Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine

The Korean Society for Reproductive Medicine (대한생식의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Mixed double-embryo transfer: A promising approach for patients with repeated implantation failure

  • Received : 2017.03.17
  • Accepted : 2017.05.17
  • Published : 2017.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of frozen mixed double-embryo transfer (MDET; the simultaneous transfer of day 3 and day 5 embryos) in comparison with frozen blastocyst double-embryo transfer (BDET; transfer of two day 5 blastocysts) in patients with repeated implantation failure (RIF). Methods: A total of 104 women with RIF who underwent frozen MDET (n = 48) or BDET (n = 56) with excellent-quality embryos were included in this retrospective analysis. All frozen embryo transfers were performed in natural cycles. The main outcome measures were the implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, multiple pregnancy rate, and miscarriage rate. These measures were compared between the patients who underwent MDET or BDET using the chi-square test or the Fisher exact test, as appropriate. Results: The implantation and clinical pregnancy rates were significantly higher in patients who underwent MDET than in those who underwent BDET (60.4% vs. 39.3%, p=0.03 and 52.1% vs. 30.4%, p=0.05, respectively). A significantly lower miscarriage rate was observed in the MDET group (6.9% vs. 10.7%, p=0.05). In addition, the multiple pregnancy rate was slightly, but not significantly, higher in the MDET group (27.1% vs. 25.0%). Conclusion: MDET was found to be significantly superior to double blastocyst transfer. It could be regarded as an appropriate approach to improve in vitro fertilization success rates in RIF patients.

