medigraphic.com
Federación Mexicana de Ginecología y Obstetricia, A.C.

2017, Number 10

<< Back Next >>

Ginecol Obstet Mex 2017; 85 (10)

Results after elective single embryo transfer: Fresh euploid embryo transfer versus frozen-thawed transfer cycles

Hernández-Nieto CA, Morales-Domínguez L, Luna-Rojas M, Cervantes-Bravo E, Rodríguez-Purata J, Sandler B

Language: Spanish
References: 43
Page: 685-693
PDF size: 465.36 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objetive: To analyze the implantation and pregnancy rates in cycles of in vitro fertilization with elective transfer of a single blastocyst, with control of the embryonic factor by transfer of euploid embryos.
Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis who included patients that underwent IVF and had at least one euploid embryo available for transfer between 2010 and 2015 on a single academic private practice. Cohorts were segregated in fresh embryo transfers (ET) vs frozen/thawed ET. Categorical variables were analyzed with χ2 and Fisher test when appropriate. Continuous variables were analyzed with Students t test. P value ‹ 0.5 was established as statistically significant. SAS/STAT 9.4 was used for analysis.
Results: Six hundred and thirty-seven euploid SETs cycles (fresh cycle: n = 243; frozen/thaw cycle: n = 394) were identified. Pregnancy (75.5% (n=289) vs 66.3% (n = 159)) and clinical pregnancy rates (PR) (62.5% (n = 235) vs 53.1% (n = 127)) were statistically higher in the frozen/thaw cycles. Low rates of multiple pregnancies (1.7 and 1.6%) were observed in both cohorts.
Conclusions: In one of the largest studies to date, a euploid SET during a frozen/thaw cycle showed significantly improved pregnancy and clinical PR compared to embryo transfer in fresh cycles. Single embryo transfer significantly reduces the incidence of multiple gestation and improves maternal and neonatal outcomes. An optimal outcome is achieved by the performance of a SET in FET cycles.


REFERENCES

  1. Huang Jin, Rong Li, Ying Lian, Lixue Chen, Xiaodan Shi, Jie Qiao, Ping Liu. Vitrified/warmed single blastocyst transfer in preimplantation genetic diagnosis/preimplantation genetic screening cycles. Int J Clin Exp Med 2015;8(11):221605-21610.

  2. Glujovsky D, Farguhar C, Quinteiro Retamar AM, Alvarez Sedo CR, Blake D. Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jun 30;(6):CD002118.

  3. Martínez-Robles IM, González-Ortega C, Saavedra-Campos P, Chavarría-Noriega R, Pérez-Peña E, Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez AM. Administración de hormona luteinizante recombinante (LHr) como protocolo de estimulación ovárica controlada en FIV-ICSI. Ginecol Obstet Mex. 2016 oct;84(10):630-638.

  4. Li W, Xue X, et al. Blastocyst transfer is not associated with increased unfavorable obstetric and perinatal outcomes compared with cleavage-stage embryo transfer. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2017 May 31:1-4.

  5. Barrie A, Homburg R, McDowell G, Brown J, Kingsland C, Troup S. Preliminary investigation of the prevalence and implantation potential of abnormal embryonic phenotypes assessed using time-lapse imaging. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017 Mar 1.

  6. Bolton VN, Wren ME, Parsons JH. Pregnancies after in vitro fertilization and transfer of human blastocysts. Fertil Steril. 1991;55: 830–2.

  7. Scott RT Jr, Upham KM, Forman EJ, Zhao T, Treff NR.Cleavage-stage biopsy significantly impairs human embryonic implantation potential while blastocyst biopsy does not: a randomized and paired clinical trial. Fertil Steril. 2013 Sep;100(3):624-30.

  8. Vera-Rodriguez M, Shawn L. Chavez, Carmen Rubio, Renee A. Reijo Pera, Carlos Simon. Prediction model for aneuploidy in early human embryo development revealed by single-cell analysis. Nat Commun. 2015 Jul 7;6:7601).

  9. Maheshwari A, Hamilton M, Bhattacharya S. Should we be promoting embryo transfer at blastocyst stage?. Reprod Biomed Online. 2016 Feb:32(2): 142-6.35.

  10. Dahdouh E., Balayla J., García-Velasco J. Comprehensive chromosome screening improves embryo selection: a meta- analysis. Fertility and Sterility. (2015) 104(6):1503-1512.

  11. Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J, Sikkema- Raddatz B, Korevaar JC, Verhoeve HR, Vogel NE, Arts EG, de Vries JW, Bossuyt PM, Buys CH, Heineman MJ, Repping S, van der Veen F. In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N Engl J Med. 2007 Jul 5;357(1):9-17.

  12. Fernández SF, Toro E, Colomar A, López-Teijón M, Velilla E.A 24-chromosome FISH technique in preimplantation genetic diagnosis: validation of the method. Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2015 Jun;61(3):171-7.

  13. Hellani A, Abu-Amero K, Azouri J, El-Akoum S. Successful pregnancies after application of array-comparative genomic hybridization in PGS-aneuploidy screening. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008 Dec;17(6):841-7

  14. Schoolcraft WB, Treff NR, Stevens JM, Ferry K, Katz-Jaffe M, Scott RT Jr Live birth outcome with trophectoderm biopsy, blastocyst vitrification, and single-nucleotide polymorphism microarray-based comprehensive chromosome screening in infertile patients. Fertil Steril. 2011 Sep;96(3):638-40

  15. Treff NR, Tao X, Ferry KM, Su J, Taylor D, Scott RT Jr. Development and validation of an accurate quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction-based assay for human blastocyst comprehensive chromosomal aneuploidy screening. Fertil Steril. 2012 Apr;97(4):819-24

  16. Treff NR, Fedick A, Tao X, Devkota B, Taylor D, Scott RT Jr. Evaluation of targeted next-generation sequencing-based preimplantation genetic diagnosis of monogenic disease. Fertil Steril. 2013 Apr;99(5):1377-1384.

  17. Fiorentino F, Bono S, Biricik A, Nuccitelli A, Cotroneo E, Cottone G, Kokocinski F, Michel CE, Minasi MG, Greco E. Application of next-generation sequencing technology for comprehensive aneuploidy screening of blastocysts in clinical preimplantation genetic screening cycles. Hum Reprod. 2014 Dec;29(12):2802-13.

  18. Xu Jiawei, Niu Wenbin, Peng Zhaofeng, Bao Xiao, Zhang Meixiang, Wang Linlin, Du Linqing, Zhang Nan, Sun Yingpu. Comparative study of single-nucleotide polymorphism array and next generation sequencing based strategies on triploid identification in preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screen. Oncotarget. 2016 7(49): 81839-81848.

  19. Germond M, Primi MP, Urner F, Chanson A, Wirthner D, Senn A. Number of transferred embryos: how to reduce multiple pregnancies. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2004 Dec; 1034:93-100.

  20. Grifo JA, Hodes-Wertz B, Lee HL, Amperloquio E, Clarke-Williams M, Adler A. Single thawed euploid embryo transfer improves IVF pregnancy, miscarriage, and multiple gestation outcomes and has similar implantation rates as egg donation. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013 Feb;30(2):259-64.

  21. Forman EJ, Tao X, Ferry KM, Taylor D, Treff NR, Scott RT Jr. Single embryo transfer with comprehensive chromosome screening results in improved ongoing pregnancy rates and decreased miscarriage rates. Hum Reprod 2012;27:1217–22

  22. Coates Alison BS, Kung Allen, BS, Mounts Emily, MS, Hesla John, MD, Bankowski B MD, Barbieri E MD y cols. Optimal euploid embryo transfer strategy, fresh versus frozen, after preimplantation genetic screening with next generation sequencing: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2017 Jan 27. pii: S0015-0282(16)63094-7.

  23. Bhattacharya S, MD. Maternal and perinatal outcomes after fresh versus frozen embryo transfer – what is the risk-benefit ratio?. Fertil Steril. 2016 Agu;106 (2) 241 -243.

  24. Cedars MI. Fresh versus frozen: initial transfer or cumulative cycle results: how do we interpret results and design studies? Fertil Steril 2016 Agu;106(2):251-6.

  25. Rodriguez-Purata J, Lee Joseph, Whitehouse M, Duke M, Grunfeld L, Sandler B, y cols. Reproductive outcome is optimized by genomic embryo screening, vitrification, and subsequent transfer into a prepared synchronous endometrium. J Assist Reprod Genet 2016 Mar;33(3):401-12

  26. Groenewoud ER, Cantineau AE, Kollen BJ, Macklon NS, Cohlen BJ. What is the optimal means of preparing the endometrium in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2013 Sep-Oct;19(5):458-70.

  27. Legro RS. Introduction: Evidence-based in vitro fertilization treatment of fresh versus frozen embryo transfer: peeling away the layers of the onion. Fertil Steril. 2016 Agu;106(2):239-40

  28. Roque M, Lattes K, Serra S, Sola I, Geber S, Carreras R, Checa MA. Fresh embryo transfer versus frozen embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization cycles:a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2013 Jan;99 (1):156-62

  29. Shapiro B, Daneshmand S, Garner F, Aguirre M, Hudson C. 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. Fertil Steril. 2011 Agu;96(2):344-348.

  30. Shapiro B, Daneshmand S, De Leon L, Garner F, Aguirre M, Hudson C. Frozen-thawed embryo transfer is associated with a significantly reduced incidence of ectopic pregnancy. Fertil Seril. 2012 Dec;98 (6):1490-1494.

  31. Navot D, Bergh P, Williams M, Garrisi G, Guzman I, Sandler B, Fox J, Schreiner-Engel P, Hofmann G, Grunfeld L. An Insight into Early Reproductive Processes through the in Vivo Model of Ovum Donation. Journ Clin Endocr Metab. 1991 72(2).

  32. Lee E, Illingworth P, Wilton L, Chambers GM. The clinical effectiveness of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy in all 24 chromosomes (PGD-A): systematic review. Hum Reprod. 2015 Feb;30(2):473-83.

  33. Lawrenz B, Fatemi HM. Effect of progesterone elevation in follicular phase of IVF-cycles on the endometrial receptivity. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017 Jan 24(17).

  34. Al-Azemi M, Kyrou D, Kolibianakis EM, Humaidan P, Van- Vaerenbergh I, Devroey P, Fatemi HM. Elevated progesterone during ovarian stimulation for IVF. Reprod Biomed Online. 2012 Apr;24(4):381-8.

  35. Ming L, Liu P, Qiao J, Lian Y, Zheng X, Ren X, Huang J, Wu Y. Synchronization between embryo development and endometrium is a contributing factor for rescue ICSI outcome. Reprod Biomed Online. 2012 May;24(5):527-31.

  36. Healy MW, Yamasaki M, Patounakis G, Richter KS, Devine K, DeCherney AH, Hill MJ. The slow growing embryo and premature progesterone elevation: compounding factors for embryo-endometrial asynchrony. Hum Reprod. 2017 Feb;32(2):362-367.

  37. Veleva Z, Orava M, Nuojua-Huttunen S, Tapanainen JS, Martikainen H. Factors affecting the outcome of frozen-thawed embryo transfer. Hum Reprod 2013 Sep;28(9):2425-31.

  38. Roque M, Valle M, Guimaraes F, Sampaio M, Geber S. Freeze-all policy: fresh vs. Frozen-thawed embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2015 may;103(5):1190-3

  39. Maheshwari A, Pandey S, Shetty A, Hamilton M, Bhattacharya S. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies resulting from the transfer of frozen thawed versus fresh embryos generated thorugh in vitro fertilization treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2012 Aug;98(2):368-77.

  40. Orvieto R, Gleicher N. Should preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) be implemented to routine IVF practice? J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016 Nov;33(11):1445 – 1448.

  41. Maxwell SM, Colls P, Hodes-Wertz B, McCulloh DH, McCaffrey C, Wells D, Munné S, Grifo JA. Why do euploid embryos miscarry? A case-control study comparing the rate of aneuploidy within presumed euploid embryos that resulted in miscarriage or live birth using next-generation sequencing. Fertil Steril. 2016 Nov;106(6):1414-1419

  42. Grady R, Alavi N, Vale R, Khandwala M, Mc Donald S. Elective single embryo transfer and perinatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2012 Feb:97(2):324-331

  43. Pereira N, Petrini AC, Lekovich JP, Schattman GL, Rosenwaks Z. Comparison of perinatal outcomes following fresh and frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer. Inf J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016 Oct;135(1):96-100.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com