Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 12/2012

01-12-2012 | Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Comparison of the clinical outcomes between fresh blastocyst and vitrified-thawed blastocyst transfer

Authors: Pei-Yun Ku, Robert Kuo-Kuang Lee, Shyr-Yeu Lin, Ming-Huei Lin, Yuh-Ming Hwu

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 12/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

To compare the clinical outcomes between fresh and vitrified-thawed day 5 blastocyst transfers.

Design

Retrospective case control study.

Setting

Tertiary referral center.

Patient(s)

Patients 38 years of age or less who underwent IVF/ICSI cycles with fresh or frozen-thawed blastocysts transferred from June 1, 2009 to November 30, 2011

Intervention(s)

Vitrification and thawing of day 5 blastocysts using the Cryotop method. (Kitazato BioPharma Co., Ltd., Fuji city, Shizuoka, Japan)

Main outcome measure(s)

Clinical pregnancy rate, implantation rate, ongoing pregnancy rate, and multiple pregnancy rates.

Results

Of the 118 cycles in the fresh transfer group, 234 blastocysts were transferred. The clinical pregnancy rate was 66.1 % and implantation rate was 50.9 %. The ongoing pregnancy rate was 56.8 % and the rates for singleton and twin pregnancies were 53.7 % and 44.8 %. Of the 59 cycles in the vitrified-thawed group, 111 blastocysts were transferred. The clinical pregnancy rate was 59.3 % and implantation rate was 43.2 %. The ongoing pregnancy rate was 47.5 % and the rates for singleton and twin pregnancies were 60.7 % and 39.3 %. The clinical pregnancy rate, implantation rate and ongoing pregnancy rate did not differ significantly between the two groups.

Conclusions

The implantation rates were not significantly different between the fresh and the vitrified-thawed groups. Thus, single embryo transfer may be considered in fresh cycles to decrease multiple pregnancy rates. The surplus embryos should be vitrified for the frozen embryo transfer to improve the cumulative pregnancy rate.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Gardner DK, Balaban B. Choosing between day 3 and day 5 embryo transfers. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2006;49:85–92.PubMedCrossRef Gardner DK, Balaban B. Choosing between day 3 and day 5 embryo transfers. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2006;49:85–92.PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Kuleshova LL, Lopata A. Vitrification can be more favorable than slow cooling. Fertil Steril. 2002;78:449–54.PubMedCrossRef Kuleshova LL, Lopata A. Vitrification can be more favorable than slow cooling. Fertil Steril. 2002;78:449–54.PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Chang EM, Han JE, Kim YS, et al. Use of the natural cycle and vitrification thawed blastocyst transfer results in better in-vitro fertilization outcomes. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2011;28:369–74. Chang EM, Han JE, Kim YS, et al. Use of the natural cycle and vitrification thawed blastocyst transfer results in better in-vitro fertilization outcomes. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2011;28:369–74.
4.
go back to reference Aflatoonian A, Oskouian H, Ahmadi S, Oskouian L. Can fresh embryo transfers be replaced by cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfers in assisted reproductive cycles? A randomized controlled trial. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2010;27:357–63.PubMedCrossRef Aflatoonian A, Oskouian H, Ahmadi S, Oskouian L. Can fresh embryo transfers be replaced by cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfers in assisted reproductive cycles? A randomized controlled trial. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2010;27:357–63.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, et al. 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;96:344–8.PubMedCrossRef Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, et al. 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;96:344–8.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Hong SW, Sepilian V, Chung HM, Kim TJ. Cryopreserved human blastocysts after vitrification result in excellent implantation and clinical pregnancy rates. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:2062–4.PubMedCrossRef Hong SW, Sepilian V, Chung HM, Kim TJ. Cryopreserved human blastocysts after vitrification result in excellent implantation and clinical pregnancy rates. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:2062–4.PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Fatemi HM, Kyrou D, Bourgain C, et al. Cryopreserved-thawed human embryo transfer: spontaneous natural cycle is superior to human chorionic gonadotropin–induced natural cycle. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:2054–8.PubMedCrossRef Fatemi HM, Kyrou D, Bourgain C, et al. Cryopreserved-thawed human embryo transfer: spontaneous natural cycle is superior to human chorionic gonadotropin–induced natural cycle. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:2054–8.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Zegers-Hochschild F, et al. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary of ART terminology, 2009. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:1520–4.PubMedCrossRef Zegers-Hochschild F, et al. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary of ART terminology, 2009. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:1520–4.PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Kuc P, Kuczyñska A, et al. Vitrification vs. slow cooling protocol using embryos cryopreserved in the 5th or 6th day after oocyte retrieval and IVF outcomes. Folia Histochem Cytobiol. 2010;48:84–8.PubMedCrossRef Kuc P, Kuczyñska A, et al. Vitrification vs. slow cooling protocol using embryos cryopreserved in the 5th or 6th day after oocyte retrieval and IVF outcomes. Folia Histochem Cytobiol. 2010;48:84–8.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Rall WF, Fahy GM. Ice-free cryopreservation of mouse embryos at −196 °C by vitrification. Nature. 1985;313:573–5.PubMedCrossRef Rall WF, Fahy GM. Ice-free cryopreservation of mouse embryos at −196 °C by vitrification. Nature. 1985;313:573–5.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Larman MG, Katz-Jaffe MG, et al. Analysis of global gene expression following mouse blastocyst cryopreservation. Hum Reprod. 2011;10:2672–80.CrossRef Larman MG, Katz-Jaffe MG, et al. Analysis of global gene expression following mouse blastocyst cryopreservation. Hum Reprod. 2011;10:2672–80.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Zhu D, Zhang J, Cao S, et al. Vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer cycles yield higher pregnancy and implantation rates compared with fresh blastocyst transfer cycles—time for a new embryo transfer strategy? Fertil Steril. 2011;95:1691–5.PubMedCrossRef Zhu D, Zhang J, Cao S, et al. Vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer cycles yield higher pregnancy and implantation rates compared with fresh blastocyst transfer cycles—time for a new embryo transfer strategy? Fertil Steril. 2011;95:1691–5.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Haouzi D, Assou S, Mahmoud K, et al. Gene expression profile of human endometrial receptivity: comparison between natural and stimulated cycles for the same patients. Hum Reprod. 2009;24:1436–45.PubMedCrossRef Haouzi D, Assou S, Mahmoud K, et al. Gene expression profile of human endometrial receptivity: comparison between natural and stimulated cycles for the same patients. Hum Reprod. 2009;24:1436–45.PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Haouzi D, Assou S, Dechanet C, et al. Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization alters endometrial receptivity in humans: protocol effects. Biol Reprod. 2010;82:679–86.PubMedCrossRef Haouzi D, Assou S, Dechanet C, et al. Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization alters endometrial receptivity in humans: protocol effects. Biol Reprod. 2010;82:679–86.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Comparison of the clinical outcomes between fresh blastocyst and vitrified-thawed blastocyst transfer
Authors
Pei-Yun Ku
Robert Kuo-Kuang Lee
Shyr-Yeu Lin
Ming-Huei Lin
Yuh-Ming Hwu
Publication date
01-12-2012
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 12/2012
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-012-9874-z

Other articles of this Issue 12/2012

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 12/2012 Go to the issue