Sequential embryo transfer versus double cleavage-stage embryo or double blastocyst transfer in patients with recurrent implantation failure with frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: a cohort study

被引:8
作者
Gao, Jiangman [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Yuan, Yifeng [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Li, Jia [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Tian, Tian [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Lian, Ying [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Liu, Ping [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Li, Rong [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Qiao, Jie [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Long, Xiaoyu [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Wang, Haiyan [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Peking Univ Third Hosp, Ctr Reprod Med, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, State Key Lab Female Fertil Promot, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] Peking Univ Third Hosp, Natl Clin Res Ctr Obstet & Gynecol, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Beijing, Peoples R China
[3] Peking Univ, Peking Univ Hosp 3, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Key Lab Assisted Reprod, Beijing, Peoples R China
[4] Peking Univ Third Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Beijing Key Lab Reprod Endocrinol & Assisted Repro, Beijing, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
repeated implantation failure; frozen-thawed embryo transfer; sequential embryo transfer; cleavage-stage embryo transfer; blastocyst transfer;
D O I
10.3389/fendo.2023.1238251
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) is more common among patients receiving assisted reproductive treatment. Many efforts have been made to increase the incidence of clinical pregnancy among patients with RIF. The effect of the sequential transfer procedure, a two-step interval transfer of a cleavage-stage embryo followed by a blastocyst in one transfer cycle, on the clinical outcomes of RIF patients remains controversial.Methods In total, 1774 frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles in RIF patients were included. Of these cycles, 302 were sequential embryo transfer (ET) cycles, 979 were double day 3 cleavage-stage ET cycles, and 493 were double blastocyst ET cycles. The primary outcomes were the rates of implantation, clinical pregnancy and multiple pregnancy, and the secondary outcomes were the rates of hCG positive, early miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy.Results The implantation, hCG positive, and clinical pregnancy rates in the sequential ET group (32.1%, 58.9%, 50.7%) were significantly higher than those in the day 3 cleavage-stage ET group (24.9%, 46.5%, 40.4%) and were similar to those in the blastocyst transfer group (30.1%, 56.4%, 47.1%). The early miscarriage rate in the blastocyst transfer group was significantly higher than that in the cleavage-stage ET group (17.2% vs. 8.1%, P <0.05), while the ectopic pregnancy rate in the blastocyst transfer group was significantly lower than that in the cleavage-stage ET group (0.4% vs. 3.0%, P <0.05). The multiple pregnancy rate in the sequential ET group was significantly lower than that in the cleavage-stage ET group (17.0% vs. 25.5%, P <0.05) and the blastocyst transfer group (17.0% vs. 27.6%, P <0.05). When cycles of blastocyst culture failure were excluded, the clinical pregnancy rate was significantly higher (55.7% vs. 47.1%, P <0.05), and the early miscarriage rate and multiple pregnancy rate were significantly lower (8.5% vs. 17.2%, 17.7% vs. 27.6%; P <0.05, respectively) in the sequential ET group than in the double blastocyst ET group.Conclusions Sequential embryo transfer in FET cycles could improve the clinical outcomes of patients with RIF.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]   PREGNANCIES FOLLOWING THE INTERVAL DOUBLE-TRANSFER TECHNIQUE IN AN INVITRO FERTILIZATION EMBRYO TRANSFER PROGRAM [J].
ABRAMOVICI, H ;
DIRNFELD, M ;
WEISMAN, Z ;
SOROKIN, Y ;
LISSAK, A ;
ROFE, A ;
SHEINFELD, M .
JOURNAL OF IN VITRO FERTILIZATION AND EMBRYO TRANSFER, 1988, 5 (03) :175-176
[2]  
Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine and ESHRE Special Interest Group of Embryology, 2011, Hum Reprod, V26, P1270, DOI 10.1093/humrep/der037
[3]  
Arefi Soheila, 2022, J Med Life, V15, P1365, DOI 10.25122/jml-2022-0041
[4]   Recurrent Implantation Failure-update overview on etiology, diagnosis, treatment and future directions [J].
Bashiri, Asher ;
Halper, Katherine Ida ;
Orvieto, Raoul .
REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY AND ENDOCRINOLOGY, 2018, 16
[5]   How common is real repeated implantation failure? An indirect estimate of the prevalence [J].
Busnelli, Andrea ;
Reschini, Marco ;
Cardellicchio, Lucia ;
Vegetti, Walter ;
Somigliana, Edgardo ;
Vercellini, Paolo .
REPRODUCTIVE BIOMEDICINE ONLINE, 2020, 40 (01) :91-97
[6]   Mechanisms of implantation: strategies for successful pregnancy [J].
Cha, Jeeyeon ;
Sun, Xiaofei ;
Dey, Sudhansu K. .
NATURE MEDICINE, 2012, 18 (12) :1754-1767
[7]   Hospital Costs of Multiple-Birth and Singleton-Birth Children During the First 5 Years of Life and the Role of Assisted Reproductive Technology [J].
Chambers, Georgina M. ;
Van Phuong Hoang ;
Lee, Evelyn ;
Hansen, Michele ;
Sullivan, Elizabeth A. ;
Bower, Carol ;
Chapman, Michael .
JAMA PEDIATRICS, 2014, 168 (11) :1045-1053
[8]   Recurrent implantation failure: definition and management [J].
Coughlan, C. ;
Ledger, W. ;
Wang, Q. ;
Liu, Fenghua ;
Demirol, Aygul ;
Gurgan, Timur ;
Cutting, R. ;
Ong, K. ;
Sallam, H. ;
Li, T. C. .
REPRODUCTIVE BIOMEDICINE ONLINE, 2014, 28 (01) :14-38
[9]   Conventional and modern markers of endometrial receptivity: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Craciunas, Laurentiu ;
Gallos, Ioannis ;
Chu, Justin ;
Bourne, Tom ;
Quenby, Siobhan ;
Brosens, Jan J. ;
Coomarasamy, Arri .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION UPDATE, 2019, 25 (02) :202-223
[10]   Single embryo transfer for all [J].
Cutting, Rachel .
BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH CLINICAL OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, 2018, 53 :30-37