Embryo quality is strongly dependent on the in-vitro culture environment. Conventionally, IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) embryos are examined microscopically every morning (from day 1 to day 6) to assess fertilization, cleavage and embryo quality. Consequently, the frequent exposure to non-optimal conditions outside the incubator may adversely affect embryonic viability and quality. Hence, this study investigated whether reduction of observation frequency outside the incubator can enhance blastocyst formation rate. A total of 285 IVF/ICSI cycles were divided into two groups. Embryos in the control group (103 cycles) were assessed out-of-incubator every day after insemination (day 1 to day 6; six times). In the experimental group (182 cycles), embryos were assessed four times, on days 1, 3, 5 and 6. The total blastocyst formation rate, day-5 blastocyst formation rate, proportion of good blastocysts and number of cryopreserved blastocysts per patient were significantly lower for the control group compared with the experimental group (42.5%, 31.4%, 50.7%, 1.72+/-1.55 versus 52.6%, 40.7%, 60.1%, 2.64+/-2.59, respectively, P<0.05); although there were no significant differences in the proportions of good embryos on day 3, blastocyst formation rate on day 6, clinical pregnancy rate and implantation rate. Hence, reduction of the observation frequency of embryos outside the incubator can enhance embryo quality and blastocyst formation rate.

ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate the outcome of fresh and vitrified-warmed cleavage-stage and blastocyst-stage embryo transfers in patients undergoing ART treatment within an ethnic Chinese population.Study designWe compared the clinical results of embryo transfer on the 3rd (cleavage stage) or 5th (blastocyst stage) day after oocyte retrieval, including clinical pregnancy rates, implantation rates and multiple pregnancy rates.ResultsOur data showed that blastocyst transfer on day 5 did not significantly increase clinical pregnancy rate (41.07% vs 47.08%, p>0.05) and implantation rate (31.8% vs 31.2%, p>0.05) in patients under 35 years of age, in comparison with day 3 cleavage stage embryo transfer. In patients older than 35 years of age, the clinical pregnancy rate after blastocyst transfer was slightly decreased compared with cleavage stage embryo transfer (33.33% vs 42.31%, p>0.05). Unexpectedly, It was found that vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer resulted in significantly higher clinical pregnancy rate (56.8%) and implantation rate (47%) compared with fresh blastocyst transfer in controlled stimulation cycles (41.07% and 31.8%, respectively). For patients under 35 years of age, the cumulative clinical pregnancy rate combining fresh and vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer cycles were significantly higher compared to just cleavage-stage embryo transfer (70.1% versus 51.8%, p<0.05). However, the cumulative multiple pregnancy rates showed no significant difference between the two groups.ConclusionsIn an ethnic Chinese patient population, fresh blastocyst transfer does not significantly increase clinical pregnancy rate. However, subsequent vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer in a non-controlled ovarian hyperstimulation cycle dramatically improves clinical outcomes. Therefore, blastocyst culture in tandem with vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer is recommended as a favourable and promising protocol in human ART treatment, particularly for ethnic Chinese patients.

No abstract