Sub-endometrial contractility or computer-enhanced 3-D modeling scoring of the endometrium before embryo transfer: are they better than measuring endometrial thickness?
- 64 Downloads
Abstract
Purpose
Recent studies have focused on transvaginal ultrasound measurement (TVUS) of sub-endometrial contractility and computer-enhanced 3-D modeling scoring of the endometrium prior to embryo transfer (ET).The aim of this study was to compare pregnancy outcome of patients who performed the 3-D scoring or the sub-endometrial measurement prior to the ET with patients that did not perform those procedures.
Methods
A single center retrospective cohort study of 635 freeze/thaw cycles of blastocysts vitrified on day 5 and transferred between January 2016 and August 2016.
Results
We compared the patients who performed 3-D scoring with the control group and found comparable patients’ characteristics, clinical pregnancy rates (42% vs. 44.3, p = NS, respectively), and ongoing pregnancy rates (31.7% vs. 33.9%, p = NS).We then compared the patients who performed the sub-endometrial wave measurements with the control group and found similar findings. The clinical pregnancy rate (38.2% vs. 44.3, p = NS, respectively) and the ongoing pregnancy rate (30.8% vs. 33.9%) were comparable between the two groups. We performed a regression analysis to examine the independent contribution of different variables to the ongoing pregnancy rates. Both the 3-D and the wave count procedures were not found to have any influence on the ongoing pregnancy rates.
Conclusions
Although new ultrasonic methods of evaluating the endometrium have been proposed during the last years, these methods have not been shown to improve the pregnancy rates compared to the original method of assessing the endometrium by measuring the endometrial thickness.
Keywords
Sub-endometrial waves 3-D endometrial scoring FETNotes
Compliance with ethical standards
Ethics statement
The study was approved by the Research Ethics Board at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto.
References
- 1.Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, Restrepo H, Garner FC, Aguirre M, Hudson C. Matched-cohort comparison of single-embryo transfers in fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:389–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, Garner FC, Aguirre M, Hudson C. Clinical rationale for cryopreservation of entire embryo cohorts in lieu of fresh transfer. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, Garner FC, Aguirre M, Hudson C, Thomas S. Evidence of impaired endometrial receptivity after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a prospective randomized trial comparing fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfer in normal responders. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:344–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Ozgur K, Berkkanoglu M, Bulut H, Humaidan P, Coetzee K. Perinatal outcomes after fresh versus vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer: retrospective analysis. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:899–907 e3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Bergh PA, Navot D. The impact of embryonic development and endometrial maturity on the timing of implantation. Fertil Steril. 1992;58:537–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Isaacs JD Jr, Wells CS, Williams DB, Odem RR, Gast MJ, Strickler RC. Endometrial thickness is a valid monitoring parameter in cycles of ovulation induction with menotropins alone. Fertil Steril. 1996;65:262–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Weissman A, Gotlieb L, Casper RF. The detrimental effect of increased endometrial thickness on implantation and pregnancy rates and outcome in an in vitro fertilization program. Fertil Steril. 1999;71:147–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Wu Y, Gao X, Lu X, Xi J, Jiang S, Sun Y, et al. Endometrial thickness affects the outcome of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer in normal responders after GnRH antagonist administration. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2014;12:96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Kasius A, Smit JG, Torrance HL, Eijkemans MJ, Mol BW, Opmeer BC, et al. Endometrial thickness and pregnancy rates after IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20:530–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Fanchin R, Righini C, Olivennes F, Taylor S, de Ziegler D, Frydman R. Uterine contractions at the time of embryo transfer alter pregnancy rates after in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:1968–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Fanchin R, Ayoubi JM, Olivennes F, Righini C, de Ziegler D, Frydman R. Hormonal influence on the uterine contractility during ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod. 2000;15(Suppl 1):90–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Fanchin R, Ayoubi JM, Righini C, Olivennes F, Schonauer LM, Frydman R. Uterine contractility decreases at the time of blastocyst transfers. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:1115–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Bu Z, Wang K, Dai W, Sun Y. Endometrial thickness significantly affects clinical pregnancy and live birth rates in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2016:1–5.Google Scholar
- 14.Fang R, Cai L, Xiong F, Chen J, Yang W, Zhao X. The effect of endometrial thickness on the day of hCG administration on pregnancy outcome in the first fresh IVF/ICSI cycle. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2016:1–4.Google Scholar
- 15.Lebovitz O, Orvieto R. Treating patients with “thin” endometrium - an ongoing challenge. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2014;30:409–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Al-Ghamdi A, Coskun S, Al-Hassan S, Al-Rejjal R, Awartani K. The correlation between endometrial thickness and outcome of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) outcome. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2008;6:37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Zhao J, Zhang Q, Li Y. The effect of endometrial thickness and pattern measured by ultrasonography on pregnancy outcomes during IVF-ET cycles. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2012;10:100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Richter KS, Bugge KR, Bromer JG, Levy MJ. Relationship between endometrial thickness and embryo implantation, based on 1,294 cycles of in vitro fertilization with transfer of two blastocyst-stage embryos. Fertil Steril. 2007;87:53–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Dain L, Bider D, Levron J, Zinchenko V, Westler S, Dirnfeld M. Thin endometrium in donor oocyte recipients: enigma or obstacle for implantation? Fertil Steril. 2013;100:1289–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Amui J, Check JH, Cohen R. Successful twin pregnancy in a donor oocyte recipient despite a maximum endometrial thickness in the late proliferative phase of 4 mm. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2012;38:328–9.Google Scholar
- 21.Fanchin R, Righini C, Ayoubi JM, Olivennes F, de Ziegler D, Frydman R. Uterine contractions at the time of embryo transfer: a hindrance to implantation? Contracept Fertil Sex. 1998;26:498–505.Google Scholar
- 22.Lesny P, Killick SR, Tetlow RL, Robinson J, Maguiness SD. Embryo transfer--can we learn anything new from the observation of junctional zone contractions? Hum Reprod. 1998;13:1540–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Zhu L, Li Y, Xu A. Influence of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation on uterine peristalsis in infertile women. Hum Reprod. 2012;27:2684–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Casper RF, Yanushpolsky EH. Optimal endometrial preparation for frozen embryo transfer cycles: window of implantation and progesterone support. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:867–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Zhu L, Che HS, Xiao L, Li YP. Uterine peristalsis before embryo transfer affects the chance of clinical pregnancy in fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:1238–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar