Literature DB >> 22786480

Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology.

Demián Glujovsky1, Debbie Blake, Cindy Farquhar, Ariel Bardach.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Advances in cell culture media have led to a shift in in vitro fertilization (IVF) practice from early cleavage embryo transfer to blastocyst stage transfer. The rationale for blastocyst culture is to improve both uterine and embryonic synchronicity and enable self selection of viable embryos thus resulting in higher implantation rates.
OBJECTIVES: To determine if blastocyst stage (Day 5 to 6) embryo transfers (ETs) improve live birth rate and other associated outcomes compared with cleavage stage (Day 2 to 3) ETs. SEARCH
METHODS: Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE and Bio extracts. The last search date was 21 February 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials were included if they were randomised and compared the effectiveness of early cleavage versus blastocyst stage transfers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Of the 50 trials that were identified, 23 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed (five new studies were added in this update). The primary outcome was rate of live birth. Secondary outcomes were rates per couple of clinical pregnancy, cumulative clinical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, high order pregnancy, miscarriage, failure to transfer embryos and cryopreservation. Quality assessment, data extraction and meta-analysis were performed following Cochrane guidelines. MAIN
RESULTS: Twelve RCTs reported live birth rates and there was evidence of a significant difference in live birth rate per couple favouring blastocyst culture (1510 women, Peto OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.74) (Day 2 to 3: 31%; Day 5 to 6: 38.8%, I(2) = 40%). This means that for a typical rate of 31% in clinics that use early cleavage stage cycles, the rate of live births would increase to 32% to 42% if clinics used blastocyst transfer.There was no difference in clinical pregnancy rate between early cleavage and blastocyst transfer in the 23 RCTs (Peto OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.32) (Day 2 to 3: 38.6%; Day 5 to 6: 41.6%) and no difference in miscarriage rate (13 RCTs, Peto OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.60). The four RCTs that reported cumulative pregnancy rates (266 women, Peto OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.25) (Day 2 to 3: 56.8%; Day 5 to 6: 46.3%) significantly favoured early cleavage. Embryo freezing rates (11 RCTs, 1729 women, Peto OR 2.88, 95% CI 2.35 to 3.51) and failure to transfer embryos (16 RCTs, 2459 women, OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.51) (Day 2 to 3: 3.4%; Day 5 to 6: 8.9%) favoured cleavage stage transfer. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: This review provides evidence that there is a small significant difference in live birth rates in favour of blastocyst transfer (Day 5 to 6) compared to cleavage stage transfer (Day 2 to 3). However, cumulative clinical pregnancy rates from cleavage stage (derived from fresh and thaw cycles) resulted in higher clinical pregnancy rates than from blastocyst cycles. The most likely explanation for this is the higher rates of frozen embryos and lower failure to transfer rates per couple obtained from cleavage stage protocols. Future RCTs should report miscarriage, live birth and cumulative live birth rates to enable ART consumers and service providers to make well informed decisions on the best treatment option available.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22786480     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002118.pub4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  77 in total

1.  A comparison of live birth rates and perinatal outcomes between cryopreserved oocytes and cryopreserved embryos.

Authors:  Jacqueline R Ho; Irene Woo; Kristin Louie; Wael Salem; Sami I Jabara; Kristin A Bendikson; Richard J Paulson; Karine Chung
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Cumulus-corona gene expression analysis combined with morphological embryo scoring in single embryo transfer cycles increases live birth after fresh transfer and decreases time to pregnancy.

Authors:  T Adriaenssens; I Van Vaerenbergh; W Coucke; I Segers; G Verheyen; E Anckaert; M De Vos; J Smitz
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2019-01-09       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Diminished ovarian reserve in the United States assisted reproductive technology population: diagnostic trends among 181,536 cycles from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcomes Reporting System.

Authors:  Kate Devine; Sunni L Mumford; Mae Wu; Alan H DeCherney; Micah J Hill; Anthony Propst
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 7.329

4.  A critical appraisal of time-lapse imaging for embryo selection: where are we and where do we need to go?

Authors:  Catherine Racowsky; Peter Kovacs; Wellington P Martins
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 3.412

5.  Improving IVF: is there a limit to our ability to manipulate human biology?

Authors:  Pasquale Patrizio; Sherman Silber
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-10-28       Impact factor: 3.412

6.  A comparison of pregnancy outcomes between day 3 and day 5/6 embryo transfers: does day of embryo transfer really make a difference?

Authors:  Susan M Maxwell; Katherine Melzer-Ross; David H McCulloh; James A Grifo
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2015-01-06       Impact factor: 3.412

7.  Early compaction at day 3 may be a useful additional criterion for embryo transfer.

Authors:  Sébastien Le Cruguel; Véronique Ferré-L'Hôtellier; Catherine Morinière; Sophie Lemerle; Pascal Reynier; Philippe Descamps; Pascale May-Panloup
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2013-04-07       Impact factor: 3.412

8.  Oxidative markers in cryopreservation medium from frozen-thawed embryos: a possible tool for improved embryo selection in in vitro fertilization?

Authors:  Zofnat Wiener-Megnazi; Shirly Lahav-Baratz; Idit Blais; Sarah Matarasso; Mara Koifman; Sergei Shnizer; David Ishai; Gil Peer; Grace Younes; Ariel Zilberlicht; Ron Auslander; Martha Dirnfeld
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-03-14       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 9.  Implementing PGD/PGD-A in IVF clinics: considerations for the best laboratory approach and management.

Authors:  Antonio Capalbo; Valeria Romanelli; Danilo Cimadomo; Laura Girardi; Marta Stoppa; Lisa Dovere; Domenico Dell'Edera; Filippo Maria Ubaldi; Laura Rienzi
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-07-16       Impact factor: 3.412

10.  Influence of blastocysts morphological score on pregnancy outcomes in frozen-thawed blastocyst transfers: a retrospective study of 741 cycles.

Authors:  Lin Liu; Yan-Hui Li; Xiao-Fang Ding; Yu-Hong Geng; Chun-Yan Chen; Ying Gao
Journal:  J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci       Date:  2014-10-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.