Advertisement

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

, Volume 35, Issue 8, pp 1537–1542 | Cite as

Brief co-incubation of gametes benefits the outcomes of newborns

  • Ruiqi Li
  • Songbang Ou
  • Nengyong Ouyang
  • Lingyan Zheng
  • Qingxue Zhang
  • Dongzi Yang
  • Wenjun Wang
Assisted Reproduction Technologies
  • 82 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

The objective of this study was to determine whether ammonium accumulates in IVF media during fertility process and whether the brief co-incubation of gametes (bIVF) benefited the outcomes of newborns.

Methods

Ammonium levels in IVF media during gamete co-incubation were measured and the effects of bIVF on neonatal outcomes were evaluated retrospectively in this study.

Results

A total of 609 live newborns cycles were included in this study. The results showed that ammonium levels in the conventional IVF (cIVF) media was significantly increased than that in bIVF and control media (27.32 ± 5.60 vs 20.71 ± 3.89, P = 0.03; 27.32 ± 5.60 vs 19.46 ± 1.31, P = 0.01, respectively). In the cIVF group, the mean gestational age was significantly lower (37.36 ± 2.29 vs. 37.74 ± 1.94 weeks, P = 0.031) and the incidence of preterm birth (< 37 weeks) was higher than that in the bIVF group (25.80 vs. 17.63%, P = 0.015). Singleton cycles and twin cycles were then analyzed respectively. The gestational age and birth weight of the singleton cycles were similar between the two groups. However, of the twin cycles, the gestational age was significantly decreased and the rate of preterm birth was increased significantly in the cIVF group (35.76 ± 2.31 vs. 36.48 ± 1.73, P = 0.013; 53.33 vs. 31.52%, P = 0.002, respectively).

Conclusions

There is an ammonium accumulation in IVF media during co-incubation of gametes. And bIVF reduces the risk of preterm birth (< 37 weeks), especially with regard to preterm birth of the twin cycles, and seems to be a safe alternative method for improving the neonatal outcomes compared with cIVF.

Keywords

Ammonium Neonatal outcomes Preterm birth Brief incubation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The contribution of the laboratory staff in the Fertility Center of Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital is gratefully acknowledged.

Author’s contribution

Ruiqi Li analyzed the data and drafted the manuscript. Songbang O, Nengyong Ouyang, Lingyan Zheng, and Meiqi Mai collected the data. Qingxue Zhang revised the manuscript. Dongzi Yang and Wenjun Wang conceived and designed the study. All the authors interpreted the data.

