Literature DB >> 27714479

Clinical pregnancy rate following frozen embryo transfer is higher with blastocysts vitrified on day 5 than on day 6.

Jigal Haas1,2, Jim Meriano3, Carl Laskin3, Yaakov Bentov3, Eran Barzilay4, Robert F Casper3, Ken Cadesky3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the pregnancy rates between good quality blastocysts vitrified on day 6 versus blastocysts vitrified on day 5 after fertilization.
METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of 791 freeze-thaw cycles of blastocysts vitrified either on day 5 or on day 6 and transferred between January 2012 and October 2015. Five hundred and thirty-seven cycles included blastocysts vitrified on day 5, and 254 cycles included blastocysts vitrified on day 6.
RESULTS: The age of the patients and the proportion of embryos that survived the thawing process were comparable between the two groups. More good quality embryos were transferred in the group in which blastocysts were vitrified on day 6 (1.2 vs. 1.3, p = 0.005), but the clinical pregnancy rate (44 vs. 33 %, p = 0.002) and the ongoing pregnancy rate (41 vs. 28 %, p < 0.001) were higher in the group in which blastocysts were vitrified on day 5. Multivariate regression analysis adjusting for patient's age, number of good quality embryos transferred (≥3BB), and treatment protocol demonstrated that the day 6 vitrified group had a significantly lower clinical pregnancy rate compared to the day 5 vitrified group (OR 0.54, 95 % CI 0.38-0.76).
CONCLUSIONS: The clinical pregnancy rate following frozen embryo transfer is significantly lower with blastocysts vitrified on day 6 compared to blastocysts vitrified on day 5.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Blastocyst day 6; Frozen embryo transfer; Vitrification

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27714479      PMCID: PMC5171889          DOI: 10.1007/s10815-016-0818-x

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


  22 in total

1.  Comparison of vitrification and conventional cryopreservation of day 5 and day 6 blastocysts during clinical application.

Authors:  Juergen Liebermann; Michael J Tucker
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2006-06-08       Impact factor: 7.329

2.  Contrasting patterns in in vitro fertilization pregnancy rates among fresh autologous, fresh oocyte donor, and cryopreserved cycles with the use of day 5 or day 6 blastocysts may reflect differences in embryo-endometrium synchrony.

Authors:  Bruce S Shapiro; Said T Daneshmand; Forest C Garner; Martha Aguirre; Richard Ross
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2007-01-16       Impact factor: 7.329

3.  Evidence of impaired endometrial receptivity after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a prospective randomized trial comparing fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfer in normal responders.

Authors:  Bruce S Shapiro; Said T Daneshmand; Forest C Garner; Martha Aguirre; Cynthia Hudson; Shyni Thomas
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2011-07-06       Impact factor: 7.329

Review 4.  Clinical rationale for cryopreservation of entire embryo cohorts in lieu of fresh transfer.

Authors:  Bruce S Shapiro; Said T Daneshmand; Forest C Garner; Martha Aguirre; Cynthia Hudson
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2014-05-17       Impact factor: 7.329

5.  Blastocyst culture after repeated failure of cleavage-stage embryo transfers: a comparison of day 5 and day 6 transfers.

Authors:  Gorka Barrenetxea; Arantza López de Larruzea; Teresa Ganzabal; Rosario Jiménez; Koldo Carbonero; Miren Mandiola
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 7.329

6.  Contribution of embryo cryopreservation to elective single embryo transfer in IVF-ICSI.

Authors:  Dominique Le Lannou; Jean-François Griveau; Marie-Christine Laurent; Annie Gueho; Elisabeth Veron; Karine Morcel
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 3.828

Review 7.  Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology.

Authors:  Demián Glujovsky; Debbie Blake; Cindy Farquhar; Ariel Bardach
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-07-11

8.  Factors relating to a successful cryopreserved blastocyst transfer program.

Authors:  Barry Behr; Janice Gebhardt; Jennifer Lyon; Amin A Milki
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 7.329

9.  Elective single-embryo transfer versus double-embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization.

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

10.  Cumulative pregnancy rates and drop-out rates in a German IVF programme: 4102 cycles in 2130 patients.

Authors:  A K Schröder; A Katalinic; K Diedrich; M Ludwig
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 3.828

View more
  20 in total

1.  Lack of evidence to support the superiority of TLI over conventional morphology to select among euploid embryos determined by PGT-A.

Authors:  Yi Guo; Henan Zhang; Shuaishuai Guo
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2019-06-25       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Pregnancy rates for single embryo transfer (SET) of day 5 and day 6 blastocysts after cryopreservation by vitrification and slow freeze.

Authors:  Leah Kaye; Erica Anspach Will; Alison Bartolucci; John Nulsen; Claudio Benadiva; Lawrence Engmann
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-05-12       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Effect of Embryo Developmental Stage, Morphological Grading, and Ploidy Status on Live Birth Rate in Frozen Cycles of Single Blastocyst Transfer.

Authors:  Hui Ji; Yuxi Zhou; Shanren Cao; Junqiang Zhang; Xiufeng Ling; Chun Zhao; Rong Shen
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2020-11-10       Impact factor: 3.060

4.  Increased live births after day 5 versus day 6 transfers of vitrified-warmed blastocysts.

Authors:  Alice Tubbing; Chloë Shaw-Jackson; Lieveke Ameye; Jérôme Colin; Serge Rozenberg; Candice Autin
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 3.412

5.  Day 5 versus Day 6 blastocyst transfers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Mathilde Bourdon; Khaled Pocate-Cheriet; Astri Finet de Bantel; Veronika Grzegorczyk-Martin; Aureli Amar Hoffet; Elisangela Arbo; Marine Poulain; Pietro Santulli
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2019-10-02       Impact factor: 6.918

6.  Extended culture of poor-quality supernumerary embryos improves ART outcomes.

Authors:  Amira Sallem; Pietro Santulli; Virginie Barraud-Lange; Nathalie Le Foll; Lucile Ferreux; Chloé Maignien; Mathilde Bourdon; Charles Chapron; Dominique de Ziegler; Jean-Philippe Wolf; Khaled Pocate-Cheriet
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-10-18       Impact factor: 3.412

7.  Live Birth Rate of Frozen-Thawed Single Blastocyst Transfer After 6 or 7 Days of Progesterone Administration in Hormone Replacement Therapy Cycles: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study.

Authors:  Xinhong Yang; Zhiqin Bu; Linli Hu
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-08-11       Impact factor: 5.555

8.  Comparison of pregnancy and live birth rates between fresh day 5 morula transfer and fresh day 6 blastocyst transfer following extended culture for slow growing embryos.

Authors:  Firat Tulek; Alper Kahraman
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2022-07-13       Impact factor: 2.493

9.  Toward embryo cryopreservation-on-a-chip: A standalone microfluidic platform for gradual loading of cryoprotectants to minimize cryoinjuries.

Authors:  Pouria Tirgar; Fatemeh Sarmadi; Mojgan Najafi; Parinaz Kazemi; Sina AzizMohseni; Samaneh Fayazi; Ghazaleh Zandi; Nikta Ziaie; Aida Shoushtari Zadeh Naseri; Allen Ehrlicher; Mojtaba Dashtizad
Journal:  Biomicrofluidics       Date:  2021-05-18       Impact factor: 2.800

10.  Effect of Day 3 and Day 5/6 Embryo Quality on the Reproductive Outcomes in the Single Vitrified Embryo Transfer Cycles.

Authors:  Ningling Wang; Xinxi Zhao; Meng Ma; Qianqian Zhu; Yao Wang
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-04-23       Impact factor: 5.555

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.