Abstract
The use of frozen embryo transfer (FET) in in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) has significantly surged over the past 20 years, now surpassing fresh embryo transfers in terms of cycle numbers worldwide.
Among women with ovulatory cycles who are undergoing FET, there are at least four distinct strategies for endometrial preparation: natural, modified natural, stimulated, and artificial.
Previous studies comparing the effectiveness of natural versus artificial cycle endometrial preparation protocols for FET have several drawbacks that affect the reliability of the findings and their applicability in clinical practice. Only one properly sized randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing the artificial cycle and the modified natural cycle has been published (ANTARCTICA trial).
However, the cryopreservation methods employed in that study are now considered outdated, resulting in significantly lower pregnancy rates compared with contemporary standards.
Among women with ovulatory cycles who are undergoing FET, there are at least four distinct strategies for endometrial preparation: natural, modified natural, stimulated, and artificial.
Previous studies comparing the effectiveness of natural versus artificial cycle endometrial preparation protocols for FET have several drawbacks that affect the reliability of the findings and their applicability in clinical practice. Only one properly sized randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing the artificial cycle and the modified natural cycle has been published (ANTARCTICA trial).
However, the cryopreservation methods employed in that study are now considered outdated, resulting in significantly lower pregnancy rates compared with contemporary standards.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | The Lancet |
| Volume | 404 |
| Issue number | 10449 |
| Pages (from-to) | 219-220 |
| Number of pages | 2 |
| ISSN | 0140-6736 |
| DOIs |
|
| Publication status | Published - 2024 |