Abstract:Study question: How does ovarian stimulation in an oocyte donor affect the IVF cycle and obstetric outcomes in recipients? Summary answer: Higher donor oocyte yields may affect the proportion of usable embryos but do not affect live birth delivery rate or obstetric outcomes in oocyte recipients. What is known already: In autologous oocyte fresh IVF cycles, the highest live birth delivery rates occur when ~15-25 oocytes are retrieved, with a decline thereafter, perhaps due to the hormone milieu, with super-physiologic estrogen levels. There are scant data in donor oocyte cycles, wherein the oocyte environment is separated from the uterine environment. Study design, size, duration: This was a retrospective cohort study from 2008 to 2015 of 350 oocyte donors who underwent a total of 553 ovarian stimulations and oocyte retrievals. The oocytes were vitrified and then distributed to 989 recipients who had 1745 embryo transfers. The primary outcome was live birth delivery rate, defined as the number of deliveries that resulted in at least one live birth per embryo transfer cycle. Participants/materials, setting, methods: The study included oocyte donors and recipients at a donor oocyte bank, in collaboration with an academic reproductive endocrinology division. Donors with polycystic ovary syndrome and recipients who used gestational carriers were excluded. The donors all underwent conventional ovarian stimulation using antagonist protocols. None of the embryos underwent pre-implantation genetic testing. The average (mean) number of embryos transferred to recipients was 1.4 (range 1-3). Main results and the role of chance: Per ovarian stimulation cycle, the median number of oocytes retrieved was 30 (range: 9-95). Among the 1745 embryo transfer cycles, 856 of the cycles resulted in a live birth (49.1%). There were no associations between donor oocyte yield and probability of live birth, adjusting for donor age, BMI, race/ethnicity and retrieval year. The results were similar when analyzing by mature oocytes. Although donors with more oocytes retrieved had a higher number of developed embryos overall, there was a relatively lower percentage of usable embryos per oocyte warmed following fertilization and culture. In our model for the average donor in the data set, holding all variables constant, for each additional five oocytes retrieved, there was a 4% (95% CI 1%, 7%) lower odds of fertilization and 5% (95% CI 2%, 7%) lower odds of having a usable embryo per oocyte warmed. There were no associations between donor oocyte yield and risk of preterm delivery (<37 weeks gestation) and low birthweight (<2500 g) among singleton infants. Limitations, reasons for caution: Ovarian stimulation was exclusively performed in oocyte donors. This was a retrospective study design, and we were therefore unable to ensure proportional exposure groups. These findings may not generalizable to older or less healthy women who may be vitrifying oocytes for planned fertility delay. There remain significant risks to aggressive ovarian stimulation, including ovarian hyperstimulation. In addition, long-term health outcomes of extreme ovarian stimulation are lacking. Lastly, we did not collect progesterone levels and are unable to evaluate the impact of rising progesterone on outcomes. Wider implications of the findings: Live birth delivery rates remain high with varying amounts of oocytes retrieved in this donor oocyte model. In a vitrified oocyte bank setting, where oocytes are typically sent as a limited number cohort, recipients are not affected by oocyte yields. Study funding/competing interest(s): Additional REDCap grant support at Emory was provided through UL1 TR000424. Dr. Audrey Gaskins was supported in part by a career development award from the NIEHS (R00ES026648).

Donor oocyte cycle characteristics and outcomes: factors potentially linked with successful endings

Effect of oocyte donor stimulation on recipient outcomes: data from a US national donor oocyte bank

Clinical outcomes after elective double-embryo transfer in frozen cycles for women of advanced maternal age A retrospective cohort study

When using donor oocytes, does embryo stage matter? An analysis of blastocyst versus cleavage stage embryo transfers using a cryopreserved donor oocyte bank

Clinical outcomes after elective double-embryo transfer in frozen cycles for women of advanced maternal age

Assessing the effect of below-benchmark vitrified/warmed donor-oocyte survival rates in subsequent laboratory and clinical outcomes

Endometriosis and oocyte quality: an analysis of 13 614 donor oocyte recipient and autologous IVF cycles

Do very young oocyte donors negatively impact live birth rates in their recipients?

Assessment of Repetitive Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) Cycles on Oocyte Donors: Impact on Oocyte Quality and Viable Embryo Yield

Embryo donation: national trends and outcomes, 2004-2019

Analysis of the Clinical Characteristics and Outcome of IVF Cycles in Advanced Age Women

Live Birth After Oocyte Donation IVF Cycles in Women With Endometriosis

Live births from in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer following the administration of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist without gonadotropins: Two case reports

In vitro fertilization and perinatal outcomes of patients with advanced maternal age after single frozen euploid embryo transfer: a propensity score-matched analysis of autologous and donor cycles

Pregnancy outcomes in women with primary ovarian insufficiency in assisted reproductive technology therapy: a retrospective study

Clinical Application of Donated Oocyte from Infertile Donors during IVF-ET

Oocyte donors' experience and expectations in a non-profit fertility care setting

Causes and Effects of Oocyte Retrieval Difficulties: A Retrospective Study of 10,624 Cycles

Patient- and cycle-specific factors affecting the outcome of frozen-thawed embryo transfers

Comparison of obstetric and perinatal complications in intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles with autologous oocytes and donated oocytes

Effects of donor sperm on perinatal and neonatal outcomes resulting from in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection and embryo transfer cycles: a retrospective cohort study