Keywords

References

  1. Simon A, Laufer N. Assessment and treatment of repeated implantation failure (RIF). J Assist Reprod Genet 2012;29:1227-39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-012-9861-4
  2. Mitri F, Nayot D, Casper RF, Bentov Y. Current tools for the optimization of embryo transfer technique for recurrent implantation failure. Minerva Ginecol 2016;68:431-49.
  3. Bergh PA, Navot D. The impact of embryonic development and endometrial maturity on the timing of implantation. Fertil Steril 1992;58:537-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)55259-5
  4. Martel D, Frydman R, Sarantis L, Roche D, Psychoyos A. Scanning electron microscopy of the uterine luminal epithelium as a marker of the implantation window. In Yoshinaga K, editor. Blastocyst implantation. Boston: Adams; 1989. p. 225-34.
  5. Prapas Y, Prapas N, Jones EE, Duleba AJ, Olive DL, Chatziparasidou A, et al. The window for embryo transfer in oocyte donation cycles depends on the duration of progesterone therapy. Hum Reprod 1998;13:720-3. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/13.3.720
  6. Ruiz-Alonso M, Blesa D, Diaz-Gimeno P, Gomez E, Fernandez-Sanchez M, Carranza F, et al. The endometrial receptivity array for diagnosis and personalized embryo transfer as a treatment for patients with repeated implantation failure. Fertil Steril 2013; 100:818-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.05.004
  7. Balaban B, Urman B, Alatas C, Mercan R, Aksoy S, Isiklar A. Blastocyst-stage transfer of poor-quality cleavage-stage embryos results in higher implantation rates. Fertil Steril 2001;75:514-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(00)01756-8
  8. Cruz JR, Dubey AK, Patel J, Peak D, Hartog B, Gindoff PR. Is blastocyst transfer useful as an alternative treatment for patients with multiple in vitro fertilization failures? Fertil Steril 1999;72:218-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00258-7
  9. Gelbaya TA, Tsoumpou I, Nardo LG. The likelihood of live birth and multiple birth after single versus double embryo transfer at the cleavage stage: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2010;94:936-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.04.003
  10. Kaur P, Swarankar ML, Maheshwari M, Acharya V. A comparative study between cleavage stage embryo transfer at day 3 and blastocyst stage transfer at day 5 in in-vitro fertilization/intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection on clinical pregnancy rates. J Hum Reprod Sci 2014;7:194-7. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-1208.142481
  11. Lukassen HG, Braat DD, Wetzels AM, Zielhuis GA, Adang EM, Scheenjes E, et al. Two cycles with single embryo transfer versus one cycle with double embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2005;20:702-8. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh672
  12. Mangalraj AM, Muthukumar K, Aleyamma T, Kamath MS, George K. Blastocyst stage transfer vs cleavage stage embryo transfer. J Hum Reprod Sci 2009;2:23-6. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-1208.51339
  13. Martikainen H, Tiitinen A, Tomas C, Tapanainen J, Orava M, Tuomivaara L, et al. One versus two embryo transfer after IVF and ICSI: a randomized study. Hum Reprod 2001;16:1900-3. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/16.9.1900
  14. van Montfoort AP, Fiddelers AA, Janssen JM, Derhaag JG, Dirksen CD, Dunselman GA, et al. In unselected patients, elective single embryo transfer prevents all multiples, but results in significantly lower pregnancy rates compared with double embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2006;21:338-43. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dei359
  15. Lewin A, Laufer N, Yanay N, Simon A, Zohav E, Berger M, et al. Double transfer of embryos in in vitro fertilization, or is there a delayed receptivity of the endometrium? J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf 1989;6:139-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01130777
  16. Vermesh M, Kletzky OA, Davajan V, Israel R. Monitoring tech niques to predict and detect ovulation. Fertil Steril 1987;47:259-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)50002-8
  17. Kuwayama M, Vajta G, Ieda S, Kato O. Comparison of open and closed methods for vitrification of human embryos and the elimination of potential contamination. Reprod Biomed Online 2005;11:608-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1472-6483(10)61169-8
  18. Achache H, Revel A. Endometrial receptivity markers, the journey to successful embryo implantation. Hum Reprod Update 2006;12:731-46. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dml004
  19. Madkour WA, Noah B, Zaheer H, Al-Bahr A, Abdelhamid AM, Shaeer M, et al. Does sequential embryo transfer improve pregnancy rate in patients with repeated implantation failure? A randomized control study. Middle East Fertil Soc J 2015;20:255-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mefs.2015.04.002
  20. Fang C, Huang R, Li TT, Jia L, Li LL, Liang XY. Day-2 and day-3 sequential transfer improves pregnancy rate in patients with repeated IVF-embryo transfer failure: a retrospective case-control study. Reprod Biomed Online 2013;26:30-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.10.004
  21. Machtinger R, Dor J, Margolin M, Levron J, Baum M, Ferber B, et al. Sequential transfer of day 3 embryos and blastocysts after previous IVF failures despite adequate ovarian response. Reprod Biomed Online 2006;13:376-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1472-6483(10)61442-3
  22. Almog B, Levin I, Wagman I, Kapustiansky R, Schwartz T, Mey- Raz N, et al. Interval double transfer improves treatment success in patients with repeated IVF/ET failures. J Assist Reprod Genet 2008;25:353-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-008-9237-y
  23. Loutradis D, Drakakis P, Dallianidis K, Bletsa SR, Milingos S, Doumplis N, et al. A double embryo transfer on days 2 and 4 or 5 improves pregnancy outcome in patients with good embryos but repeated failures in IVF or ICSI. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 2004; 31:63-6.
  24. Abramovici H, Dirnfeld M, Weisman Z, Sorokin Y, Lissak A, Rofe A, et al. Pregnancies following the interval double-transfer technique in an in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer program. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf 1988;5:175-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01131183
  25. al-Hasani S, van der Ven H, Diedrich K, Reinecke A, Hartje H, Krebs D. Effect of sequential embryo transfer on pregnancy following in vitro fertilization. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 1990;50: 640-3. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1026516
  26. Ashkenazi J, Yoeli R, Orvieto R, Shalev J, Ben-Rafael Z, Bar-Hava I. Double (consecutive) transfer of early embryos and blastocysts: aims and results. Fertil Steril 2000;74:936-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(00)01549-1
  27. Norwitz ER, Schust DJ, Fisher SJ. Implantation and the survival of early pregnancy. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1400-8. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra000763
  28. van Mourik MS, Macklon NS, Heijnen CJ. Embryonic implantation: cytokines, adhesion molecules, and immune cells in establishing an implantation environment. J Leukoc Biol 2009;85:4-19.
  29. Eftekhar M, Rahmani E, Eftekhar T. Effect of adding human chorionic gonadotropin to the endometrial preparation protocol in frozen embryo transfer cycles. Int J Fertil Steril 2012;6:175-8.
  30. Licht P, Fluhr H, Neuwinger J, Wallwiener D, Wildt L. Is human chorionic gonadotropin directly involved in the regulation of human implantation? Mol Cell Endocrinol 2007;269:85-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mce.2006.09.016

Cited by

  1. Successful Pregnancy following Mixed Double Embryo Transfer in a Patient with Variable Window of Implantation vol.2018, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/1687583
  2. The effects of autologous platelet-rich plasma in repeated implantation failure: a randomized controlled trial vol.23, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2019.1569268
  3. Effect of platelet-rich plasma on pregnancy outcomes in infertile women with recurrent implantation failure: a randomized controlled trial vol.37, pp.2, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1080/09513590.2020.1756247
  4. Sequential cleavage and blastocyst embryo transfer and IVF outcomes: a systematic review vol.19, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-021-00824-y