Funding

This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81370680), the National Key R&D Plan of 2017 (Grant No. 2017YFC1001004PCOS), Guangzhou Science and Technology Project 2014 (Grant No. 2014Y2-00512), 2014 Sun Yat-sen University 5010 Project (Grant No: 2014005), Special funds for Public welfare research of Guangdong Province (Grant No. 2014A020213014) and the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (Grant No. 2015A030313086).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. 1.
    Sazonova A, Kallen K, Thurin-Kjellberg A, Wennerholm UB, Bergh C. Obstetric outcome after in vitro fertilization with single or double embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:442–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Henningsen AK, Pinborg A, Lidegaard O, Vestergaard C, Forman JL, Andersen AN. Perinatal outcome of singleton siblings born after assisted reproductive technology and spontaneous conception: Danish national sibling-cohort study. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:959–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Helmerhorst FM, Perquin DA, Donker D, Keirse MJ. Perinatal outcome of singletons and twins after assisted conception: a systematic review of controlled studies. BMJ. 2004;328:261–0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pelkonen S, Koivunen R, Gissler M, Nuojua-Huttunen S, Suikkari AM, Hyden-Granskog C, et al. Perinatal outcome of children born after frozen and fresh embryo transfer: the Finnish cohort study 1995-2006. Hum Reprod. 2010;25:914–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McGovern PG, Llorens AJ, Skurnick JH, Weiss G, Goldsmith LT. Increased risk of preterm birth in singleton pregnancies resulting from in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer or gamete intrafallopian transfer: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2004;82:1514–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eskild A, Monkerud L, Tanbo T. Birthweight and placental weight; do changes in culture media used for IVF matter? Comparisons with spontaneous pregnancies in the corresponding time periods. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:3207–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dar S, Librach CL, Gunby J, Bissonnette F, Cowan L. Increased risk of preterm birth in singleton pregnancies after blastocyst versus day 3 embryo transfer: Canadian ART register (CARTR) analysis. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:924–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhu J, Lin S, Li M, Chen L, Lian Y, Liu P, et al. Effect of in vitro culture period on birthweight of singleton newborns. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:448–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kleijkers SHM, van Montfoort APA, Smits LJM, Coonen E, Derhaag JG, Evers JLH, et al. Age of G-1 PLUS v5 embryo culture medium is inversely associated with birthweight of the newborn. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:1352–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kleijkers SHM, van Montfoort APA, Bekers O, Coonen E, Derhaag JG, Evers JLH, et al. Ammonium accumulation in commercially available embryo culture media and protein supplements during storage at 2–8°C and during incubation at 37°C. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:1192–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li Q, Wang WJ, Zhang NF, Ouyang NY, Li RQ, Mai MQ, et al. Ammonium concentration of spent medium provides a noninvasive assessment of embryonic developmental potential in IVF. Reprod Sci. 2013;20:1316–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lane M, Gardner DK. Ammonium induces aberrant blastocyst differentiation, metabolism, pH regulation, gene expression and subsequently alters fetal development in the mouse. Biol Reprod. 2003;69:1109–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhang XD, Liu JX, Liu WW, Gao Y, Han W, Xiong S, et al. Time of insemination culture and outcomes of in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2013;19:685–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huang Z, Li J, Wang L, Yan J, Shi Y, Li S. Brief co-incubation of sperm and oocytes for in vitro fertilization techniques. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:D9391.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kattera S, Chen C. Short coincubation of gametes in in vitro fertilization improves implantation and pregnancy rates: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Fertil Steril. 2003;80:1017–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dirnfeld M, Bider D, Koifman M, Calderon I, Abramovici H. Shortened exposure of oocytes to spermatozoa improves in-vitro fertilization outcome: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:2562–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Li R, Ouyang N, Ou S, Ni R, Mai M, Zhang Q, et al. Does reducing gamete co-incubation time improve clinical outcomes: a retrospective study. J Assist Reprod Gen. 2016;33:33–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    De Sutter P, Delbaere I, Gerris J, Verstraelen H, Goetgeluk S, Van der Elst J, et al. Birthweight of singletons after assisted reproduction is higher after single- than after double-embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:2633–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zander DL, Thompson JG, Lane M. Perturbations in mouse embryo development and viability caused by ammonium are more severe after exposure at the cleavage stages. Biol Reprod. 2006;74:288–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Khosla S, Dean W, Brown D, Reik W, Feil R. Culture of preimplantation mouse embryos affects fetal development and the expression of imprinted genes. Biol Reprod. 2001;64:918–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rivera RM, Stein P, Weaver JR, Mager J, Schultz RM, Bartolomei MS. Manipulations of mouse embryos prior to implantation result in aberrant expression of imprinted genes on day 9.5 of development. Hum Mol Genet. 2008;17:1–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gardner DK, Hamilton R, McCallie B, Schoolcraft WB, Katz-Jaffe MG. Human and mouse embryonic development, metabolism and gene expression are altered by an ammonium gradient in vitro. Reproduction. 2013;146:49–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    McDonald SD, Murphy K, Beyene J, Ohlsson A. Perinatel outcomes of singleton pregnancies achieved by in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2005;27:449–59.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kallen B, Finnstrom O, Lindam A, Nilsson E, Nygren KG, Olausson PO. Selected neonatal outcomes in dizygotic twins after IVF versus non-IVF pregnancies. BJOG. 2010;117:676–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Anthony S, Buitendijk SE, Dorrepaal CA, Lindner K, Braat DD, den Ouden AL. Congenital malformations in 4224 children conceived after IVF. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:2089–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Xiong X, Dickey RP, Pridjian G, Buekens P. Maternal age and preterm births in singleton and twin pregnancies conceived by in vitro fertilisation in the United States. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2015;29:22–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Oken E, Kleinman KP, Rich-Edwards J, Gillman MW. A nearly continuous measure of birth weight for gestational age using a United States national reference. BMC Pediatr. 2003;3:6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cogswell ME, Yip R. The influence of fetal and maternal factors on the distribution of birthweight. Semin Perinatol. 1995;19:222–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rosenberg TJ, Garbers S, Lipkind H, Chiasson MA. Maternal obesity and diabetes as risk factors for adverse pregnancy outcomes: differences among 4 racial/ethnic groups. Am J Public Health. 2005;95:1545–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ruiqi Li
    • 1
    • 2
  • Songbang Ou
    • 1
    • 2
  • Nengyong Ouyang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Lingyan Zheng
    • 1
    • 2
  • Qingxue Zhang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Dongzi Yang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Wenjun Wang
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Malignant Tumor Epigenetics and Gene Regulation, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial HospitalSun Yat-Sen UniversityGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Reproductive Medicine Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial HospitalSun Yat-Sen UniversityGuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations