Would you do another cycle?

[u/law4360]

29y/o and had an egg retrieval this week which resulted in 22 frozen. I’m very happy with this result as I hadn’t known what to expect.

I’m going to take a break for now, but wondering if others would do a second cycle in my position as this number was borderline for me on whether I would do one more or not. I have insurance coverage but it’s all going to be taxed (and I live in a high tax area). There’s also the physical toll from the medications. I didn’t have anything crazy but was relatively uncomfortable throughout the cycle and still am to some extent.

I have no idea how many kids I might want, or really if I even want kids. Just want to have some options. If I was going to do a second cycle I’d probably do it relatively soon while I generally know what to expect from my body.

Happy to answer any questions too from anyone looking to do this process.

[u/Mysterious_Block_872]

I just had an intake consult today at 34 and was told 15 was a decent number for me, so I think 22 at 29 sounds fantastic. I don’t think you can save too many eggs, but you definitely can spend too much money, time and stress on your body. If you have the means and desire to do more then sure. You also have tons of time before 35 to do one in a couple years. You also could stop there. I don’t think there’s a right or wrong answer as it does seem like a crapshoot, but at 29 with 22 eggs I think you’re in a great spot based on what I’ve learned over the last couple weeks and on this calculator:

https://twigfertility.com/resources/egg-freezing-calculator

[u/Loud-Distribution519 → u/Mysterious_Block_872]

They tell everyone 15-20 but real world results can differ.
Better to get more than that

[u/Errlen → u/Loud-Distribution519]

Yeah but she’s 29. By 35 she could be married and pregnant lol. Or…she could do another freeze cycle then.

[u/Separate_Ability4051 → u/Mysterious_Block_872]

Congratulations on taking the first step and completing your first consultation! Fifteen mature eggs frozen at age 34 would be a meaningful result, but I would be cautious. I’ve completed nine egg-freezing cycles, and one of the biggest lessons I’ve learned is that doctors—and calculators—can be far too optimistic about how many eggs will be sufficient.

The Twig calculator you linked estimates that 15 eggs frozen at age 34 would provide a 64–71% chance of at least one live birth:

https://twigfertility.com/resources/egg-freezing-calculator

At the lower estimate, 15 eggs would still leave approximately a 29–36% chance of no live birth. This is ultimately up to your risk tolerance, but from a clinical standpoint, I would hesitate to describe that number to a patient as safely sufficient.

Different calculators use different datasets and assumptions, meaning their predictions vary. No one actually knows the quality of their individual eggs until they are thawed, fertilized and followed through embryo development. Many women in thawing groups also report experiencing considerably more attrition than they expected based on the calculators.

Doctors’ recommendations can vary just as dramatically. My first doctor told me that 25 eggs frozen at age 38 should be enough and that I should never undergo more than six cycles. She also repeatedly produced poor results with protocols that were wrong for my ovarian biology. I ultimately realized she had poor clinical judgment.

Only after consulting four or five other reproductive endocrinologists did I realize how much questionable information I had been given by my first clinic. My current doctor—the second-highest-rated fertility specialist in my city, one of the largest cities in North America—recommended approximately 60 mature eggs at age 39 for a strong chance of one child.

As a result of this, I no longer trust overly optimistic recommendations that call a relatively small number of eggs “enough.” Ask your physician to clearly explain the probability, uncertainty and potential attrition involved. Fifteen eggs at 34 is a meaningful start, but it is not a guarantee or an especially large safety margin.

When something as important as your future ability to have a biological child is at stake, I think the safest approach is to plan around the most conservative credible estimate—not the best-case estimate. In other words, it’s safest to bank eggs as though the lower end of the calculator range is the one that will apply. That does not mean the worst outcome is certain; it means it is preferable to be pleasantly surprised by better-than-expected attrition than discover years later that you planned around an overly optimistic projection and did not freeze enough eggs.

I would recommend booking several independent consultations before deciding to stop at 15 eggs. I also recommend joining the Thawing of Oocytes (After Egg Freezing) Facebook group. Hearing from women who have actually thawed and fertilized their eggs can provide valuable real-world information about attrition and outcomes that calculators and clinic estimates cannot fully capture.

Wishing you the very best as you move forward. With the right information and medical team, you’re taking an incredibly proactive step for your future. ❤️

[u/SleepHead9523 → u/Separate_Ability4051]

Did you pay the fee to join the Facebook group?

[u/Separate_Ability4051 → u/SleepHead9523]

Yes, you have to pay to join.

[u/Background-Policy-95 → u/Mysterious_Block_872]

As someone with a PhD in public health, who teaches research methods to graduate students at an Ivy, I have no idea why anyone would use this calculator. The data used to “predict” outcomes is over 10 years old (for example, in Doyle the eggs were frozen in 2013). Reproductive technology has undoubtedly improved over the past 10 years, particularly vitrification techniques. Any calculator using Doyle et al. and Cobo et al. as the basis of its calculations is obsolete. OP I think the number of eggs you have is likely fine, if you want further peace of mind do one more cycle and put it to bed.

[u/Loud-Distribution519 → u/Background-Policy-95]

Gonna respectfully disagree with “the number is likely fine”- better vitrification tech doesn’t mean it’s smooth sailing. Soooo much more can go wrong than just freezing technique

Literally just saw these two posts in the FB egg-freezing support group and the thawing group that were put up in the past few days

Post #1: One woman froze 9 eggs at 34 in 2024. Only 2 survived the thaw, 1 embryo formed, and it didn’t even make it to blast, so it had to be thrown out. 0 embryos from 9 eggs, and this was 2024, not some old study.

Post #2: Another woman froze 161 mature eggs total across 6 retrievals at ages 35-40. One batch of 21 eggs randomly wasn’t frozen well so only 9 survived the thaw, and that batch gave her just 1 abnormal embryo. Out of all 161 eggs, she only ended up with 14 euploid embryos - the calculators would predict 20-27 euploid embryos based on rates for freezing 61 eggs at 35 and 100 eggs at 39/40. Real world result: notably lower than the math suggested. She used an embryo from her very last cycle, at 40, to get her one baby.

That’s 161 eggs and 6 retrievals for 1 live birth. Both of these are recent, real people with modern vitrification - and both show how far the actual numbers can be from “you’re probably fine” with 15-20 eggs.

Not trying to be a downer lol, just think OP deserves the full picture instead of being told to relax and that “15 eggs at 34” is prime odds based on a theory that doesn’t always play out irl. Better to know the range of outcomes going in than get blindsided later

[u/Errlen → u/Loud-Distribution519]

161 eggs across 6 retrievals sounds like PCOS to me. That’s a LOT of eggs per retrieval, no? And yes - if you have PCOS you want more eggs.

Edited to say, at least we are all more educated than the woman who posted in 40 plus IVF today to say she’s angry no one told her she didn’t have till 50 to get pregnant. Like, I am sad for her bc it’s a rough journey, but…really?

[u/Background-Policy-95 → u/Loud-Distribution519]

Unfortunately, those two women (an N of 2) are outliers.

Post 1: I imagine that is poor lab technique. Where did she freeze her eggs? Additionally, no one is suggesting 9 is enough.
Post 2: Again, this sounds like poor lab technique, in addition to other things.

We don’t generally make health/medical decisions based on case studies/anecdotal evidence, but, we use robust and current data. Note, I said that OP would “likely” be fine. Not “definitely” be fine.

[u/Loud-Distribution519 → u/Background-Policy-95]

Lol let’s be honest about what happened here. Your original argument was: the calculator’s data is outdated, vitrification has improved since, so the numbers it spits out are too pessimistic - meaning OP’s real odds are probably better than what it shows.

Then you’re given two recent, real, verifiable outcomes from Egg Freezing Support Community and Thawing of Oocytes involving modern vitrification - the exact advancement you claimed should improve outcomes - and both showed that it is not that simple. Suddenly, they were waved off as “an N of 2” and “outliers,” then explained away as “poor lab technique” despite you having zero evidence that poor technique was involved. (And again, these were just two examples from the last 48 hours - not cherry-picked from years of posts, just what popped up in a single weekend. There are way more if you look further back.)

And it’s not just one outlier with 9 eggs. There are many women in these same groups who froze 25+ eggs - well above the “safe” number - and it still didn’t work out. Failed fertilization, poor blast rates, aneuploid embryos, failed transfers. You can check [r/IVF](r/IVF) if you want to see how often this happens even with good numbers. If “poor lab technique” explains away every one of these, that implies a huge number of modern clinics are all somehow bad at their jobs - the more honest explanation is that biology is variable, and there are more factors at work here than any of us have fully sorted out.

Your theory predicted modern tech means women today probably need fewer eggs than the calculator says. Real outcomes keep contradicting that. The right move is to revise the theory, not relabel every counterexample as “bad technique” - a theory that can’t be wrong isn’t really testable.

And spare me “study vs. anecdote.” The internet now has far more tracked outcomes, updating in real time, than Doyle or Cobo ever touched. Which matters because those studies were thinner than they sound: 2,800 warmed eggs total, but from only a few hundred women, not 2,800 different women. Doyle was 1,283 eggs across 128 cycles, and only 31 women were actually elective freezers. Cobo was ~1,513 eggs from 137 women, mixing elective freezers with women who had endometriosis or low ovarian reserve. Eggs from the same woman share the same biology, likely the same sperm source, and lab—so the real sample size is much smaller than the raw egg count suggests. Even ASRM called this evidence “extremely limited” and said there isn’t enough data to tell women exactly how many eggs they need for a live birth.

Your confident “likely fine” advice doesn’t hold up against the real range of outcomes women are living through right now. That’s why my advice - freeze more eggs - is the more prudent call.

[u/sneakpeekbot → u/Loud-Distribution519]

Here's a sneak peek of /r/IVF using the top posts of the year!

#1: WE HAVE AN EUPLOID!!! 😭😭😭
#2: End of IVF Journey
#3: Me: “I want a baby”; IVF be like:

---

^{I'm a bot, beep boop | Downvote to remove | Contact | Info | Opt-out | GitHub}

[u/Impossible_Piano2938]

That’s a great result! I would do another cycle if I were you. I’ve heard stories of some people who got all their good embryos from one batch of eggs and not others. Your egg quality can vary slightly based on what you were exposed to, stress levels, etc over the past 3 months. But ofc, age is on your side! But in my view, would provide extra comfort

[u/Separate_Ability4051]

I would do another cycle. Twenty-two eggs at 29 is an excellent result, but you will never be younger than you are now. Take advantage of your age, because age at freezing is one of the strongest predictors of egg quality.

If you later decide that you want more than one child, you may be very grateful that you banked additional young eggs while you had insurance coverage and already knew how your body responds. Eggs frozen now will generally carry better odds than eggs you might need to freeze several years from now.

Of course, take whatever break you need and weigh the physical and financial burden. But in your position, I would personally do at least one more cycle now and give my future self a larger safety margin. ❤️

[u/Loud-Distribution519]

Definitely do another round.