Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-wxhwt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T12:30:27.597Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is it worth it to cryopreserve embryos with blastulation delay at day 5?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2019

D. Montjean Open the ORCID record for D. Montjean [Opens in a new window] ,
V. Pauly ,
M. Gervoise-Boyer ,
Aurélie Amar-Hoffet ,
C. Geoffroy-Siraudin  and
P Boyer
D. Montjean*
Affiliation:
Service de Médecine et Biologie de la Reproduction, Hôpital Saint-joseph, Marseille, France
V. Pauly
Affiliation:
Département de Santé Publique et Maladies Chroniques, Aix-Marseille Université, Faculté de médecine, Unité de recherche EA 3279, 13005, Marseille, France Service d’information médicale, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Marseille, 13009, Marseille, France
M. Gervoise-Boyer
Affiliation:
Service de Médecine et Biologie de la Reproduction, Hôpital Saint-joseph, Marseille, France
Aurélie Amar-Hoffet
Affiliation:
Service de Médecine et Biologie de la Reproduction, Hôpital Saint-joseph, Marseille, France
C. Geoffroy-Siraudin
Affiliation:
Service de Médecine et Biologie de la Reproduction, Hôpital Saint-joseph, Marseille, France
P Boyer
Affiliation:
Service de Médecine et Biologie de la Reproduction, Hôpital Saint-joseph, Marseille, France
*
*Address for correspondence: D. Montjean. Service de Médecine et Biologie de la Reproduction, Hôpital Saint-joseph, Marseille, France. E-mail: debbie_montjean@hotmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This is a retrospective study over a 5-year period. In total, 3139 embryos were individually cryopreserved (Cryotop®) and warmed using the Kitazato vitrification/warming kit. They were classified into three categories based on their expansion degree. Transfer, implantation and pregnancy rates were assessed for each embryo category and compared using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) software. In total, 1139 couples enrolled in infertility treatment programme benefitted from embryo vitrification at day 5. After warming, embryos belonging to the three categories showed similar success rates. Although there was a trend towards better outcomes when grade 3 embryos were transferred, the differences did not reach statistical significance: implantation rates (n fetal sac/n embryo transferred) grade 1: 21.9%, grade 2: 22.7% and grade 3: 30.3% (=0.19). Pregnancy rate (n clinical pregnancy/n transfer) (21.9%, 22.7%, 30.3%, respectively; P=0.11). Miscarriage rate was not statistically different in the three categories (14.5%, 20.4%, 20%, respectively, P=0.51). Our overall results show that it is worth vitrifying slow kinetics embryos as they provide a non-negligible chance to give rise to a pregnancy.

Keywords

Blastulation delayEmbryo gradeImplantation rateSurvival rateVitrification
Type
Research Article
Information
Zygote , Volume 27 , Issue 4 , August 2019 , pp. 219 - 224
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adler, A, Lee, HL, McCulloh, DH, Ampeloquio, E, Clarke-Williams, M, Wertz, BH and Grifo, J (2014) Blastocyst culture selects for euploid embryos: comparison of blastomere and trophectoderm biopsies. Reprod Biomed Online 28,485–491.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ahlstrom, A, Westin, C, Wikland, M and Hardarson, T (2013) Prediction of live birth in frozen–thawed single blastocyst transfer cycles by pre-freeze and postthaw morphology. Hum Reprod 28,1199–1209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartolacci, A, Pagliardini, L, Makieva, S, Salonia, A, Papaleo, E and Viganò, P (2018) Abnormal sperm concentration and motility as well as advanced paternal age compromise early embryonic development but not pregnancy outcomes: a retrospective study of 1266 ICSI cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet 35, 1897–1903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basile, N, Del Carmen Nogales, M, Bronet, F, Florensa, M, Riqueiros, M, Rodrigo, L, García-Velasco, J and Meseguer, M (2014) Increasing the probability of selecting chromosomally normal embryosby time-lapse morphokinetics analysis. Fertil Steril 101, 699–704.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bouillon, C, Celton, N, Kassem, S, Frapsauce, C and Guérif, F (2017) Obstetric and perinatal outcomes of singletons after single blastocyst transfer: is there any difference according to blastocyst morphology? Reprod Biomed Online 35, 197–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boyer, P and Boyer, M (2009) Non-invasive evaluation of the embryo: morphology of preimplantation embryos. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 37, 908–916.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boyer, P, Montjean, D, Tourame, P and Gervoise-Boyer, M (2013) Oocyte vitrification in an ART laboratory. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 41, 551–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, S (2008) Miscarriage and its associations. Semin Reprod Med 26, 391–400.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, A, Fishel, S, Bowman, N, Duffy, S, Sedler, M and Thornton, S (2013) Retrospective analysis of outcomes after IVF using an aneuploidy risk model derived from time-lapse imaging without PGS. Reprod Biomed Online 27, 140–146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cao, S, Zhao, C, Zhang, J, Wu, X, Guo, X and Ling, X (2014) Retrospective clinical analysis of two artificial shrinkage methods applied prior to blastocyst vitrification on the outcome of frozen embryo transfer. J Assist Reprod Genet 31, 577–581.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cobo, A, De los Santos, MJ, Castellò, D, Gámiz, P, Campos, P and Remohí, J (2012) Outcomes of vitrified early cleavage-grade and blastocyst-grade embryos in a cryopreservation program: evaluation of 3,150 warming cycles. Fertil Steril 98, 1138–1146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cobo, A, Castellò, D, Vallejo, B, Albert, C, De los Santos, JM and Remohí, J (2013) Outcome of cryotransfer of embryos developed from vitrified oocytes: double vitrification has no impact on delivery rates. Fertil Steril 99, 1623–1630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Darwish, E and Magdi, Y (2016) Artificial shrinkage of blastocoel using a laser pulse prior to vitrification improves clinical outcome. J Assist Reprod Genet 33, 467–471.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, S, Christopikou, D, Tsorva, E, Karagianni, A, Handyside, AH and Mastrominas, M (2012) Delayed cleavage division and a prolonged transition between 2- and 4-cell grades in embryos identified as aneuploidy at the 8- cell grade by array-CGH. Hum Reprod 27, 84–86.Google Scholar
Del Carmen Nogales, M, Bronet, F, Basile, N, Martínez, EM, Liñán, A, Rodrigo, L and Meseguer, M (2017) Type of chromosome abnormality affects embryo morphology dynamics. Fertil Steril 107, 229–235.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Desai, N, Ploskonka, S, Goodman, L, Attaran, M, Goldberg, J, Austin, C and Falcone, T (2016) Delayed blastulation, multinucleation, and expansion grade are independently associated with live-birth rates in frozen blastocyst transfer cycles. Fert Steril 106, 1370–1378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Du, Q, Wang, E, Huang, Y, Guo, X, Xiong, Y, Yu, Y, Yao, G, Shi, S and Sun, YP (2016) Blastocoele expansion degree predicts live birth after single blastocyst transfer for fresh and vitrified/warmed single blastocyst transfer cycles. Fert Steril 4, 910–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, DK, Lane, M, Stevens, J, Schlenker, T and Schoolcraft, WB (2000) Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome: towards a single blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril 73, 1155–1158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goto, S, Kadowaki, T, Tanaka, S, Hashimoto, H, Kokeguchi, S and Shiotani, M (2011) Prediction of pregnancy rate by blastocyst morphological score and age, based on 1,488 single frozen–thawed blastocyst transfer cycles. Fertil Steril 95, 948–952.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haas, J, Meriano, J, Laskin, C, Bentov, Y, Barzilay, E, Casper, RF and Cadesky, K (2016) Clinical pregnancy rate following frozen embryo transfer is higher with blastocysts vitrified on day 5 than on day 6. J Assist Reprod Genet 12, 1553–1557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrero, L, Pareja, S, Aragonés, M, Cobo, A, Bronet, F and Garcia-Velasco, JA (2014) Oocyte versus embryo vitrification for delayed embryo transfer: an observational study. Reprod Biomed Online 29, 567–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holubcová, Z, Kyjovská, D, Martonová, M, Páralová, D, Klenková, T, Otevřel, P, Štěpánová, R, Kloudová, S and Hampl, A (2019) Egg maturity assessment prior to ICSI prevents premature fertilization of late-maturing oocytes. J Assist Reprod Genet doi: 10.1007/s10815-018-1393-0 [Epub ahead of print]CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hyde, KJ and Schust, DJ (2015) Genetic considerations in recurrent pregnancy loss. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med 5, a023119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaartinen, N, Das, P, Kananen, K, Huhtala, H and Tinkanen, H (2015) Can repeated IVF-ICSI-cycles be avoided by using blastocysts developing from poor-quality cleavage grade embryos? Reprod Biomed Online 30, 241–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaye, L, Will, EA, Bartolucci, A, Nulsen, J, Benadiva, C and Engmann, L (2017) Pregnancy rates for single embryo transfer (SET) of day 5 and day 6 blastocysts after cryopreservation by vitrification and slow freeze. J Assist Reprod Genet 34, 913–919.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, HJ, Lee, KH, Park, SB, Choi, YB and Yang, JB (2015) The effect of artificial shrinkage and assisted hatching on the development of mouse blastocysts and cell number after vitrification. Clin Exp Reprod Med 42, 94–100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lammers, J, Reignier, A, Splingart, C, Catteau, A, David, L, Barriere, P and Freour, T (2015) Does sperm origin affect embryo morphokinetic parameters? J Assist Reprod Genet 32, 1325–1332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levi-Setti, PE, Menduni, F, Smeraldi, A, Patrizio, P, Morenghi, E and Albani, E (2016) Artificial shrinkage of blastocysts prior to vitrification improves pregnancy outcome: analysis of 1028 consecutive warming cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet 33, 461–466.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Montjean, D, Geoffroy-Siraudin, C, Gervoise-Boyer, M, Tourame, P and Boyer, P (2015) Morphokinetics analysis of embryos derived from vitrified/warmed oocytes. J Assist Reprod Genet 32, 1615–1621.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ortega-Hrepich, C, Stoop, D, Guzmán, L, Van Landuyt, L, Tournaye, H, Smitz, J and De Vos, M (2013) A ‘freeze-all’ embryo strategy after in vitro maturation: a novel approach in women with polycystic ovary syndrome? Fertil Steril 100, 1002–1007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Piccolomini, M, Nicolielo, M, Bonetti, T, Motta, E, Serafini, P and Alegretti, J (2016) Does slow embryo development predict a high aneuploidy rate on trophectoderm biopsy? Reprod Biomed Online 33, 398–403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rienzi, L, Gracia, C, Maggiulli, R, LaBarberaj, AR, Kaser, DJ, Ubaldi, FM, Vanderpoel, S and Racowsky, C (2017) Oocyte, embryo and blastocyst cryopreservation in ART: systematic review and meta-analysis comparing slow-freezing versus vitrification to produce evidence for the development of global guidance. Hum Reprod Update 23,139–155.Google ScholarPubMed
Shapiro, BS, Daneshmand, ST, Garner, FC, Aguirre, M and Hudson, C (2015) Freeze-all at the blastocyst or bipronuclear grade: a randomized clinical trial. Fertil Steril 104, 1138–1144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sifer, C, Sermondade, N, Dupont, C, Poncelet, C, Cédrin-Durnerin, I, Hugues, JN, Benzacken, B and Levy, R (2012) Outcome of embryo vitrification compared with slow freezing process at early cleavage grades. Report of the first French birth. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 40, 158–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suzumori, N and Sugiura-Ogasawara, M (2010) Genetic factors as a cause of miscarriage. Curr Med Chem 17, 3431–3437.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teh, WT, McBain, J and Rogers, P (2016) What is the contribution of embryo-endometrial asynchrony to implantation failure? J Assist Reprod Genet 33, 1419–1430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vanderzwalmen, P, Bertin, G, Debauche, Ch, Standaert, V, van Roosendaal, E, Vandervorst, M, Bollen, N, Zech, H, Mukaida, T, Takahashi, K and Schoysman, R (2002) Births after vitrification at morula and blastocyst grades: effect of artificial reduction of the blastocoelic cavity before vitrification. Hum Reprod 17, 744–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, X, Zhen, J, Sun, Z, Yu, Q, Deng, C, Zhou, Y, Wang, H and He, F (2016) Effects of fifth day (D5) or sixth day (D6) frozen–thawed blastocysts on neonatal outcomes. Zygote 24, 684–691.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wirleitner, B, Schuff, M, Stecher, A, Murtinger, M and Vanderzwalmen, P (2016) Pregnancy and birth outcomes following fresh or vitrified embryo transfer according to blastocyst morphology and expansion stage, and culturing strategy for delayed development. Hum Reprod 31, 1685–1695.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed