Lasers in Medical Science

, Volume 34, Issue 6, pp 1137–1145 | Cite as

Laser-assisted hatching and clinical outcomes in frozen-thawed cleavage-embryo transfers of patients with previous repeated failure

  • Xinmei Lu
  • Yubing Liu
  • Xiang Cao
  • Su-Ying LiuEmail author
  • Xi DongEmail author
Original Article


Assisted hatching (AH) is initially developed to provide an artificial manipulation of the zona pellucida (ZP) to help embryos hatch and improve the capacity of the embryos to implant. However, these effects remain unclear and controversial because of variation in patient characteristics, and it is critical to ascertain the indications for AH and to identify those patients who might benefit from AH. Here, this study aimed to assess the effect of laser-assisted zona thinning hatching technology (LAH) during the frozen-thawed D3 embryos on pregnancy outcomes in patients with previous repeated failures in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET). To the best of our knowledge, these relationships have not been previously investigated. A retrospective cohort analysis was carried out. Infertility patients with previous repeated failure who underwent assisted reproductive therapy at our in vitro fertilization (IVF) center from May 2014 to May 2016 were enrolled. A total of 415 cleavage FET cycles (225 in the LAH group and 190 in the control group) were analyzed. Clinical outcomes including clinical pregnancy, implantation, live birth, miscarriage, and multiple gestation rates after transfer were compared between the LAH and control groups. The clinical pregnancy (49.3% versus 38.9%) and implantation rates (31.2% versus 24.6%) were significantly higher for the LAH group than the control group (P < 0.05). The live birth (44.8% versus 35.8%), multiple pregnancy (32.4% versus 31.0%), preterm birth (22.8% versus 17.1%), miscarriage (7.2% versus 5.4%), and ectopic rates (1.9% versus 0%) did not differ significantly between the two groups (P > 0.05). This study showed that LAH via zona pellucida (ZP) thinning significantly improves clinical outcomes, particularly clinical pregnancy and implantation rates, associated with FET cycles among patients with previous repeated failure.


Frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) Laser-assisted hatching (LAH) D3 cleavage embryo Previous repeated failure 



assisted hatching


Zona pellucida


laser-assisted hatching


frozen-thawed embryo transfer


in vitro fertilization


assisted reproductive technologies


in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer


follicle-stimulating hormone


gonadotrophin-releasing hormone




human chorionic gonadotropin


intracytoplasmic sperm injection


two pronuclei

2 PB

two polar bodies


equilibration solution


vitrification solution


trawing solution


diluent solution


washing solution 1


washing solution 2


blastocyst culture medium


monozygotic twin



The authors are very grateful to all personnel of the Reproductive Medical Centre of Zhongshan Hospital.

Authors’ contributions

XML carried out diagnosis, ovarian stimulation and oocytes collection. XML and YBL participated in embryo culture, vitrification and warming. YBL and XC participated in the laser-assisted hatching procedure. YBL and XML contributed to data collection and statistical analysis. XML, YBL, and SYL contributed to manuscript writing as well as to interpretation of the results. SYL participated in the design of the study and performed part of the statistical analysis. XD contributed to guideline of this study, and participated in its design and critical revision of the manuscript. All authors participated in the data collection and read approved the final manuscript.


This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant No. 31601197), and the project sponsored by Program for Young Excellent Talents in Tongji University (grant No. 2016KJ049).

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the ethics committee of Zhongshan Hospital. Informed consent has been obtained.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no conflict interests.


  1. 1.
    Gunby J et al (2010) Assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in Canada: 2006 results from the Canadian ART register. Fertil Steril 93(7):2189–2201CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ishihara O et al (2015) International committee for monitoring assisted reproductive technologies: world report on assisted reproductive technologies, 2007. Fertil Steril 103(2):402–13.e11CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cohen J et al (1990) Impairment of the hatching process following IVF in the human and improvement of implantation by assisting hatching using micromanipulation. Hum Reprod 5(1):7–13CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Feng HL et al (2009) A retroprospective study comparing three different assisted hatching techniques. Fertil Steril 91(4 Suppl):1323–1325CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Huisman GJ et al (2000) Implantation rates after in vitro fertilization and transfer of a maximum of two embryos that have undergone three to five days of culture. Fertil Steril 73(1):117–122CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hsieh YY et al (2002) Laser-assisted hatching of embryos is better than the chemical method for enhancing the pregnancy rate in women with advanced age. Fertil Steril 78(1):179–182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Makrakis E et al (2006) Laser versus mechanical assisted hatching: a prospective study of clinical outcomes. Fertil Steril 86(6):1596–1600CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lanzendorf SE et al (2007) A randomized, prospective study comparing laser-assisted hatching and assisted hatching using acidified medium. Fertil Steril 87(6):1450–1457CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alteri A et al (2018) Revisiting embryo assisted hatching approaches: a systematic review of the current protocols. J Assist Reprod Genet 35(3):367–391CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mantoudis E et al (2001) A comparison between quarter, partial and total laser assisted hatching in selected infertility patients. Hum Reprod 16(10):2182–2186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Blake DA et al (2001) Laser zona pellucida thinning--an alternative approach to assisted hatching. Hum Reprod 16(9):1959–1964CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ali J et al (2003) Routine laser assisted hatching results in significantly increased clinical pregnancies. J Assist Reprod Genet 20(5):177–181CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martins WP et al (2011) Assisted hatching of human embryos: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Hum Reprod Update 17(4):438–453CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (2014) Role of assisted hatching in in vitro fertilization: a guideline. Fertil Steril 102(2):348–351Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nadir CH et al (2005) Impact of assisted hatching on ART outcome in women with endometriosis. Hum Reprod 20(9):2546–2549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cohen J et al (1992) Selective assisted hatching of human embryos. Ann Acad Med Singap 21(4):565–570PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sallam HN, Sadek SS, Agameya AF (2003) Assisted hatching--a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Assist Reprod Genet 20(8):332–342CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Levin I et al (2012) Effects of laser polar-body biopsy on embryo quality. Fertil Steril 97(5):1085–1088CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Han TS et al (2003) Laser-assisted human embryo biopsy on the third day of development for preimplantation genetic diagnosis: two successful case reports. Fertil Steril 80(2):453–455CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hartshorn C, Anshelevich A, Wangh LJ (2005) Laser zona drilling does not induce hsp70i transcription in blastomeres of eight-cell mouse embryos. Fertil Steril 84(5):1547–1550CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Uppangala S et al (2016) Laser assisted zona hatching does not lead to immediate impairment in human embryo quality and metabolism. Syst Biol Reprod Med 62(6):396–403CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hiraoka K et al (2009) Impact of the size of zona pellucida thinning area on vitrified-warmed cleavage-stage embryo transfers: a prospective, randomized study. J Assist Reprod Genet 26(9–10):515–521CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Alikani M et al (1994) Monozygotic twinning in the human is associated with the zona pellucida architecture. Hum Reprod 9(7):1318–1321CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schieve LA et al (2000) Does assisted hatching pose a risk for monozygotic twinning in pregnancies conceived through in vitro fertilization? Fertil Steril 74(2):288–294CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Behr B et al (2000) Blastocyst-ET and monozygotic twinning. J Assist Reprod Genet 17(6):349–351CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schachter M et al (2001) Monozygotic twinning after assisted reproductive techniques: a phenomenon independent of micromanipulation. Hum Reprod 16(6):1264–1269CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kanyo K, Konc J (2003) A follow-up study of children born after diode laser assisted hatching. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 110(2):176–180CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Primi MP et al (2004) A European multicentre prospective randomized study to assess the use of assisted hatching with a diode laser and the benefit of an immunosuppressive/antibiotic treatment in different patient populations. Hum Reprod 19(10):2325–2333CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zhou H, Zao W, Zhang W, Shi J, Shi W (2014) No adverse effects were identified on the perinatal outcomes after laser-assisted hatching treatment. Reprod BioMed Online 29(6):692–698CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jeong JE et al (2018) Effects of three-area laser-assisted zona thinning in 8-cell human embryos on pregnancy outcomes in vitro fertilization. Clin Exp Reprod Med 45(1):25–30CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jungheim ES et al (2010) Embryo transfer practices in the United States: a survey of clinics registered with the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Fertil Steril 94(4):1432–1436CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Zhongshan HospitalFudan UniversityShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Tenth People’s Hospital of Tongji UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations