PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of single vitrified-warmed blastocyst embryo transfer (SVBT) versus double vitrified-warmed blastocyst embryo transfer (DVBT) according to the day of vitrification. METHODS: This retrospective study included a total of 1,051 cycles in women less than 37 years of age with their autologous SVBT cryopreserved on day 5 (5d-SVBT, n = 737) or day 6 (6d-SVBT, n = 154) and DVBT on day 5 (5d-DVBT, n = 129) or day 6 (6d-DVBT, n = 31) from January 2009 to December 2011. RESULTS: The clinical pregnancy rate (41.8 % vs. 48.1 %, p = 0.184) and ongoing pregnancy rate (36.6 % vs. 45.0 %, p = 0.072) were not significantly different between the 5d-SVBT group and the 5d-DVBT group. However, the clinical pregnancy (29.9 % vs. 58.1 %, p = 0.003) and ongoing pregnancy rates (23.4 % vs. 51.6 %, p = 0.001) were significantly lower in the 6d-SVBT group compared with those in the 6d-DVBT group. The implantation rate (42.2 % vs. 34.5 %, p = 0.03) of the 5d-SVBT group was significantly higher than that of the 5d-DVBT group, while the implantation rate (29.9 % vs. 37.1 %, p = 0.303) of the 6d-SVBT group was not statistically different compared with that in the 6d-DVBT group. The multiple pregnancy rates (1.0 % in the 5d-SVBT group vs. 38.7 % in the 5d-DVBT group, p < 0.001 and 0 % in the 6d-SVBT group vs. 22.2 % in the 6d-DVBT group, p = 0.001) were statistically significantly lower in the SVBT group compared with those in the DVBT group regardless of the day of vitrification. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the 5d-SVBT resulted in comparable clinical outcomes compared to the 5d-DVBT while the 6d-SVBT yielded significantly lower clinical outcomes compared to the 6d-DVBT.
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of single vitrified-warmed blastocyst embryo transfer (SVBT) versus double vitrified-warmed blastocyst embryo transfer (DVBT) according to the day of vitrification. METHODS: This retrospective study included a total of 1,051 cycles in women less than 37 years of age with their autologous SVBT cryopreserved on day 5 (5d-SVBT, n = 737) or day 6 (6d-SVBT, n = 154) and DVBT on day 5 (5d-DVBT, n = 129) or day 6 (6d-DVBT, n = 31) from January 2009 to December 2011. RESULTS: The clinical pregnancy rate (41.8 % vs. 48.1 %, p = 0.184) and ongoing pregnancy rate (36.6 % vs. 45.0 %, p = 0.072) were not significantly different between the 5d-SVBT group and the 5d-DVBT group. However, the clinical pregnancy (29.9 % vs. 58.1 %, p = 0.003) and ongoing pregnancy rates (23.4 % vs. 51.6 %, p = 0.001) were significantly lower in the 6d-SVBT group compared with those in the 6d-DVBT group. The implantation rate (42.2 % vs. 34.5 %, p = 0.03) of the 5d-SVBT group was significantly higher than that of the 5d-DVBT group, while the implantation rate (29.9 % vs. 37.1 %, p = 0.303) of the 6d-SVBT group was not statistically different compared with that in the 6d-DVBT group. The multiple pregnancy rates (1.0 % in the 5d-SVBT group vs. 38.7 % in the 5d-DVBT group, p < 0.001 and 0 % in the 6d-SVBT group vs. 22.2 % in the 6d-DVBT group, p = 0.001) were statistically significantly lower in the SVBT group compared with those in the DVBT group regardless of the day of vitrification. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the 5d-SVBT resulted in comparable clinical outcomes compared to the 5d-DVBT while the 6d-SVBT yielded significantly lower clinical outcomes compared to the 6d-DVBT.
Authors: F Guerif; M Lemseffer; R Bidault; O Gasnier; M H Saussereau; V Cadoret; C Jamet; D Royere Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2009-02-13 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Sang Min Kang; Sang Won Lee; Hak Jun Jeong; San Hyun Yoon; Min Whan Koh; Jin Ho Lim; Seong Goo Lee Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2012-03-01 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: Lucinda L Veeck; Richard Bodine; Robert N Clarke; Rosemary Berrios; Joanne Libraro; Rose Marie Moschini; Nikica Zaninovic; Zev Rosenwaks Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Ann Thurin; Jon Hausken; Torbjörn Hillensjö; Barbara Jablonowska; Anja Pinborg; Annika Strandell; Christina Bergh Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-12-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Dong Soo Park; Ji Won Kim; Eun Mi Chang; Woo Sik Lee; Tae Ki Yoon; Sang Woo Lyu Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2020-08-04 Impact factor: 5.555