No abstract

Study Question Does prior SARS-CoV-2 infection in women undergoing fertility treatments affect the outcomes of fresh ART cycles? Summary Answer SARS-CoV-2 infection does not affect fresh ART treatment outcomes, except for a possible long term negative effect on oocyte yield (>180 days post infection). What Is Known Already A single previous study suggested no evidence that a history of asymptomatic or mild SARS-CoV-2 infection in females caused impairment of fresh ART treatment outcomes. Study Design, Size, Duration Retrospective cohort study, including all SARS-CoV-2 infected women who underwent fresh ART cycles within a year from infection (the first cycle post infection), between October 2020 and June 2021, matched to non-diagnosed controls. Participants/Materials, Setting, Methods Patients from two large IVF units in Israel who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 and later underwent fresh ART cycles were matched by age to non-diagnosed, non-vaccinated controls. Demographics, cycle characteristics and cycle outcomes, including oocyte yield, maturation rate, fertilization rate, number of frozen embryos per cycle, and clinical pregnancy rates, were compared between groups. Main Results And The Role Of Chance One hundred and twenty-one infected patients and 121 controls who underwent fresh ART cycles were included. Oocyte yield (12.50 versus 11.29; p = 0.169) and mature oocyte rate (78% versus 82%; p = 0.144) in all fresh cycles were similar between groups, as were fertilization rates, number of frozen embryos per cycle and clinical pregnancy rates (43% versus 40%; p = 0.737) in fresh cycles with an embryo transfer. In a logistic regression model, SARS-CoV-2 infection more than 180 days prior to retrieval had a negative effect on oocyte yield (p = 0.018, Slope=-4.08, 95% CI -7.41 – -0.75), although the sample size was small. Limitations, Reasons For Caution A retrospective study with data that was not uniformly generated under a study protocol, no antibody testing for the control group. Wider Implications Of The Findings The study findings suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection does not affect treatment outcomes, including oocyte yield, fertilization and maturation rate, number of good quality embryos, and clinical pregnancy rates, in fresh ART cycles, except for a possible long term negative effect on oocyte yield when retrieval occurs > 180 days post SARS-CoV-2 infection. Further studies are warranted to support these findings. Study funding/competing interest(s) None. Trial registration number 0010-21-HMC, 0094-21-ASF

Purpose To study the effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection on pregnancy rates in frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles. Methods A retrospective cohort study including women under the age of 42 with documented SARS-CoV-2 infection up to 1 year prior to treatment, undergoing FET cycles in the first half of 2021, with transfer of embryos generated prior to the infection. Controls were SARS-CoV-2 non-diagnosed, non-vaccinated women matched by age, number, and day of embryo transfer. Demographic and cycle characteristics and outcomes were compared. Results Forty-one recovered women and 41 controls were included. Pregnancy rates were 29% and 49% respectively ( p = 0.070). Stratification by time from SARS-CoV-2 infection to transfer into ≤ 60 and > 60 days revealed a difference in pregnancy rates, with women in the COVID group having lower pregnancy rates if infected in proximity to the transfer (21% vs. 55%; p = 0.006). In a logistic regression model, infection was a significant variable ( p = 0.05, OR 0.325, 95% CI 0.106–0.998). Logistic regression applied on the subgroup of women infected in proximity to the transfer further strengthened the univariate results, with COVID-19 remaining a significant parameter ( p = 0.005, OR 0.072, 95% CI 0.012–0.450). Conclusions In FET cycles of patients with past SARS-CoV-2 infection, in which oocytes were retrieved prior to infection, decreased pregnancy rates were observed, specifically in patients who recovered less than 60 days prior to embryo transfer. Pending further studies, in cases of FET cycles with limited number of embryos, postponing embryo transfer for at least 60 days following recovery from COVID-19 might be considered when feasible. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10815-022-02517-w.

Study question Is there an influence of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine on ovarian response and in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment outcomes? Summary answer COVID-19 mRNA vaccine did not affect the ovarian response nor pregnancy rates in IVF treatment What is known already Studies demonstrated that infection with COVID-19 during pregnancy increased the risk of the development of severe disease and pregnancy complications. A recent meta-analysis of international data showed a declining tendency to be vaccinated, possibly influenced by public concerns over safety of the vaccines. Specifically, concerns were raised about a possible detrimental effect on fertility and pregnancy outcomes due to similarity between syncytin-1, a human placental fusion protein, and the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein expressed after administration of the COVID-19 vaccine. To date, only one retrospective analysis on 36 infertility patients has assessed the influence of COVID-19 vaccination on IVF treatment outcomes. Study design, size, duration A retrospective cohort study . The study included a total of 400 patients, 200 vaccinated women and 200 age matched non-vaccinated women, undergoing IVF treatments during January-April 2021. Participants/materials, setting, methods All vaccinated women aged 20-42 that underwent IVF treatment cycles between January 1, 2021 and April 31 2021 were included. All participants completed two doses of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine at least two weeks before starting ovarian stimulation. The study group was matched by age to non-vaccinated patients that underwent IVF treatments during the same period. Patients with a positive COVID 19 test in the past were excluded. Main results and the role of chance Two hundred patients underwent oocyte retrieval 14-68 days after receiving COVID-19 vaccination. No difference was found between vaccinated and non-vaccinated patients in mean number of oocytes retrieved per cycle (10.63 vs 10.72, p = 0.93). Among 128 vaccinated patients and 133 non-vaccinated patients that underwent fresh embryos transfers, no difference was demonstrated in clinical pregnancy rates (32.8% vs. 33.1%, p-value=0.96), 42 and 44 pregnancies respectively. The fertilization rates and mean number of cryopreserved embryos were similar between the two groups in freeze all cycles (55.43% vs. 54.29%, p-value=0.73), (3.59 vs. 3.28, p-value=0.80). Among vaccinated patients and non-vaccinated patients that underwent fresh embryos transfers, no difference was demonstrated in the fertilization rate (64.81% vs. 61.98%, p = 0.51), and transferred embryos quality. Regression models applied demonstrated no effect of the vaccine on oocyte yields and pregnancy rates. Limitations, reasons for caution Limitations include retrospective nature and different treatment protocols. Additional limitation is the lack of information about vaccination status of the partners. One would assume that if unbalanced, the proportion of vaccinated males would be higher in the study group as partners tend to choose similarly in regard to vaccine administration. Wider implications of the findings Women should consider vaccination prior to their attempts to conceive via IVF treatments. Trial registration number ASF-0094-21

Objective: To study whether sonographic findings suggestive of ovarian stromal edema are associated with tissue ischemia in patients with adnexal torsion. Methods: A study of 79 patients with adnexal torsion was performed. Patients were divided into an ischemic group, in which the twisted adnexa were seen as blue or black, and a non-ischemic group, in which the adnexa retained normal color and appeared viable. Clinical and ultrasonographic findings, specifically the presence of ultrasonographic signs suggestive of ovarian stromal edema, were compared between the two groups. Results: Of the 79 patients with torsion, in 44 (55.7%) the adnexa appeared ischemic at surgery. The presence of ischemia was not associated with age, pregnancy, duration of pain, vomiting or findings at physical examination. There was no significant difference between the ischemic and the non-ischemic group in the proportion of patients with signs of ovarian stromal edema (59 vs. 40%, p = 0.11), in the proportion of patients with absent/diminished stromal Doppler flow (36 vs. 28%, p = 0.12%) or in the proportion of patients with both signs of stroma edema and absent/diminished stromal Doppler flow (20 vs. 12%, p = 0.36). Conclusion: Ultrasonographic signs of ovarian stromal edema do not assist in differentiating between ischemic and non-ischemic adnexal torsion.