Comparison of pregnancy outcomes in elective single blastocyst transfer versus double blastocyst transfer stratified by age

Mullin, Christine; Fino, Mary Elizabeth; Talebian, S.; Krey, L.C.; Licciardi, F.; Grifo, James A.

doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.12.137

Cited by 56 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Transferring blastocyst-stage embryos in fresh or frozen-thawed cycles would improve the likelihood of pregnancy because embryos are selected during extended culture [7,28]. Also, unlike eSCET results, some studies have shown that SBET tends to show a significantly lower risk of multiple pregnancies without reducing the overall pregnancy rate compared to DBET [19,31]. On the other hand, Berin et al [3] reported that when the clinical outcomes of SBET and DBET in frozen-thawed cycle were compared, the clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate of SBET were significantly lower than those of DBET.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although elective single cleavagestage embryo transfer (eSCET) causes significantly lower pregnancy and delivery rates than double cleavage-stage embryo transfer (DCET), eSCET combined with single frozen-thawed embryo transfer shows similar cumulative pregnancy and delivery rates with those of DCET while maintaining a significantly lower multiple pregnancy rate [26]. On the other hand, the clinical outcomes of single blastocyst embryo transfer (SBET) were similar to those of double blastocyst embryo transfer (DBET) in fresh cycles [19]. If single frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer is combined with SBET, it will be able to produce a significantly higher cumulative clinical outcome than DBET.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of clinical outcomes between single and double vitrified-warmed blastocyst embryo transfer according to the day of vitrification

Kang

Lee

Yoon

et al. 2013

J Assist Reprod Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To compare the efficacy of single vitrified-warmed blastocyst embryo transfer (SVBT) versus double vitrifiedwarmed blastocyst embryo transfer (DVBT) according to the day of vitrification. Methods This retrospective study included a total of 1,051 cycles in women less than 37 years of age with their autologous SVBT cryopreserved on day 5 (5d-SVBT, n=737) or day 6 (6d-SVBT, n=154) and DVBT on day 5 (5d-DVBT, n=129) or day 6 (6d-DVBT, n=31) from January 2009 to December 2011. Results The clinical pregnancy rate (41.8 % vs. 48.1 %, p=0.184) and ongoing pregnancy rate (36.6 % vs. 45.0 %, p=0.072) were not significantly different between the 5d-SVBT group and the 5d-DVBT group. However, the clinical pregnancy (29.9 % vs. 58.1 %, p=0.003) and ongoing pregnancy rates (23.4 % vs. 51.6 %, p=0.001) were significantly lower in the 6d-SVBT group compared with those in the 6d-DVBT group. The implantation rate (42.2 % vs. 34.5 %, p=0.03) of the 5d-SVBT group was significantly higher than that of the 5d-DVBT group, while the implantation rate (29.9 % vs. 37.1 %, p=0.303) of the 6d-SVBT group was not statistically different compared with that in the 6d-DVBT group. The multiple pregnancy rates (1.0 % in the 5d-SVBT group vs. 38.7 % in the 5d-DVBT group, p<0.001 and 0 % in the 6d-SVBT group vs. 22.2 % in the 6d-DVBT group, p=0.001) were statistically significantly lower in the SVBT group compared with those in the DVBT group regardless of the day of vitrification. Conclusions This study showed that the 5d-SVBT resulted in comparable clinical outcomes compared to the 5d-DVBT while the 6d-SVBT yielded significantly lower clinical outcomes compared to the 6d-DVBT.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of clinical outcomes between single and double vitrified-warmed blastocyst embryo transfer according to the day of vitrification

Kang

Lee

Yoon

et al. 2013

J Assist Reprod Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…278 Moreover, a high rate of dizygotic twinning can be expected in good prognosis patients even following transfer of only two blastocysts. 279,280 Finally, concerns have been raised regarding possible adverse effects of longer durations of culture on the risks of epigenetic mutations in offspring, 281,282 particularly as animal data indicate that developmental programming is modifiable by in vitro manipulations, 283,284 and children born from blastocyst transfer may be at a slightly increased risk for preterm birth 285 and adverse neonatal outcomes compared with those conceived following cleavage stage transfer. 286 Randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of blastocyst transfer with cleavage-stage transfer have revealed the importance of patient selection (based on patient age, number and quality of embryos, etc.)…”

Section: Cleavage Stage Versus Blastocyst Transfermentioning

confidence: 99%

Assisted Reproduction

Ginsburg¹,

Racowsky²

2014

Yen &Amp; Jaffe's Reproductive Endocrinology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Single embryo transfer (SET) has been proposed as a means for limiting multiple gestations in ART. However, prospective studies comparing SET to double embryo transfer (DET) have returned mixed results [8,9,10]. As a result, elective SET (eSET) is still infrequently practiced in the United States, accounting for only 4.2 % of embryo transfers in 2011 [2], while in Europe is more common due to laws mandating it [11,12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A greater number of euploid blastocysts in a given cohort predicts excellent outcomes in single embryo transfer cycles

Morin

Melzer-Ross²,

McCulloh

et al. 2014

J Assist Reprod Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This multicentered retrospective study analyzed whether the quantity of euploid blastocysts in a given cohort after comprehensive chromosomal screening can be used to identify candidates for single embryo transfer. Methods Blastocysts from 437 patients underwent trophectoderm biopsy followed by array comparative genomic hybridization. Embryos were then selected for single or double embryo transfer. The number of euploid blastocysts produced and transferred for each patient was recorded, as was clinical pregnancy rate and multiple gestation rate. Results In patients with e3 euploid blastocysts, clinical pregnancy rate was higher in double, compared to single embryo transfers. However, in patients with Q4 euploid blastocysts, clinical pregnancy rate was not reduced with single embryo transfer was performed, whereas the multiple gestation rate was greatly reduced. Conclusions Size of the euploid embryo cohort is a marker for success in single embryo transfer cycles. Patients who produce at least four euploid blastocysts are outstanding candidates for single embryo transer.

show abstract

Comparison of pregnancy outcomes in elective single blastocyst transfer versus double blastocyst transfer stratified by age

Cited by 56 publications

References 34 publications

Comparison of clinical outcomes between single and double vitrified-warmed blastocyst embryo transfer according to the day of vitrification

Comparison of clinical outcomes between single and double vitrified-warmed blastocyst embryo transfer according to the day of vitrification

Assisted Reproduction

A greater number of euploid blastocysts in a given cohort predicts excellent outcomes in single embryo transfer cycles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About