Should zygote intrafallopian transfer be offered to all patients with unexplained repeated in-vitro fertilization cycle failures?

Journal of Ovarian Research

Raoul Orvieto¹  Masha Brengauz¹  Jehoshua Dor¹  Gil Yerushalmi¹  Jacob Levron¹  Itai Gat² 

[1] Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel;Pinchas Borenstein Talpiot Medical Leadership Program, Chaim Sheba Medical Center (Tel Hashomer), Ramat Gan, Israel

关键词: Pregnancy rate;    Repeated implantation failure;    IVF;    ZIFT;   

Others  :  802172
DOI  :  10.1186/1757-2215-7-7

 received in 2013-11-01, accepted in 2014-01-16,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

One of the suggest strategy for patients with repeated implantation failure (RIF) is zygote intrafallopian transfer (ZIFT). However, no data exist regarding to the issue of when and under which circumstances should ZIFT be offered to patients with RIF? We therefore aimed to examine whether repeated implantation failure (RIF) patients characteristics or their previous controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) variables may differentiate between those who will conceive following a ZIFT cycle and those who will not.

Methods

Forty seven consecutive women admitted to our IVF unit during a 7 year period, who underwent ZIFT for RIF, were included. Ovarian stimulation characteristics, number of oocytes retrieved and number and quality of zygotes/embryos transferred were assessed and compared between the ZIFT cycle and the previous IVF/ICSI cycle and between those who conceived following the ZIFT cycle and those who did not.

Results

Twelve clinical pregnancies (clinical pregnancy rate- 25.5%) were recorded following the ZIFT cycle. Those who benefit from ZIFT were young patients (≤31 yrs), who underwent ≤6 cycle attempts, yielding over eight 2PN embryos with low (≤0.4) ratio of number of top-quality embryos to total 2PN embryos. Moreover, in those destined for a ZIFT cycle, only those with >7 2PN embryo should undergo a transfer of at least five 2PN embryos.

Conclusions

Further large prospective studies are needed to identify the specific characteristics of RIF women who may benefit from ZIFT.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Gat et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Penzias AS: Improving results with assisted reproductive technologies: individualized patient-tailored strategies for ovulation induction. Reprod Biomed Online 2004, 9:43-46.
• [2]Killick S: Ultrasound and the receptivity of the endometrium. Reprod Biomed Online 2007, 15:63-67.
• [3]Templeton A, Morris JK: Reducing the risk of multiple births by transfer of two embryos after in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med 1998, 339:573-577.
• [4]Meldrum DR, Silverberg KM, Bustillo M, Stokes L: Success rate with repeated cycles of in vitro fertilization–embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 1998, 69:1005-1009.
• [5]Homburg S, Meltcer J, Rabinson S, Scharf EY, Anteby R, Orvieto : Is there a limit for the number of in-vitro fertilization cycles for an individual patient? Fertil Steril 2009, 91:1329-1331.
• [6]Margalioth EJ, Ben-Chetrit A, Gal M, Eldar-Geva T: Investigation and treatment of repeated implantation failure following IVF-ET. Hum Reprod 2006, 21:3036-3043.
• [7]Urman B, Yakin K, Balaban B: Recurrent implantation failure in assisted reproduction: how to counsel and manage. B. Treatment options that have not been proven to benefit the couple. Reprod Biomed Online 2005, 11:382-391.
• [8]Orvieto R, Meltcer S, Liberty G, Rabinson J, Anteby EY, Nahum R: A combined approach to patients with repeated IVF failures. Fertil Steril 2010, 94:2462-2464.
• [9]Levran D, Mashiach S, Dor J, Levron J, Farhi J: Zygote intrafallopian transfer may improve pregnancy rate in patients with repeated failure of implantation. Fertil Steril 1998, 69:26-30.
• [10]Levran D, Farhi J, Nahum H, Royburt M, Glezerman M, Weissman A: Prospective evaluation of blastocyst stage transfer vs. zygote intrafallopian tube transfer in patients with repeated implantation failure. Fertil Steril 2002, 77:971-977.
• [11]Aslan D, Elizur SE, Levron J, Shulman A, Lerner-Geva L, Bider D, Dor J: Comparison of zygote intrafallopian tube transfer and transcervical uterine embryo transfer in patients with repeated implantation failure. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2005, 122:191-194.
• [12]Habana A, Palter SF: Is tubal embryo transfer of any value? A meta analysis and comparison with the society for assisted reproductive technology database. Fertil Steril 2001, 76:286-293.
• [13]Weissman A, Horowitz E, Ravhon A, Nahum H, Golan A, Levran D: Zygote intrafallopian transfer among patients with repeated implantation failure. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2013, 120:70-73.
• [14]Ziebe S, Lundin K, Janssens R, Helmgaard L: Arce JC for the MERIT Group Influence of ovarian stimulation with HP-hMG or recombinant FSH on embryo quality parameters in patients undergoing IVF. Hum Reprod 2007, 22:2404-2413.