Embryo tranfer at zygote stage in patients with failed embryonic development in previous in vitro fertilization programs


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Objective: Assessment of the effectiveness of embyo transfer into uterine cavity at the zygote stage in patients with multiple IVF/ICSI failures in history and the absence of embryonic cleavage cultured in vitro. Materials and methods: The study included 37 patients. The mean age of patients was 38.3 (3.3) лет, and infertility duration was 6.1 (2.3) years. Idiopathic infertility was a major nosologic form of infertility. Independently of the chosen ovarian stimulation protocol and the used type of gonadotropins, the absence of embryos that could be offered for transfer and stoppage of embryonic development took place in all attempts. In 37 women in the study group, embryo transfer into the uterine cavity was performed on day 1 after transvaginal ovarian puncture, immediately after fertilization was confirmed. Results: The average number of IVF/ICSI attempts in history of the patients included in the study was 4.2 (1.6). The retrospective analysis confirmed that the parameters of early embryo development was impaired in all patients in the study group. Pregnancy rate in the group of women below 40 years was 45.0% (9/20), and 5.8% (1/17) in the group of patients of late reproductive age. Conclusion: It is supposed that in vitro embryo culture may be one of the cause of impaired embryo development and early embryonic developmental arrest. Due to this, embryo transfer strategy into the uterine cavity at zygote stage, can influence physiological preimplantation development and as a result lead to the onset of pregnancy in difficult clinical situations, when embryos stop developing. This method can be effective for the patients of young age, who mainly have euploid oocytes.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Tatiana A. Nazarenko

Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: t_nazarenko@oparina4.ru
Dr. Med. Sci., Professor, Director of Institute of Reproductive Medicine

Yana O. Martirosyan

Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: ya_martirosyan@oparina4.ru
Researcher at the Scientific and Educational Center for ART with the Clinical Division named after F. Paulsen

Valeria G. Krasnova

Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: lkrasnova27@gmail.com
clinical resident, Scientific and Educational Center for ART with the Clinical Division named after F. Paulsen

Almina M. Biryukova

Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: a_birukova@oparina4.ru
PhD, gynecologist at Scientific and Clinical Department of ART named after F. Paulsen

Julia V. Sokolova

Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: julietsok@gmail.com
embryologist

