Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 20, 2026

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Contribution of cryopreservation to the cumulative live birth rate: a large multicentric cycle-based data analysis
G Scaravelli1, P E Levi-Setti2,3, C Livi4
1ART Italian National Register, National Centre for Diseases Prevention and Health Promotion, National Health Institute, Rome, Italy. giulia.scaravelli@iss.it.
Purpose:
To estimate the contribution of cryopreservation to the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) after law modification in Italy in the era of vitrification and freeze-all.
Methods:
The Italian National Registry performed a cycle-based data collection. Nine Italian IVF clinics were involved incorporating a total of 10,260 fresh cycles performed between January 2015 and April 2016 resulting in 9273 oocyte retrievals and 3266 subsequent warming cycles from the same oocyte retrievals performed up to December 2016. Mean female age was 37 ± 4.3 years. Primary outcome measure was CLBR per oocyte retrieval. Confounding factors were tested in multivariate regression analysis, and the relative impact of cryopreservation to the CLBR in different patient categories was calculated.
Results:
CLBR per oocyte retrieval was 32.6%, 26.5%, 18.7%, 13.0%, and 5.5% for women younger than 36, aged 36-39, 40-41, and older than 41 years, respectively. The total relative contribution of oocyte/embryo cryopreservation was 40.6% (95% CI 38.41-42.75). An association between maternal age, number of oocytes retrieved, fertilization rate, cryopreservation, and cumulative live birth was shown. When adjusted for confounders, a 2.3-fold increase was observed in the chance of live birth when cryopreservation was performed (OR 2.3; 95% CI 1.99-2.56). In high responder patients (> 15 oocytes retrieved) where freeze-all was applied in 67.6% of cycles to avoid the risk of hyper stimulation syndrome, the relative contribution of vitrification to the CLBR was 80.6%.
Conclusions:
Cryopreservation is essential in IVF and should always be available to patients to optimize success rates. Multicentric, cycle-based data analyses are crucial to provide infertile couples, clinicians, and regulatory bodies with accurate information on IVF effectiveness including fresh and cryopreserved cycles.
Related Concept Videos
06:55Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:00Cryopreservation of Mouse Embryos by Ethylene Glycol-Based Vitrification
Cell Cycle Analysis
08:24Fourier-Based Diffraction Analysis of Live Caenorhabditis elegans
11:30Quantitative Analysis of Aspergillus nidulans Growth Rate using Live Microscopy and Open-Source Software
10:44Imaging- and Flow Cytometry-based Analysis of Cell Position and the Cell Cycle in 3D Melanoma Spheroids

