| Literature DB >> 31902102 |
Lan N Vuong1,2,3, Anh H Le4,5, Vu N A Ho4,5, Toan D Pham4,5, Flor Sanchez6,7, Sergio Romero6,7, Michel De Vos6, Tuong M Ho4,5, Robert B Gilchrist8, Johan Smitz6.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Standard oocyte in vitro maturation (IVM) usually results in lower pregnancy rates than in vitro fertilization (IVF). IVM preceded by a prematuration step improves the acquisition of oocyte developmental competence and can enhance embryo quality (EQ). This study evaluated the effectiveness of a biphasic culture system incorporating prematuration and IVM steps (CAPA-IVM) versus standard IVM in women with polycystic ovarian morphology (PCOM).Entities:
Keywords: C-type natriuretic peptide; In vitro fertilization; In vitro maturation; Oocyte prematuration; Polycystic ovary syndrome
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31902102 PMCID: PMC7056678 DOI: 10.1007/s10815-019-01677-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet ISSN: 1058-0468 Impact factor: 3.412
Fig. 1CONSORT diagram. AFC, antral follicle count; CAPA-IVM, capacitation in vitro maturation; FET, frozen embryo transfer; IUI, intrauterine insemination; IVF, in vitro fertilization; IVM, in vitro maturation; OPU, oocyte pick-up; PGS, preimplantation genetic screening
Fig. 2Study schedule for CAPA-IVM and standard IVM (control). Patients were randomized to CAPA-IVM or standard IVM. The stimulation protocols are identical in the two arms. Patients received approximately 2.5 days of gonadotropin priming and no human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) priming. CAPA-IVM group allocated patients had their oocytes 24-h longer in a prematuration culture (orange bar). All embryos were vitrified and transferred in subsequent cycles. CAPA, capacitation prematuration; D3, day 3; Gn, gonadotrophin; IVM, in vitro maturation; OCP, oral contraceptive pill; VIT, vitrification
Baseline patient demographics and clinical characteristics
| Characteristic | CAPA-IVM ( | Standard IVM ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 28.5 ± 3.4 | 28.1 ± 3.1 | 0.52 |
| Body mass index, kg/m2 | 21.8 ± 2.5 | 21.4 ± 2.2 | 0.45 |
| Duration of infertility, years | 2.9 ± 1.5 | 3.0 ± 2.1 | 0.79 |
| Type of infertility, | 0.15 | ||
| Primary | 24 (60.0) | 31 (77.5) | |
| Secondary | 16 (40.0) | 9 (22.5) | |
| Number ART attempts, | 0.99 | ||
| 1 | 38 (95.0) | 37 (92.5) | |
| 2 | 2 (5.0) | 3 (7.5) | |
| Diagnosis, | 0.35 | ||
| PCO morphology + normal menstrual cycle length (group 1) | 4 (10.0) | 8 (20.0) | |
| PCO morphology + oligomenorrhea/amenorrhea (group 2) | 36 (90.0) | 32 (80.0) |
Values are mean ± standard deviation, or number of patients (%)
CAPA capacitation prematuration, IVF in vitro fertilization, IVM in vitro maturation, ART assisted reproductive technique, PCO polycystic ovary, SD standard deviation
Fig. 3Hormonal profiles during CAPA-IVM (n = 40) compared with standard IVM (n = 40). Serum concentrations of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), estradiol, and progesterone were measured from the day of first visit until the day of immature cumulus-oocyte complex retrieval for both IVM treatments. Values are mean ± standard deviation
Cycle parameters
| Characteristic | CAPA-IVM ( | Standard IVM ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Days on gonadotropins, days | 2.5 ± 0.6 | 2.5 ± 0.5 | 0.834 |
| Total dose of gonadotropin used, IU | 378.8 ± 83.1 | 375.0 ± 76.0 | 0.834 |
| Number of follicles at last ultrasound | 35.3 ± 15.4 | 30.9 ± 10.1 | 0.127 |
| Endometrial thickness on day of OPU (mm) | 6.1 ± 2.1 | 6.1 ± 1.6 | 0.93 |
Values are mean ± standard deviation, or number of patients (%)
CAPA capacitation prematuration, FSH follicle-stimulating hormone, HP-hMG highly purified human menotropin, IVM in vitro maturation, LH luteinizing hormone, OPU ovum pick-up
In vitro maturation and embryology outcomes
| Oocyte developmental outcomes | CAPA-IVM ( | Standard IVM ( | Between-group difference (95% CI)a | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of COCs | 17.5 [11.0, 23.0] | 16.5 [9.8, 21.0] | 1 (− 3, 7) | 0.39 |
| % Maturation (MII) | 63.6 [55.0, 75.0] | 49.0 [35.9, 62.1] | 14.6 (5.5, 24) | < 0.001 |
| % Pronuclear stage per ICSI | 84.0 [72.9, 100.0] | 84.50 [72.0, 100.0] | − 0.5 (− 10.7, 11.9) | 0.80 |
| % Grade 1 or 2 embryos per pronuclear stage | 37.5 [23.8, 50.0] | 35.40 [16.4, 50.0] | 2.1 (− 11.5, 14.6) | 0.60 |
| % Grade 1 or 2 embryos per metaphase II | 30.0 [13.9, 43.3] | 26.80 [14.3, 40.7] | 3.2 (− 8.6, 16.2) | 0.70 |
| % Grade 1 or 2 embryos per COC | 18.9 [8.5, 26.9] | 12.7 [7.3, 20.4] | 6.2 (− 1.5, 12.4) | 0.11 |
| No embryo, | 1 (25) | 1 (25) | – | – |
| Frozen embryos remaining after first ET, | 2.5 ± 2.5 | 1.3 ± 1.9 | 0.02 |
Values are median [interquartile range], number of patients (%), mean ± standard deviation, or difference (95% confidence interval)
CAPA capacitation culture, CI confidence interval, COC cumulus-oocyte complex, EQ1 day 3 embryo quality grade 1, EQ2 day 3 embryo quality grade 2, ICSI intracytoplasmic sperm injection, IQR interquartile range, IVM in vitro maturation
aBootstrapping and resampling 1000 times
bWilcoxon rank sum test p value
Fig. 4Comparison of maturation rate between standard and CAPA-IVM in follicles of < 6 mm and ≥ 6 mm. Values are mean ± standard deviation; with Tukey’s HSD-adjusted p value
Pregnancy outcomes after the first transfer
| CAPA-IVM ( | Standard IVM ( | Between-group difference (95% CI) | RR (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of embryos transferreda, | 0.70 | ||||
| 1 | 3 (7.5) | 4 (10.0) | |||
| 2 | 28 (70.0) | 31 (77.5) | |||
| 3 | 7 (17.5) | 4 (10.0) | |||
| No embryo transfera | 2 (5.0) | 1 (2.5) | |||
| Pregnancy outcomesb | |||||
| Positive beta hCG, | 24 (60.0) | 17 (42.5) | 15.2 (− 6.6, 41.6) | 1.4 (0.9, 2.2) | 0.17 |
| Implantation, | 42.1 ± 39.1 | 26.9 ± 38.0 | 13.1 (− 2.3, 32.7) | – | 0.09 |
| Clinical pregnancy, | 24 (60.0) | 15 (37.5) | 22.5 (− 1.3, 46.3) | 1.6 (1, 2.6) | 0.06 |
| Miscarriage (before 12 weeks), | 4 (10.0) | 1 (2.5) | 7.5 (− 5.5, 20.5) | 4 (0.5, 34.2) | 0.39 |
| Ectopic pregnancy, | 1 (2.5) | 0 (0.0) | – | – | 0.63 |
| Ongoing pregnancy, | 19 (47.5) | 14 (35.0) | 12.5 (− 11.4, 36.4) | 1.4 (0.8, 2.3) | 0.43 |
| Miscarriage (at 12–24 weeks), | 0 (0.0) | 1 (2.5) | – | – | 0.99 |
| Preterm delivery, | 2 (5.0) | 4 (10.0) | − 5 (− 19, 9) | 0.5 (0.1, 2.58) | 0.68 |
| < 28 weeks | 0 (0.0) | 2 (5.0) | – | ||
| 28 to < 34 weeks | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | – | ||
| 34 to < 37 weeks | 2 (5.0) | 2 (5.0) | 0.99 | ||
| Gestational age at delivery (weeks) | 37.5 ± 1.0 | 35.1 ± 4.8 | 2.4 (− 0.6, 5.4) | 0.04 | |
| Live birth, | 19 (47.5) | 13 (32.5) | 15 (− 8.7, 38.7) | 1.5 (0.9, 2.5) | 0.37 |
| Singleton | 11 (57.9) | 8 (61.5) | |||
| Twins | 8 (42.1) | 5 (38.5) | |||
| Birth weight, g | |||||
| Singleton | 3045.5 ± 452.5 | 2691.9 ± 873.4 | 353.6 (− 401.3, 1108.5) | 0.78 | |
| Twins | 2325.0 ± 450.9 | 1680.0 ± 639.1 | 645 (150.6, 1139.4) | 0.01 |
CAPA capacitation prematuration, CI confidence interval, hCG human chorionic gonadotropin, IVM in vitro maturation, RR risk ratio
aOne patient has not yet returned for embryo transfer in the CAPA group; two patients had no embryos for transfer (1 in each group)
b Fisher exact test
cAll preterm newborns were alive in both groups