In eight women with ovarian failure, we induced histologically normal endometrial function during a preparatory cycle consisting of sequential administration of estrogen and progesterone. During a subsequent cycle, endometrial stimulation was synchronized with surrogate-embryo transfer performed on days 16 to 21. Among the eight women, two pregnancies were established by embryo transfer on days 18 and 19. In both women, ovarian tissue was absent, and these patients therefore serve as an in vivo model for the isolated effects of estrogen and progesterone on implantation and maintenance of pregnancy. Treatment with exogenous estrogen was mandatory up to the 11th week of gestation, and treatment with progesterone until the 18th to 22nd weeks. We conclude that it is biologically feasible to simulate the essential hormonal and endometrial milieu of a fertile menstrual cycle and early gestation solely by the administration of estrogen and progesterone. Days 18 to 19 of the cycle are recommended for successful embryo implantation with this treatment program.

No abstract

Spermatid microinjection into oocytes has proven to be a successful assisted reproduction procedure in the animal model and in the human species, since in the latter a few full-term pregnancies were actually obtained. Patients entering our spermatid injection study included those with a total absence of spermatozoa in the testicular tissue notwithstanding previous positive biopsies (n = 29): an obstructive problem (n = 3), secretory azoospermia (n = 26), and those with total arrest at the spermatogenesis level in previous explorative biopsies (n = 15). In the latter group, absence of spermatids was recorded in four cases. Mature, elongated, elongating and round spermatids (ROS) were injected in respectively 3, 2, 3, and 32 attempts. A total of 260 metaphase II oocytes were injected with ROS, 36 oocytes with spermatids at other stages of maturity. The rates of oocytes showing two pronuclei (2PN) and two polar bodies reached 22% and 64% respectively after injection of round or elongated-mature spermatids. The fertilization rate after ROS injection was influenced by the percentage of spermatozoa observed in a previous biopsy. Patients with a positive preliminary biopsy had significantly more 2PN (33%) when compared to those with a severe spermatogenic dysfunction and in whom no spermatozoa were found (only 11%) (P < 0.05). Incubation of oocytes in calcium ionophore after ROS injection had a positive effect on the rate of 2PN formation (36 versus 16%). Ninety per cent of all the normally fertilized oocytes cleaved. The percentage of grade A and B embryos depended on the type of injected cells: 12% after ROS and 30% with the other types of haploid cells. A total of 39 transfers resulted in five pregnancies: three full term with healthy babies delivered (one after ROS injection, and two after injection of an elongating and a mature spermatid), one 4 months ongoing (after elongating spermatid injection) and one miscarriage at 4 weeks (after elongated cell injection). Compared to our conventional intracytoplasmic sperm injection-testicular sperm extraction (ICSI-TESE) programme, the implantation rate after ROS injection was very low (5.5 versus 10.5%).

Patients receiving ET are carrying viable embryos within the intrauterine environment. Therefore, in this unique group of patients, failure to demonstrate a positive pregnancy test represents an implantation failure or a very early postimplantation loss. The results of this study suggest that periimplantation events may be affected by autoimmune antibodies. Very early miscarriage or implantation failure may be related to the same pathophysiological mechanism that causes recurrent miscarriages and is diagnosed incorrectly as infertility.

No abstract