

Artificial Intelligence in Embryology: Machine learning algorithms are increasingly used for embryo selection, potentially improving accuracy beyond human assessment.

In Vitro Gametogenesis: Research into creating eggs and sperm from other cell types could revolutionize fertility treatment for patients with no viable gametes.

Mitochondrial Replacement: Three-parent IVF techniques approved in some countries may prevent transmission of mitochondrial diseases.

Early studies suggest AI-assisted embryo selection may improve pregnancy rates by 15-20% compared to traditional morphology assessment, though longer-term data is still needed.

Improving Access and Reducing Costs

Simplified Protocols: Research into minimal stimulation and natural cycle IVF aims to reduce costs and complexity while maintaining reasonable success rates.

Automation: Laboratory automation and improved efficiency may reduce costs and improve standardization of care.

Telemedicine Integration: Remote monitoring and consultation can reduce patient burden and improve access, particularly in rural areas.

Regulatory Evolution

As technology advances, regulatory frameworks must evolve to ensure safety while promoting innovation. Key areas include genetic modification techniques, international treatment standards, and emerging technologies like artificial gametes.

Making Informed Decisions: A Framework for Choice

Age-Specific Considerations

Women in Their 20s: Egg freezing may be considered for medical reasons (cancer treatment) or personal choice, though natural fertility remains high.

Women in Their Early 30s: This represents the optimal balance for elective egg freezing—reasonable success rates with good egg quality but before significant fertility decline.

Women 35-40: Time becomes critical. Those wishing to delay childbearing should consider egg freezing promptly, while those ready to conceive might proceed directly to trying naturally or with fertility treatments.

Women Over 40: Individual assessment is crucial. Egg freezing may have limited benefit, and donor eggs might be more successful for immediate pregnancy attempts.

The decision between egg freezing and immediate pregnancy attempts should consider personal readiness, partner status, career goals, and individual fertility assessment results.

Quality of Life Considerations

Treatment Burden: Consider the physical, emotional, and time commitments required for fertility treatments in the context of personal and professional obligations.

Success Expectations: Realistic understanding of success rates and the potential need for multiple cycles is crucial for informed decision-making.

Alternative Family Building: Consider all paths to parenthood, including adoption and donor conception, as valid alternatives to genetic parenthood.

Optimizing Success: Evidence-Based Recommendations

Pre-Treatment Optimization:

Lifestyle Modifications: Achieve optimal BMI (20-25), stop smoking completely, limit alcohol to light consumption, exercise moderately, and manage stress through proven techniques.

Nutritional Support: Follow Mediterranean-style diet, take prenatal vitamins with folic acid, ensure adequate vitamin D levels, and consider CoQ10 supplementation (some evidence for egg quality improvement).

Medical Optimization: Address underlying conditions like thyroid dysfunction, diabetes, and autoimmune disorders. Ensure up-to-date vaccinations and dental health.

Partner Preparation: Male partners should also optimize health through similar lifestyle modifications, particularly for 3 months before treatment (sperm development cycle).

Clinic Selection: Choose clinics with appropriate success rates for your age group, experience with your specific condition, and comprehensive support services including counseling.

Financial Planning: Understand total potential costs, explore insurance coverage and financing options, and plan for the possibility of multiple cycles.

Timeline Planning: Consider seasonal factors (some prefer winter cycles to avoid summer heat during stimulation), work schedules, and personal stress periods.

When to Seek Treatment and Setting Realistic Expectations

The timing of fertility treatment varies based on individual circumstances, but general guidelines can help inform decisions:

Immediate Evaluation: Known fertility issues, previous cancer treatment, family history of early menopause, or BRCA mutations warrant immediate consultation regardless of current pregnancy intentions.

Age-Based Recommendations: Women over 35 should seek evaluation after 6 months of trying to conceive naturally, while those under 35 typically try for 12 months first.

Elective Fertility Preservation: Consider egg freezing in early 30s for optimal balance of success rates and timeline flexibility.

Studies show that couples who begin fertility evaluation and treatment within appropriate timeframes have 20-30% higher success rates compared to those who delay significantly.

International Perspectives and Global Access

Treatment Availability Worldwide

Access to fertility treatments varies dramatically across countries based on healthcare systems, cultural attitudes, and economic development.

High-Resource Countries: Nations like Denmark, Belgium, and Israel provide extensive public funding and achieve high success rates through standardized care protocols.

Developing Nations: Limited access due to cost and infrastructure challenges, though some countries are developing more affordable treatment models.

Cultural Variations: Religious and cultural attitudes significantly influence treatment availability and acceptance in many regions.

WHO data indicates that only about 50-60% of countries have any form of assisted reproductive technology available, with significant variation in accessibility within countries.

Medical Tourism and Cross-Border Care

Patients increasingly travel internationally for fertility treatments due to cost differences, legal restrictions, or treatment availability.

Popular Destinations: Czech Republic, Spain, and Cyprus are popular European destinations, while Mexico and Thailand serve international markets with lower costs.

Considerations: Language barriers, different medical standards, legal complications, and follow-up care challenges must be carefully evaluated.

The Future of Reproductive Choice

Egg freezing and IVF represent remarkable achievements in reproductive medicine, offering hope and options to millions worldwide. As these technologies continue advancing, they're becoming safer, more effective, and potentially more accessible.

The science is clear: these treatments work, but success depends on numerous factors including age, overall health, clinic quality, and realistic expectations. The decision to pursue fertility preservation or assisted reproduction is deeply personal, influenced by medical, financial, psychological, and social factors unique to each individual.

Understanding the science empowers informed decision-making, whether you're considering preserving fertility for the future or ready to start building your family now. The most important step is seeking consultation with qualified reproductive endocrinologists who can provide personalized assessments and recommendations based on your specific circumstances.

As we look toward the future, emerging technologies promise even better outcomes, improved accessibility, and new options for previously impossible cases. The field of reproductive medicine continues evolving rapidly, driven by scientific innovation and the fundamental human desire to create and nurture life.

Remember that while technology provides powerful tools, the journey to parenthood remains deeply human. Combining cutting-edge science with comprehensive support, realistic expectations, and personal agency creates the best foundation for success in your reproductive journey.

References

1. Faddy MJ, Gosden RG, Gougeon A, Richardson SJ, Nelson JF. Accelerated disappearance of ovarian follicles in mid-life: implications for forecasting menopause. *Human Reproduction*. 1992;7(10):1342-1346. 2. Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Mature oocyte cryopreservation: a guideline. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2013;99(1):37-43. 3. Cobo A, García-Velasco JA, Coello A, Domingo J, Pellicer A, Remohí J. Oocyte vitrification as an efficient option for elective fertility preservation. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2016;105(3):755-764. 4. Rienzi L, Gracia C, Maggiulli R, et al. 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. *Human Reproduction Update*. 2017;23(2):139-155. 5. Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. National Summary Report 2021. Available at: https://www.sartcorsonline.com/ 6. McLernon DJ, Maheshwari A, Lee AJ, Bhattacharya S. Cumulative live birth rates after one or more complete cycles of IVF: a population-based study of linked cycle data from 178,898 women. *Human Reproduction*. 2016;31(3):572-581. 7. Doyle JO, Richter KS, Lim J, Stillman RJ, Graham JR, Tucker MJ. Successful elective and medically indicated oocyte vitrification and warming for autologous in vitro fertilization, with predicted birth probabilities for fertility preservation according to number of cryopreserved oocytes and age at retrieval. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2016;105(2):459-466. 8. Goldman RH, Racowsky C, Farland LV, Munné S, Ribustello L, Fox JH. Predicting the likelihood of live birth for elective oocyte cryopreservation: a counseling tool for physicians and patients. *Human Reproduction*. 2017;32(4):853-859. 9. Chambers GM, Sullivan EA, Ishihara O, Chapman MG, Adamson GD. The economic impact of assisted reproductive technology: a review of selected developed countries. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2009;91(6):2281-2294. 10. Kushnir VA, Barad DH, Albertini DF, Darmon SK, Gleicher N. Systematic review of worldwide trends in assisted reproductive technology 2004-2013. *Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology*. 2017;15:6. 11. European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. ART fact sheet. Available at: https://www.eshre.eu/ 12. Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, Dyer S, et al. The International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility Care, 2017. *Human Reproduction*. 2017;32(9):1786-1801. 13. Mascarenhas MN, Flaxman SR, Boerma T, Vanderpoel S, Stevens GA. National, regional, and global trends in infertility prevalence since 1990: a systematic analysis of 277 health surveys. *PLoS Medicine*. 2012;9(12):e1001356. 14. Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility Committee, Family Physicians Advisory Committee, Maternal-Fetal Medicine Committee, et al. Advanced reproductive age and fertility. *Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada*. 2011;33(11):1165-1175. 15. La Marca A, Sunkara SK. Individualization of controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF using ovarian reserve markers: from theory to practice. *Human Reproduction Update*. 2014;20(1):124-140. 16. Grynberg M, Fanchin R, Dubost G, et al. Histology of genital tract and breast tissue after long-term ovarian stimulation in a mouse model. *Reproduction*. 2013;145(1):3-12. 17. Devroey P, Polyzos NP, Blockeel C. An OHSS-Free Clinic by segmentation of IVF treatment. *Human Reproduction*. 2011;26(10):2593-2597. 18. Humaidan P, Quartarolo J, Papanikolaou EG. Preventing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: guidance for the clinician. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2010;94(2):389-400. 19. Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine and ESHRE Special Interest Group of Embryology. The Istanbul consensus workshop on embryo assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting. *Human Reproduction*. 2011;26(6):1270-1283. 20. Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB. Culture and transfer of human blastocysts. *Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology*. 1999;11(3):307-311. 21. Glujovsky D, Farquhar C, Quinteiro Retamar AM, Alvarez Sedo CR, Blake D. Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. *Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews*. 2016;6:CD002118. 22. Meseguer M, Herrero J, Tejera A, Hilligsøe KM, Ramsing NB, Remohí J. The use of morphokinetics as a predictor of embryo implantation. *Human Reproduction*. 2011;26(10):2658-2671. 23. Rubio C, Bellver J, Rodrigo L, et al. In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidies in advanced maternal age: a randomized, controlled study. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2017;107(5):1122-1129. 24. Munné S, Kaplan B, Frattarelli JL, et al. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy versus morphology as selection criteria for single frozen-thawed embryo transfer in good-prognosis patients: a multicenter randomized clinical trial. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2019;112(6):1071-1079. 25. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Multiple gestation associated with infertility therapy: an American Society for Reproductive Medicine Practice Committee opinion. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2012;97(4):825-834. 26. Pandian Z, Marjoribanks J, Ozturk O, Serour G, Bhattacharya S. Number of embryos for transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection. *Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews*. 2013;7:CD003416. 27. van der Linden M, Buckingham K, Farquhar C, Kremer JA, Metwally M. Luteal phase support for assisted reproduction cycles. *Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews*. 2015;7:CD009154. 28. Wong KM, Mastenbroek S, Repping S. Cryopreservation of human embryos and its contribution to in vitro fertilization success rates. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2014;102(1):19-26. 29. Paulson RJ, Boostanfar R, Saadat P, et al. Pregnancy in the sixth decade of life: obstetric outcomes in women of advanced reproductive age. *JAMA*. 2002;288(18):2320-2323. 30. De Geyter C, Calhaz-Jorge C, Kupka MS, et al. ART in Europe, 2014: results generated from European registries by ESHRE. *Human Reproduction*. 2018;33(9):1586-1601. 31. Sermondade N, Huberlant S, Bourhis-Lefebvre V, et al. Female obesity is negatively associated with live birth rate following IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis. *Human Reproduction Update*. 2019;25(4):439-451. 32. Waylen AL, Metwally M, Jones GL, Wilkinson AJ, Ledger WL. Effects of cigarette smoking upon clinical outcomes of assisted reproduction: a meta-analysis. *Human Reproduction Update*. 2009;15(1):31-44. 33. Klonoff-Cohen H, Natarajan L, Marrs R, Yee B. Effects of female and male smoking on success rates of IVF and GIFT. *Human Reproduction*. 2001;16(7):1382-1390. 34. Rossi BV, Berry KF, Hornstein MD, Cramer DW, Ehrlich S, Missmer SA. Effect of alcohol consumption on in vitro fertilization. *Obstetrics and Gynecology*. 2011;117(1):136-142. 35. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Stress and infertility: a committee opinion. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2014;102(6):1646-1653. 36. Domar AD, Clapp D, Slawsby EA, Dusek J, Kessel B, Freizinger M. Impact of group psychological interventions on pregnancy rates in infertile women. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2000;73(4):805-811. 37. Boivin J, Griffiths E, Venetis CA. Emotional distress in infertile women and failure of assisted reproductive technologies: meta-analysis of prospective psychosocial studies. *BMJ*. 2011;342:d223. 38. Gameiro S, Boivin J, Peronace L, Verhaak CM. Why do patients discontinue fertility treatment? A systematic review of reasons and predictors of discontinuation in fertility treatment. *Human Reproduction Update*. 2012;18(6):652-669. 39. Verhaak CM, Smeenk JM, Evers AW, Kremer JA, Kraaimaat FW, Braat DD. Women's emotional adjustment to IVF: a systematic review of 25 years of research. *Human Reproduction Update*. 2007;13(1):27-36. 40. de Lacey S, Rogers C, Tanner A, et al. The perceived benefits and risks of elective oocyte cryopreservation: a systematic review. *Human Reproduction*. 2021;36(4):910-926. 41. Hammarberg K, Kirkman M, Pritchard N, et al. Reproductive experiences of women who cryopreserved oocytes for non-medical reasons. *Human Reproduction*. 2017;32(3):575-581. 42. Rodriguez-Wallberg KA, Oktay K. Options on fertility preservation in female cancer patients. *Cancer Treatment Reviews*. 2012;38(5):354-361. 43. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Mature oocyte cryopreservation: a guideline. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2013;99(1):37-43. 44. Argyle CE, Harper JC, Davies MC. Oocyte cryopreservation: where are we now? *Human Reproduction Update*. 2016;22(4):440-449. 45. Stoop D, Nekkebroeck J, Devroey P. A survey on the intentions and attitudes towards oocyte cryopreservation for non-medical reasons among women of reproductive age. *Human Reproduction*. 2011;26(3):655-661. 46. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Fertility preservation in patients undergoing gonadotoxic therapy or gonadectomy: a committee opinion. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2019;112(6):1022-1033. 47. International Federation of Fertility Societies. IFFS Surveillance 2019. Available at: https://www.iffs-reproduction.org/ 48. Zegers-Hochschild F, Schwarze JE, Crosby JA, Musri C, Urbina MT. Assisted reproductive technologies in Latin America: The Latin American Registry, 2016. *Reproductive Biomedicine Online*. 2019;39(3):452-460. 49. Harper J, Magli MC, Lundin K, Barratt CLR, Brison D. When and how should new technology be introduced into the IVF laboratory? *Human Reproduction*. 2012;27(2):303-313. 50. Curchoe CL, Flores E, Seaborne A, et al. Assisted hatching does not improve live birth rates in good prognosis patients: a randomized controlled trial. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2019;112(4):721-728. 51. Ruiz-Alonso M, Blesa D, Díaz-Gimeno P, et al. The endometrial receptivity array for diagnosis and personalized embryo transfer as a treatment for patients with repeated implantation failure. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2013;100(3):818-824. 52. Simón C, Gómez C, Cabanillas S, et al. A 5-year multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing personalized, frozen and fresh blastocyst transfer in IVF. *Reproductive Biomedicine Online*. 2020;41(3):402-415. 53. Garcia-Velasco JA, Menabrito M, Catalán IB. What fertility specialists should know about the vaginal microbiome: a review. *Reproductive Biomedicine Online*. 2017;35(1):103-112. 54. Patrizio P, Vaiarelli A, Levi Setti PE, et al. How to define, diagnose and treat poor ovarian response to gonadotrophins: a multicentre analysis of 10,000 IVF cycles. *Reproductive Biomedicine Online*. 2015;31(6):711-718. 55. Ferraretti AP, La Marca A, Fauser BC, et al. ESHRE consensus on the definition of 'poor response' to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria. *Human Reproduction*. 2011;26(7):1616-1624. 56. Ubaldi FM, Capalbo A, Vaiarelli A, et al. Follicular versus luteal phase ovarian stimulation during the same menstrual cycle (DuoStim) in a reduced ovarian reserve population results in a similar euploid blastocyst formation rate: new insight in ovarian reserve exploitation. *Fertility and Sterility*. 2016;105(6):1488-1495. 57. García-Velasco JA, Fassbender A, Ruiz-Alonso M, et al. Non-invasive assessment of embryo viability. *Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology*. 2015;27(3):171-177. 58. Apter S, Ebner T, Freour T, et al. Good practice recommendations for the use of time-lapse technology. *Human Reproduction Open*. 2020;2020(2):hoaa008. 59. Kirkegaard K, Hindkjaer JJ, Grøndahl ML, Kesmodel US, Ingerslev HJ. A randomized clinical trial comparing embryo culture in a conventional incubator with a time-lapse incubator. *Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics*. 2012;29(6):565-572. 60. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2019 Assisted Reproductive Technology National Summary Report. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2021.

Comments

← Back to blog