Live birth rate and neonatal outcome following cleavage-stage embryo transfer versus blastocyst transfer using the freeze-all strategy

被引:26
|
作者
Zhu, Qianqian [1 ]
Zhu, Jing [1 ]
Wang, Yun [1 ]
Wang, Bian [1 ]
Wang, Ningling [1 ]
Yin, Mingru [1 ]
Zhang, Suqun [1 ]
Lyu, Qifeng [1 ]
Kuang, Yanping [1 ]
机构
[1] Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Shanghai Peoples Hosp 9, Dept Assisted Reprod, Sch Med, Zhizaoju Rd 639, Shanghai 200011, Peoples R China
关键词
Assisted reproductive technology; Blastocyst transfer; Embryo cryopreservation; Freeze-all strategy; Neonatal outcomes; FRESH EMBRYOS; CRYOPRESERVATION; CULTURE;
D O I
10.1016/j.rbmo.2018.12.034
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Research question: What are the live birth rates and neonatal outcomes following cleavage-stage embryo transfer and blastocyst transfer in a freeze-all treatment scenario? Design: This was a retrospective cohort study. All good-quality embryos were frozen on the third day; the remaining embryos were grown on until they reached blastocyst stage and then frozen. Between 2007 and 2016, 11,801 patients underwent cleavage-stage embryo transfer and 1009 patients underwent blastocyst transfer in the first treatment cycle using the freeze-all strategy. The live birth rate and neonatal outcomes were evaluated. Results: The live birth rate in the first frozen embryo transfer cycle was higher following blastocyst transfer than following cleavage-stage transfer (69.1% versus 55.5%, P < 0.01), but there was no difference in live birth rate in the second frozen embryo transfer cycle between blastocyst transfer and cleavage-stage transfer (45.2% versus 52.7%, P > 0.05). Similarly, no difference was found in the cumulative live birth rate for the first complete IVF cycle (71.1% versus 69.2%, P > 0.05). Blastocyst transfer gave a higher risk of preterm singleton delivery than did cleavage-stage transfer. However, there was no difference in the risk of early preterm delivery, low birth weight, very low birth weight, high birth weight and very high birth weight between the two groups. Conclusions: There is no evidence to support the superiority of blastocyst transfer compared with cleavage-stage transfer in a freeze-all treatment scenario. There may be a higher risk of preterm singleton delivery following blastocyst transfer than following cleavage-stage transfer but further studies are needed to verify this.
引用
收藏
页码:892 / 900
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Cumulative live birth rate in freeze-all cycles is comparable to that of a conventional embryo transfer policy at the cleavage stage but superior at the blastocyst stage
    Zaca, Carlotta
    Bazzoccbi, Antonia
    Pennetta, Francesca
    Bonu, Maria Antonietta
    Coticchio, Giovanni
    Borini, Andrea
    [J]. FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2018, 110 (04) : 703 - 709
  • [2] Blastocyst or cleavage-stage embryo transfer?
    Johnson, Neil
    Blake, Debbie
    Farquhar, Cindy
    [J]. BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH CLINICAL OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, 2007, 21 (01) : 21 - 40
  • [3] Blastocyst transfer for all? Higher cumulative live birth chance in a blastocyst-stage transfer policy compared to a cleavage-stage transfer policy
    Di Croo, I
    Colman, R.
    De Sutter, P.
    Tilleman, K.
    [J]. FACTS VIEWS AND VISION IN OBGYN, 2019, 11 (02): : 169 - 176
  • [4] Cumulative Pregnancy Rates Following Cleavage-stage and Blastocyst Embryo Transfer
    Kwik, Michele
    Lam, Lawrence
    Chapman, Michael
    [J]. AUSTRALIAN & NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, 2010, 50 : 5 - 5
  • [5] IVF: "Freeze-all" Strategy versus conventional Embryo Transfer
    Lichert, Frank
    [J]. GEBURTSHILFE UND FRAUENHEILKUNDE, 2018, 78 (12) : 1166 - +
  • [6] Live Birth after Cleavage-Stage versus Blastocyst-Stage Embryo Transfer in Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Randomised Controlled Study
    Mahmoudinia, Maliheh
    Souizi, Behnaz
    Ebadi, Seyed Mohammad Reza
    Zakerinasab, Faezeh
    Sadeghi, Tahereh
    Mahmoudinia, Mahbobeh
    Hamdieh, Mostafa
    Hassani, Fatemeh
    Hosseini, Roya
    Kalantar, Seyed Mehdi
    Khazaei, Mozafar
    Kheradmand, Alireza
    Movaghar, Afarin Rahimi
    Moazzeni, Seyed Mohammad
    Pooransari, Parichehr
    Ramazanali, Fariba
    Shahhoseini, Maryam
    Tavalaee, Marziyeh
    Ashrafi, Mahnaz
    Alhalabi, Marwan
    Barra, Fabio
    Berga, Sarah L.
    Calagna, Gloria
    Franciscis, Pasquale De
    Lagana, Antonio Simone
    Madani, Tahereh
    Moini, Ashraf
    Nezhat, Camran
    Niroomanesh, Shirin
    Nouri, Kazem
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FERTILITY & STERILITY, 2024, 18
  • [7] Cleavage-stage versus blastocyst-stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology
    Glujovsky, Demian
    Quinteiro Retamar, Andrea Marta
    Alvarez Sedo, Cristian Roberto
    Ciapponi, Agustin
    Cornelisse, Simone
    Blake, Deborah
    [J]. COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2022, (05):
  • [8] Cumulative live birth rates after fresh and vitrified cleavage-stage versus blastocyst-stage embryo transfer in the first treatment cycle
    De Vos, Anick
    Van Landuyt, Lisbet
    Santos-Ribeiro, Samuel
    Camus, Michel
    Van de Velde, Hilde
    Tournaye, Herman
    Verheyen, Greta
    [J]. HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2016, 31 (11) : 2442 - 2449
  • [9] Comparison of the live birth rate after single embryo transfer in fresh versus frozen cycle: no evidence to support routine freeze-all strategy
    Toikkanen, R.
    Terho, A.
    Pelkonen, S.
    Martikainen, H.
    [J]. HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2021, 36 : 497 - 497
  • [10] Blastocyst transfer on day 5 results in significantly higher birth rate in relation to cleavage-stage embryo transfer on day 3
    Tersoglio, A. E.
    Sibuet, M. E.
    Tersoglio, S.
    [J]. HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2006, 21 : I137 - I137