Literature DB >> 32827168

Number of embryos for transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection.

Mohan S Kamath1, Mariano Mascarenhas2, Richard Kirubakaran3, Siladitya Bhattacharya4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Transfer of more than one embryo during in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) increases multiple pregnancy rates resulting in an increased risk of maternal and perinatal morbidity. Elective single embryo transfer offers a means of minimising this risk, but this potential gain needs to be balanced against the possibility of jeopardising the overall live birth rate (LBR).
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different policies for the number of embryos transferred in infertile couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology cycles. SEARCH
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group specialised register of controlled trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception to March 2020. We handsearched reference lists of articles and relevant conference proceedings. We also communicated with experts in the field regarding any additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different policies for the number of embryos transferred following IVF or ICSI in infertile women. Studies of fresh or frozen and thawed transfer of one to four embryos at cleavage or blastocyst stage were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias. The primary outcomes were LBR and multiple pregnancy rate. The secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy and miscarriage rates. We analysed data using risk ratios (RR), Peto odds ratio (Peto OR) and a fixed effect model. MAIN
RESULTS: We included 17 RCTs in the review (2505 women). The main limitation was inadequate reporting of study methods and moderate to high risk of performance bias due to lack of blinding. A majority of the studies had low numbers of participants. None of the trials compared repeated single embryo transfer (SET) with multiple embryo transfer. Reported results of multiple embryo transfer below refer to double embryo transfer. Repeated single embryo transfer versus multiple embryo transfer in a single cycle Repeated SET was compared with double embryo transfer (DET) in four studies of cleavage-stage transfer. In these studies the SET group received either two cycles of fresh SET (one study) or one cycle of fresh SET followed by one frozen SET (three studies). The cumulative live birth rate after repeated SET may be little or no different from the rate after one cycle of DET (RR 0.95, 95% CI (confidence interval) 0.82 to 1.10; I² = 0%; 4 studies, 985 participants; low-quality evidence). This suggests that for a woman with a 42% chance of live birth following a single cycle of DET, the repeated SET would yield pregnancy rates between 34% and 46%. The multiple pregnancy rate associated with repeated SET is probably reduced compared to a single cycle of DET (Peto OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.21; I² = 0%; 4 studies, 985 participants; moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that for a woman with a 13% risk of multiple pregnancy following a single cycle of DET, the risk following repeated SET would be between 0% and 3%. The clinical pregnancy rate (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.12; I² = 47%; 3 studies, 943 participants; low-quality evidence) after repeated SET may be little or no different from the rate after one cycle of DET. There may be little or no difference in the miscarriage rate between the two groups. Single versus multiple embryo transfer in a single cycle A single cycle of SET was compared with a single cycle of DET in 13 studies, 11 comparing cleavage-stage transfers and three comparing blastocyst-stage transfers.One study reported both cleavage and blastocyst stage transfers. Low-quality evidence suggests that the live birth rate per woman may be reduced in women who have SET in comparison with those who have DET (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.75; I² = 0%; 12 studies, 1904 participants; low-quality evidence). Thus, for a woman with a 46% chance of live birth following a single cycle of DET, the chance following a single cycle of SET would be between 27% and 35%. The multiple pregnancy rate per woman is probably lower in those who have SET than those who have DET (Peto OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.22; I² = 0%; 13 studies, 1952 participants; moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that for a woman with a 15% risk of multiple pregnancy following a single cycle of DET, the risk following a single cycle of SET would be between 2% and 4%. Low-quality evidence suggests that the clinical pregnancy rate may be lower in women who have SET than in those who have DET (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.77; I² = 0%; 10 studies, 1860 participants; low-quality evidence). There may be little or no difference in the miscarriage rate between the two groups. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: Although DET achieves higher live birth and clinical pregnancy rates per fresh cycle, the evidence suggests that the difference in effectiveness may be substantially offset when elective SET is followed by a further transfer of a single embryo in fresh or frozen cycle, while simultaneously reducing multiple pregnancies, at least among women with a good prognosis. The quality of evidence was low to moderate primarily due to inadequate reporting of study methods and absence of masking those delivering, as well as receiving the interventions.
Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32827168      PMCID: PMC8094586          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003416.pub5

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


  79 in total

1.  Blastocyst transfer decreases multiple pregnancy rates in in vitro fertilization cycles: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  John L Frattarelli; Mark P Leondires; Jeffrey L McKeeby; Bradley T Miller; James H Segars
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 7.329

Review 2.  Comprehensive chromosome screening of trophectoderm with vitrification facilitates elective single-embryo transfer for infertile women with advanced maternal age.

Authors:  William B Schoolcraft; Mandy G Katz-Jaffe
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 7.329

3.  Introduction of blastocyst culture and transfer for all patients in an in vitro fertilization program.

Authors:  D Marek; M Langley; D K Gardner; N Confer; K M Doody; K J Doody
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 7.329

4.  Elective single embryo transfer versus double embryo transfer in assisted reproduction.

Authors:  Mohamed Khaled Moustafa; Sheded Ashour Sheded; Mohamed Abd El Aziz Mousta
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 3.828

5.  Psychological consequences of having triplets: a 4-year follow-up study.

Authors:  M Garel; C Salobir; B Blondel
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 7.329

6.  Randomized single versus double embryo transfer: obstetric and paediatric outcome and a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Ann Thurin Kjellberg; Per Carlsson; Christina Bergh
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2005-09-19       Impact factor: 6.918

7.  Natural conception rates in couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility scheduled for fertility treatment: a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  R van Eekelen; R I Tjon-Kon-Fat; P M M Bossuyt; N van Geloven; M J C Eijkemans; A J Bensdorp; F van der Veen; B W Mol; M van Wely
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 6.918

Review 8.  Multiple gestation pregnancy. The ESHRE Capri Workshop Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 6.918

9.  Babies born after ART treatment cost more than non-ART babies: a cost analysis of inpatient birth-admission costs of singleton and multiple gestation pregnancies.

Authors:  Georgina M Chambers; Michael G Chapman; Narelle Grayson; Marian Shanahan; Elizabeth A Sullivan
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2007-09-28       Impact factor: 6.918

10.  Prevention of multiple pregnancies in couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility: randomised controlled trial of in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer or in vitro fertilisation in modified natural cycle compared with intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation.

Authors:  A J Bensdorp; R I Tjon-Kon-Fat; P M M Bossuyt; C A M Koks; G J E Oosterhuis; A Hoek; P G A Hompes; F J M Broekmans; H R Verhoeve; J P de Bruin; R van Golde; S Repping; B J Cohlen; M D A Lambers; P F van Bommel; E Slappendel; D Perquin; J M Smeenk; M J Pelinck; J Gianotten; D A Hoozemans; J W M Maas; M J C Eijkemans; F van der Veen; B W J Mol; M van Wely
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2015-01-09
View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  Cleavage-stage versus blastocyst-stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology.

Authors:  Demián Glujovsky; Andrea Marta Quinteiro Retamar; Cristian Roberto Alvarez Sedo; Agustín Ciapponi; Simone Cornelisse; Deborah Blake
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2022-05-19

2.  The Application of Artificial Intelligence in Predicting Embryo Transfer Outcome of Recurrent Implantation Failure.

Authors:  Lei Shen; Yanran Zhang; Wenfeng Chen; Xinghui Yin
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2022-06-30       Impact factor: 4.755

3.  Effectiveness and Safety of Two Consecutive Cycles of Single Embryo Transfer Compared With One Cycle of Double Embryo Transfer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Yangqin Peng; Shujuan Ma; Liang Hu; Xiaojuan Wang; Yiquan Xiong; Minghong Yao; Jing Tan; Fei Gong
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-06-30       Impact factor: 6.055

4.  PGT-A: who and when? Α systematic review and network meta-analysis of RCTs.

Authors:  Mara Simopoulou; Konstantinos Sfakianoudis; Evangelos Maziotis; Petroula Tsioulou; Sokratis Grigoriadis; Anna Rapani; Polina Giannelou; Marilena Asimakopoulou; Georgia Kokkali; Amelia Pantou; Konstantinos Nikolettos; Nikolaos Vlahos; Konstantinos Pantos
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-05-25       Impact factor: 3.357

5.  Analysis of Biochemical and Clinical Pregnancy Loss Between Frozen-Thawed Embryo Transfer of Blastocysts and Day 3 Cleavage Embryos in Young Women: A Comprehensive Comparison.

Authors:  Xiuliang Dai; Tingting Gao; Xiyang Xia; Fang Cao; Chunmei Yu; Tianfu Li; Lingjun Li; Yufeng Wang; Li Chen
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-12-24       Impact factor: 5.555

6.  Clinical outcomes after elective double-embryo transfer in frozen cycles for women of advanced maternal age: A retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Zilian Wang; Haiyan Zhu; Xiaomei Tong; Lingying Jiang; Qun Wei; Songying Zhang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2022-03-04       Impact factor: 1.817

7.  Risk factors for twin pregnancy in women undergoing double cleavage embryo transfer.

Authors:  Panpan Chen; Kai-Lun Hu; Jiani Jin; Ruixue Chen; Qiqi Xu; Wei Zhao; Runju Zhang; Lanfeng Xing; Yimin Zhu; Dan Zhang
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2022-03-29       Impact factor: 3.007

8.  Comparisons of benefits and risks of single embryo transfer versus double embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Shujuan Ma; Yangqin Peng; Liang Hu; Xiaojuan Wang; Yiquan Xiong; Yi Tang; Jing Tan; Fei Gong
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2022-01-27       Impact factor: 5.211

9.  Response to Letter to the editor on: "Never too late? Quadruplets at the age of 65 years".

Authors:  Larry Hinkson; Christof Dame; Thorsten Braun; Irit Nachtigall; Wolfgang Henrich
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2021-11-10       Impact factor: 2.344

10.  POSEIDON classification and the proposed treatment options for groups 1 and 2: time to revisit? A retrospective analysis of 1425 ART cycles.

Authors:  Parimala Chinta; Belavendra Antonisamy; Ann M Mangalaraj; Aleyamma T Kunjummen; Mohan S Kamath
Journal:  Hum Reprod Open       Date:  2021-02-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.