Clinical outcome of fresh and vitrified-warmed blastocyst and cleavage-stage embryo transfers in ethnic Chinese ART patients

Journal of Ovarian Research

Xiu Feng Ling¹  Boon Chin Heng³  Ji Cui¹  Jun Qiang Zhang¹  Xun Wu¹  Shan Ren Cao¹  Guo Qing Tong² 

[1] Department of Reproduction, Nanjing Maternity and Child Health Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210004, PR China;Reproductive Medicine Center, Shuguang Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 528, Zhangheng Rd, Shanghai 201203, PR China;ETH-Zurich, Department of Biosystem Science & Engineering, Mattenstrasse 26, Basel, 4058, Switzerland

关键词: Implantation;    Clinical pregnancy;    Vitrification;    Blastocyst transfer;   

Others  :  814959
DOI  :  10.1186/1757-2215-5-27

 received in 2012-08-27, accepted in 2012-09-25,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Objectives

This study sought to evaluate the outcome of fresh and vitrified-warmed cleavage-stage and blastocyst-stage embryo transfers in patients undergoing ART treatment within an ethnic Chinese population.

Study design

We compared the clinical results of embryo transfer on the 3rd (cleavage stage) or 5th (blastocyst stage) day after oocyte retrieval, including clinical pregnancy rates, implantation rates and multiple pregnancy rates.

Results

Our data showed that blastocyst transfer on day 5 did not significantly increase clinical pregnancy rate (41.07% vs 47.08%, p>0.05) and implantation rate (31.8% vs 31.2%, p>0.05) in patients under 35 years of age, in comparison with day 3 cleavage stage embryo transfer. In patients older than 35 years of age, the clinical pregnancy rate after blastocyst transfer was slightly decreased compared with cleavage stage embryo transfer (33.33% vs 42.31%, p>0.05). Unexpectedly, It was found that vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer resulted in significantly higher clinical pregnancy rate (56.8%) and implantation rate (47%) compared with fresh blastocyst transfer in controlled stimulation cycles (41.07% and 31.8%, respectively). For patients under 35 years of age, the cumulative clinical pregnancy rate combining fresh and vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer cycles were significantly higher compared to just cleavage-stage embryo transfer (70.1% versus 51.8%, p<0.05). However, the cumulative multiple pregnancy rates showed no significant difference between the two groups.

Conclusions

In an ethnic Chinese patient population, fresh blastocyst transfer does not significantly increase clinical pregnancy rate. However, subsequent vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer in a non-controlled ovarian hyperstimulation cycle dramatically improves clinical outcomes. Therefore, blastocyst culture in tandem with vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer is recommended as a favourable and promising protocol in human ART treatment, particularly for ethnic Chinese patients.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Tong et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Mettler L, Michelmann HW, Riedel HH, et al.: In vitro fertilization and embryo replacement at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Kiel, F.R.G. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf 1984, 1:250-262.
• [2]Nyboe Andersen A, Goossens V, Ferraretti AP, et al.: The European IVF-monitoring Consortium, for the European Society of Human Reproduction, Embryology (ESHRE). Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2004: results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod 2008, 23:756-771.
• [3]Wang YA, Chambers GM, Dieng M, et al.: Assisted Reproductive Technology in Australia and New Zealand 2007. AIHW National Perinatal Statistics Unit, Sydney, Australia; 2009. [Assisted Reproduction Technology Series]
• [4]Blake D, Farquhar C, Johnson N, Proctor M: Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted conception (Review). Cochrane Data base of Systematic reviews 2007, 4:CD002118.
• [5]Blake D, Proctor M, Johnson N, Olive D: Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted conception. The Cochrane Collaboration 2005, 4:CD002118.
• [6]Langen ES, Shahine LK, Lamb JD, et al.: Asian Ethnicity and Poor Outcomes After In Vitro Fertilization Blastocyst Transfer. Obstet Gynecol 2010, 115(3):591-596.
• [7]Tiitinen A, Halttunen M, Harkki P, et al.: Elective single embryo transfer: the value of cryopreservation. Hum Reprod 2001, 16:1140-1144.
• [8]Jun Qiang Z, Xiu Ling L, Peng Yz, et al.: Reproduction in exposure of human embryos outside the incubator enhances embryo quality and blastocyst rate. Reproductive BioMedcine Online 2010, 20:510-515.
• [9]Gardner DK, Lane M: Culture and selection of viable human blastocysts:feasible proposition for human IVF? Hum Reprod Update 1997, 3:367-382.
• [10]Kuwayama M, Vajta G, Ieda S, Kato O: Vitrification of human embryos using the CryoTip TM method. Reprod Biomed 2005, 11:608-614.
• [11]Kuwayama M: Highly efficient vitrification for cryopreservation of human oocytes and embryos: The Cryotop method. Theriogenology 2007, 67:73-80.
• [12]Luca Dal P, Andrea B, Monica C, et al.: Endometrial preparation for frozen-thawed embryo transfer with or without pretreatment with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist. Fertil Steril 2002, 77:956-960.
• [13]Sathanandan M, Macnamee MC, Rainsbury P, et al.: Replacement of frozen-thawed embryos in artificial and natural cycles: a prospective semi-randomized study. Hum Reprod 1991, 6:685-687.
• [14]Muasher SJ, Kruithoff C, Simonetti S, et al.: Controlled preparation of the endometrium with exogenous steroids for the transfer of frozen-thawed pre-embryos in patients with anovulatory or irregular cycles. Hum Reprod 1991, 6:443-445.
• [15]Weissman A, Biran G, Nahum H, et al.: Blastocyst culture and transfer: lessons from an unselected, difficult IVF population. Reprod Biomed Online 2008, 17:220-228.
• [16]Gardner DK, Surrey E, Minjarez D, et al.: Single blastocyst transfer: A propective randomized trial. Fertil Steril 2004, 81:551-555.
• [17]Papanikolaou EG, Camus M, Kolibianakis EM, et al.: Transfer of a single blastocyst-stage embryo as compared with a single cleavage-stage embryo for in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med 2006, 354:1139-1146.
• [18]Birmingham A: Blastocyst culture and transfer in clinical-assisted reproduction. Fertil Steril 2008, 90:174-177.
• [19]Mangalraj AM, Muthukumar K, Aleyamma T, et al.: Blastocyst stage transfer vs cleavage stage embryo transfer. J Hum Reprod Sci. 2009, 2:23-26.
• [20]Guerif F, Lemseffer M, Bidault R, et al.: Single Day 2 embryo versus blastocyst-stage transfer: a prospective study integrating fresh and frozen embryo transfers. Hum Reprod 2009, 24:1051-1058.
• [21]Racowsky C, Jackson KV, Cekleniak NA, et al.: The number of eight-cell embryos is a key determinant for selecting day 3 or day 5 transfer. Fertil Steril 2000, 73:558-564.
• [22]Guerif F, Le Gouge A, Giraudeau B, et al.: Limited value of morphological assessment at days 1 and 2 to predict blastocyst development potential: a prospective study based on 4042 embryos. Hum Reprod 2007, 22:1973-1981.
• [23]Milki AA, Hinckley MD, Gebhardt J, et al.: Accuracy of day 3 criteria for selecting the best embryos. Fertil Steril 2002, 77:1191-1195.
• [24]Papanikolaou EG, Kolibianakis EM, Tournaye H, et al.: Live birth rates after transfer of equal number of blastocysts or cleavage-stage embryos in IVF. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod 2008, 23:91-99.
• [25]Aflatoonian A, Oskouian H, Ahmadi S, et al.: Can fresh embryo transfers be replaced by cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfers in assisted reproductive cycles? A randomized controlled trial. J Assist Reprod Genet 2010, 27:357-363.
• [26]Sills ES, Palermo GD: Human blastocyst culture in IVF: current laboratory applications in reproductive medicine practice. Romanian J Morphology and Embryology 2010, 51(3):441-445.
• [27]Shapiro B, Daneshmand S, Garner F, et al.: Large blastocyst diameter, early blastulation, and low preovulatory serum progesterone are dominant predictors of clinical pregnancy in fresh autologous cycles. Fertil Steril 2008, 90:302-329.
• [28]Conti M: When an egg is not an egg: compromised maternal mRNA storage and stabilization. Biol Reprod 2011, 85(3):429-430.
• [29]Jedrusik A, Bruce AW, Tan MH, Leong DE, Skamagki M, Yao M, Zernicka-Goetz M: Maternally and zygotically provided Cdx2 have novel and critical roles for early development of the mouse embryo. Dev Biol 2010, 344(1):66-78.
• [30]Li L, Sun L, Gao F, Jiang J, Yang Y, Li C, Gu J, Wei Z, Yang A, Lu R, Ma Y, Tang F, Kwon SW, Zhao Y, Li J, Jin Y: Stk40 links the pluripotency factor Oct4 to the Erk/MAPK pathway and controls extraembryonic endoderm differentiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010, 107(4):1402-1407.