Clinical outcomes after IVF or ICSI using human blastocysts derived from oocytes containing aggregates of smooth endoplasmic reticulum

Abstract

In this study the clinical and neo-natal outcomes after transfer of blastocysts derived from oocytes containing aggregates of smooth endoplasmic reticulum (SER) were compared between IVF and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. Clinical and neo-natal outcomes of blastocysts in cycles with at least one SER metaphase II oocyte (SER + MII; SER + cycles) did not significantly differ between the two insemination methods. When SER + MII were cultured to day 5/6, fertilization, embryo cleavage and blastocyst rates were not significantly different between IVF and ICSI cycles. In vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer cycles, the clinical pregnancy rates from SER + MII in IVF and ICSI did not significantly differ. In this study, 52 blastocysts (27 IVF and 25 ICSI) derived from SER + MII were transferred, yielding 15 newborns (5 IVF and 10 ICSI) and no malformations. Moreover, 300 blastocysts (175 IVF and 125 ICSI) derived from SER-MII were transferred, yielding 55 newborns (24 IVF and 31 ICSI cycles). Thus, blastocysts derived from SER + cycles exhibited an acceptable ongoing pregnancy rate after IVF (n = 125) or ICSI (n = 117) cycles. In conclusion, blastocysts from SER + MII in both IVF and ICSI cycles yield adequate ongoing pregnancy rates with neo-natal outcomes that do not differ from SER-MII.

A higher incidence of cleavage failure in oocytes containing smooth endoplasmic reticulum clusters

“…We previously reported that sERC formation was related to higher serum estradiol levels detected in sERC positive cycles and this is in agreement with other studies [2,9]. Very recently, Canto et al reported that sERC positive oocytes had greater spindle lengths and widths compared with control oocytes.…”

Live birth rates in In vitro fertilization cycles with oocytes containing smooth endoplasmic reticulum aggregates and normal oocytes

“…[789101214151617] Eight studies have reported clinical pregnancy as an outcome[7891014151617] and four have reported live birth rate. [1081617] Of the eight studies, all studies have a lower pregnancy rate in SERa oocytes, but only in one study, the difference reached statistical significance. [15] There was no difference in the live birth rate reported in the four studies between SERa oocytes and normal oocytes.…”

“…[3131415] Very few prior studies have reported live birth rate as a primary outcome measure. [8101617] Moreover, following the 2011 recommendations, there were three publications in 2013 which reported the birth of normal babies originating from oocytes containing SERa. [81718] Discarding oocytes containing SERa increases the risk of cycle cancellation with no embryos available for transfer.…”

Complex chromosomal aberrations in a fetus originating from oocytes with smooth endoplasmic reticulum (SER) aggregates

“…In terms of pregnancy and neonatal outcomes, transfer of SERa-positive embryos was associated with 20% increased risk of miscarriage (Braga et al 2013), while women with SERa oocytes tended to deliver earlier, were characterized by a higher percentage of obstetric complications during pregnancy and a significantly lower birthweight in singletons compared to unaffected women (Ebner et al 2008). The rate of neonatal death was alarmingly high in the SERa group compared to healthy counterparts (Ebner et al 2008), although subsequent studies were more reassuring, reporting similar fertilization and pregnancy rates, as well as similar malformation rates between SERa-positive and SERa-negative cycles (Ebner et al 2013;Mateizel et al 2013;Hattori et al 2014;Itoi et al 2017). The adverse obstetric outcome observed in the present case report may be attributed to a procedure-related effect of amniocentesis (Akolekar et al 2015;Alfirevic et al 2017), although the presence of SERa in oocytes cannot be excluded as a potential cause.…”