While an association can be addressed among endometriosis and subfertility, the causal relationship has not been elucidated yet. Impaired oocyte quality in endometriosis patients has been accused for the unsuccessful outcomes of assisted reproductive techniques. There are limited studies in literature evaluated association between endometriosis and oocyte morphology. We conducted this retrospective study to evaluate whether morphological abnormalities of oocytes are more common in women with endometriosis than women with diagnosis of male factor infertility as a source of healthy oocytes. Totally 1568 oocytes, 775 (49.4%) in endometriosis groups and 793 (50.6%) in control group were evaluated for morphological parameters before ICSI cycles. Abnormal oocyte morphology was detected in 352 (22.4%) of 1568 oocytes. Of the abnormal oocytes, 208 (59.1%) were in endometriosis group and 144 (40.9%) in control group (p < .001). The following dysmorphisms were significantly higher in oocytes retrieved from endometriosis group: dark cytoplasm; dark, large or thin zona pellucida; and flat or fragmented polar body (p < .05 for all). When morphological parameters for oocytes of endometriosis patients evaluated, the oocyte defects has increased significantly in endometriosis patients. These findings are thought to be useful to clarify the subfertility in endometriosis patient, which needs to be confirmed with further studies.

No abstract

The goal of this retrospective cohort study was to compare survival, implantation, clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates between blastocysts that were vitrified on post-fertilization days 5, 6 and 7. Before vitrification, blastocysts were evaluated in terms of morphology and blastocyst expansion, inner cell mass and trophectoderm quality. They were thawed and transfered in a subsequent artificial cycle. Embryo implantation rates were 39%, 25% and 25% for blastocysts that were vitrified on days 5, 6, and 7, respectively (p = 0.006). Clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates were 19%, 12%, 13% (p = 0.100) and 9%, 7%, 12% (p = 0.99) for days 5, 6 and 7 blastocysts, respectively. Day 5 blastocysts had significantly higher full-collapsing score after assisted-hatching compared to days 6 and 7 blastocysts (p = 0.014). As blastocyst quality increased, implantation and clinical pregnancy rates increased in all groups and both parameters were statistically significantly higher on day 5 blastocysts than on days 6 or 7 (p = 0.001). It was clearly found that good quality blastocysts obtained on day 5 have higher implantation and clinical pregnancy rates than 6th and 7th day cryopreserved embryos. There were no statistically significant differences between the cryopreserved embryos on days 6 and 7 regarding the implantation, clinic and ongoing pregnancy rates.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of the embryo transfer duration of standard and simple embryo transfer method. STUDY DESIGN: This study was a retrospective cohort study conducted at a tertiary ART Centre, between June 2018- September 2018. Day 5 fresh embryo transferred patients aged between 18 - 40, BMI <35 kg/m2 without uterine pathology were enrolled in the study. Patients were divided into two groups. Group-1 consisted of patients who had successful implantation and Group-2 consisted of patients who did not have implantation. Groups were compared according to their embryo transfer durations. Ninety-two patients were enrolled in the study. Also, sub-steps of as; cleaning of the cervical mucus and placing the outer catheter in the cervix, loading the embryo to the catheter, the period between embryo loading and embryo transfer, and following that, time spent for retracting the outer catheter evaluated. RESULTS: Between Group-1 and Group-2, there was no significant difference for the period of cervical cleaning and placing the outer catheter into the cervix (Respectively; 63 sec vs. 76 sec; p=0.18), the period of embryo loading (Respectively; 69sec vs. 71sec; p=0.46), the period between embryo loading and embryo transfer (Respectively; 10 sec vs. 10 sec; p=0.74, retracing the outer catheter (Respectively; 25.5sec vs. 24sec; p=0.42 and the total period of embryo transfer (182sec vs. 182.5 sec; p=0.55). CONCLUSION: The embryo transfer duration is not related to implantation rates. The duration of the embryo transfer process steps is not a distinguishing factor if a good-quality embryo transfer is done.

No abstract