References

  1. Khalife D., Nassar A., Khalil A., Awwad J., Abu Musa A., Hannoun A. et al. Cumulative live-birth rates by maternal age after one or multiple In Vitro fertilization cycles: An institutional experience. Int. J. Fertil. Steril. 2020; 14(1): 34-40. https://dx.doi.org/10.22074/ijfs.2020.5855.
  2. Leijdekkers J.A., Eijkemans M.J.C., van Tilborg T.C., Oudshoorn S.C., van Golde R.J.T., Hoek A. et al.; OPTIMIST Study Group. Cumulative live birth rates in low-prognosis women. Hum. Reprod. 2019; 34(6): 1030-41. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dez051.
  3. Busnelli A., Somigliana E., Cirillo F., Baggiani A., Levi-Setti P.E. Efficacy of therapies and interventions for repeated embryo implantation failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci. Rep. 2021; 11(1): 1747. https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-81439-6.
  4. ESHRE Special Interest Group of Embryology and Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine. The Vienna consensus: report of an expert meeting on the development of ART laboratory performance indicators. Reprod. Biomed. Online. 2017; 35(5): 494-510. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.06.015.
  5. Mohebi M., Ghafouri-Fard S. Embryo developmental arrest: review of genetic factors and pathways. Gene Rep. 2019; 17: 100479. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.genrep.2019.100479.
  6. ESHRE Special Interest Group of Embryology; Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine. The Vienna consensus: report of an expert meeting on the development of art laboratory performance indicators. Hum. Reprod. Open. 2017; 2017(2): hox011. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hox011.
  7. Betts D.H., Madan P. Permanent embryo arrest: molecular and cellular concepts. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 2008; 14(8): 445-53. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molehr/gan035.
  8. Xu Y., Qian Y., Liu Y., Wang Q., Wang R., Zhou Y. et al. A novel homozygous variant in NLRP5 is associate with human early embryonic arrest in a consanguineous Chinese family. Clin. Genet. 2020; 98: 69-73. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cge.13744.
  9. Civico S., Agell N., Herndndez L., Campo E., Bachs O., Balasch J. Increased messenger ribonucleic acid expression of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor P27Kip1 in cleavage-stage human embryos exhibiting developmental arrest. Fertil. Steril. 2008; 89(5, Suppl.): 1557-62. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.06.003.
  10. Scott L., Alvero R., Leondires M., Miller B. The morphology of human pronuclear embryos is positively related to blastocyst development and implantation. Hum. Reprod. 2000; 15(11): 2394-403. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/15.11.2394.
  11. Edwards R.G., Steptoe P.C., Purdy J.M. Establishing full-term human pregnancies using cleaving embryos grown in vitro. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 1980; 87(9): 73756. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1980.tb04610.x.
  12. Dale B., Fiorentino A., de Simone M.L., di Matteo L., di Frega A.S., Wilding M. et al. Zygote versus embryo transfer: a prospective randomized multicenter trial. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2002, 19(10): 456-61. https://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1020354318164.
  13. Quinn P., Stone B.A., Marrs R.P. Suboptimal laboratory conditions can affect pregnancy outcome after embryo transfer on day 1 or 2 after insemination in vitro. Fertil. Steril. 1990; 53(1): 168-70. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)53236-1.
  14. Scott L.A., Smith S. The successful use of pronuclear embryo transfers the day following oocyte retrieval. Hum. Reprod. 1998; 13(4): 1003-13. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/13.4.1003.
  15. Ahuja K., Smith W., Tucker M., Craft I. Successful pregnancies from the transfer of pronucleate embryo in an outpatient in vitro fertilization program. Fertil. Steril. 1985; 44(2): 181-4. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)48732-7.
  16. Jaroudi K., Coskun S., Hollanders J., Al-Hassan S., Al-Sufayan H., Atared A., Merdad T. Advanced surgical sperm recovery is a viable option for intracytoplasmic sperm injection in patients with obstructive or nonobstructive azoospermia. Fertil. Steril. 1999; 72(3): 479-83. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00298-8.
  17. Margreiter M., Weghofer A., Kogosowski A., Mahmoud K.Z., Feichtinger W.A. Prospective randomized multicenter study to evaluate the best day for embryo transfer: does the outcome justify prolonged embryo culture? J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2003; 20(2): 91-4. https://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1021744209193.
  18. Sermondade N., Delarouziere V., Ravel C., Berthaut I., Verstraete L., Mathieu E. et al. Characterization of a recurrent poor-quality embryo morphology phenotype and zygote transfer as a rescue strategy. Reprod. Biomed. Online. 2012; 24(4): 403-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.01.004.
  19. Barker D.J. The origins of the developmental origins theory. J. Intern. Med. 2007; 261(5): 412-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2796.2007.01809.x.
  20. Calle A., Miranda A., Fernandez-Gonzalez R., Pericuesta E., Laguna R., Gutierrez-Adan A. Male mice produced by in vitro culture have reduced fertility and transmit organomegaly and glucose intolerance to their male offspring. Biol. Reprod. 2012; 87(2): 34. https://dx.doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.112.100743.
  21. Rizos D., Clemente M., Bermejo-Alvarez P., de La Fuente J., Lonergan P., Gutierrez-Addn A. Consequences of in vitro culture conditions on embryo development and quality. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 2008; 43(Suppl. 4): 44-50. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.2008.01230.x.
  22. Fauque P., Leandri R., Merlet F., Juillard J.C., Epelboin S., Guibert J. et al. Pregnancy outcome and live birth after IVF and ICSI according to embryo quality. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2007; 24(5): 159-65. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10815-007-9115-z.
  23. Bavister B. Oxygen concentration and preimplantation development. Reprod. Biomed. Online. 2004; 9(5): 484-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1472-6483(10)61630-6.
  24. Biggers J.D., Summers M.C. Choosing a culture medium: making informed choices. Fertil. Steril. 2008; 90(3): 473-83. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.08.010.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) 2022 Bionika Media

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies