Literature DB >> 26347340

Developmentally delayed cleavage-stage embryos maintain comparable implantation rates in frozen embryo transfers.

Heather Burks1, Jennifer Buckbinder2, Mary Francis-Hernandez3, Karine Chung4, Sami Jabara5, Kristin Bendikson6, Richard Paulson7.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: In fresh IVF cycles, embryos reaching the eight-cell stage on day 3 of development are thought to have a higher chance of implantation than those reaching this stage on day 4. To determine whether this difference persists after cryopreservation, we compared pregnancy and implantation rates between frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles using delayed cleavage-stage embryos (cryopreserved day 4) and normal cleavage-stage embryos (cryopreserved day 3).
METHODS: Participants underwent FET between 2008 and 2012 using embryos cryopreserved on either day 3 (n = 76) or day 4 (n = 48), depending on the length of time needed to achieve the eight-cell stage. All embryos, regardless of day of cryopreservation, were thawed and transferred on the 4th day of vaginal progesterone following endometrial preparation with oral estradiol. Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare patient demographics and cycle outcomes.
RESULTS: More women in the day 4 group had diminished ovarian reserve (44 vs 16 %, p = 0.003). Pregnancy outcomes in preceding fresh cycles were not different between the two groups. Pregnancy, implantation, and live birth rates following FET did not differ between the day 3 and day 4 groups.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to address outcomes using day 3 versus day 4 cryopreserved embryos. Despite a higher prevalence of diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) in the day 4 group, delayed cleavage-stage embryos utilized in FET cycles performed as well as embryos growing at the normal rate, suggesting delayed embryo development does not affect embryo implantation as long as endometrial synchrony is maintained.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cleavage-stage embryo; Delayed embryo development; Embryo cryopreservation; Frozen embryo transfer

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26347340      PMCID: PMC4615912          DOI: 10.1007/s10815-015-0561-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet        ISSN: 1058-0468            Impact factor:   3.412


  11 in total

1.  Construction of an evidence-based integrated morphology cleavage embryo score for implantation potential of embryos scored and transferred on day 2 after oocyte retrieval.

Authors:  J Holte; L Berglund; K Milton; C Garello; G Gennarelli; A Revelli; T Bergh
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2006-11-09       Impact factor: 6.918

2.  Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support.

Authors:  Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2008-09-30       Impact factor: 6.317

3.  Selection of embryos for transfer in IVF: ranking embryos based on their implantation potential using morphological scoring.

Authors:  Laura van Loendersloot; Madelon van Wely; Fulco van der Veen; Patrick Bossuyt; Sjoerd Repping
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2014-05-15       Impact factor: 3.828

4.  The Graduated Embryo Score (GES) predicts blastocyst formation and pregnancy rate from cleavage-stage embryos.

Authors:  J D Fisch; H Rodriguez; R Ross; G Overby; G Sher
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 6.918

5.  Which set of embryo variables is most predictive for live birth? A prospective study in 6252 single embryo transfers to construct an embryo score for the ranking and selection of embryos.

Authors:  A Rhenman; L Berglund; T Brodin; M Olovsson; K Milton; N Hadziosmanovic; J Holte
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2014-11-05       Impact factor: 6.918

6.  Delayed blastocyst development does not influence the outcome of frozen-thawed transfer cycles.

Authors:  T El-Toukhy; E Wharf; R Walavalkar; A Singh; V Bolton; Y Khalaf; P Braude
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2011-09-06       Impact factor: 6.531

7.  Human pregnancy following cryopreservation, thawing and transfer of an eight-cell embryo.

Authors:  A Trounson; L Mohr
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1983 Oct 20-26       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Accelerated endometrial maturation in the luteal phase of cycles utilizing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: impact of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists versus antagonists.

Authors:  Peyman Saadat; Robert Boostanfar; Cristin C Slater; David E Tourgeman; Frank Z Stanczyk; Richard J Paulson
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 7.329

9.  Blastocyst development rate impacts outcome in cryopreserved blastocyst transfer cycles.

Authors:  Eric D Levens; Brian W Whitcomb; Sasha Hennessy; Aidita N James; Belinda J Yauger; Frederick W Larsen
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2008-01-07       Impact factor: 7.329

10.  The clinical outcomes of day 3 4-cell embryos after extended in vitro culture.

Authors:  Ping Zhao; Ming Li; Ying Lian; Xiaoying Zheng; Ping Liu; Jie Qiao
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2014-10-12       Impact factor: 3.412

View more
  3 in total

1.  Should the flexibility enabled by performing a day-4 embryo transfer remain as a valid option in the IVF laboratory? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  M Simopoulou; K Sfakianoudis; P Tsioulou; A Rapani; E Maziotis; P Giannelou; S Grigoriadis; A Pantou; K Nikolettos; N Vlahos; K Pantos; M Koutsilieris
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2019-05-20       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  The effect of fresh IVF cycle characteristics on frozen embryo transfer (FET) outcomes.

Authors:  Nayla J Bushaqer; Noor N Alkhudhairy; Ziyad M Alturaigi; Rowaida M Alhamad; Wadha A Mohawesh; Fatema E Alraka; Hisham A Ayyoub; M Dayou Nawal
Journal:  JBRA Assist Reprod       Date:  2020-05-01

3.  Clinical Outcome of Day-3 Cleavage Slow-Growing Embryos at Different Cleavage Rates after Overnight Culture: A Cohort Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Lan Geng; Xinran Lin; Rang Liu; Jiahui Wu; Yongsheng Luo; Hongmei Sun; Zhenhui Hou; Qiuju Zhang; Chang Xu; Xiao Li; Canhui Cao; Tianren Wang; Xi Xia
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-07-29       Impact factor: 4.964

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.