Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is the presence of an uncleaved embryo on day 3 a useful predictor of outcomes following day 5 transfer?

  • Assisted Reproduction Technologies
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to determine whether the presence of an uncleaved embryo on day 3 is predictive of cycle outcome after day 5 transfer (D5 ET).

Methods

In vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles from January 2013 to November 2014 with D5 ET were analyzed for the presence of at least one uncleaved embryo on day 3 (D3). Each index cycle (n = 70) was compared with two matched control cycles without uncleaved embryos. The main outcome measures included embryo quality, implantation rate, and clinical pregnancy rate.

Results

Fifty-nine of 3896 total embryos in this study were uncleaved on D3 (1.5 %). Cycles with uncleaved embryos had more oocytes retrieved (20.6 vs. 17.5), lower proportions of good quality embryos on D3 (52.4 vs. 66.1 %), and fewer usable embryos (transferred or frozen) on D5 (42.4 vs. 50.8 %). However, there were no significant differences in the incidence of cycles with a positive hCG, or in the rates of implantation, clinical pregnancy, or live birth.

Conclusions

Although an uncleaved embryo on D3 is associated with reduced conversion of sibling embryos to the blastocyst stage on D5, overall quality of those embryos forming blastocysts is not markedly decreased and clinical outcomes are not compromised.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Edwards RG, Steptoe PC, Purdy JM. Establishing full-term human pregnancies using cleaving embryos grown in vitro. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1980;87(9):737–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bolton VN, Wren ME, Parsons JH. Pregnancies after in vitro fertilization and transfer of human blastocysts. Fertil Steril. 1991;55:830–2.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gardner DK, Vella P, Lane M, Wagley L, Schlenker T, Schoolcraft WB. Culture and transfer of human blastocysts increases implantation rates and reduces the need for multiple embryo transfers. Fertil Steril. 1998;69:84–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Adler A, Lee HL, McCulloh DH, Ampeloquio E, Clarke-Williams M, Wertz BH, et al. Blastocyst culture selects for euploid embryos: comparison of blastomere and trophectoderm biopsies. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;28(4):485–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Vega M, Breborowicz A, Moshier EL, McGovern PG, Keltz MD. Blastulation rates decline in a linear fashion from euploid to aneuploid embryos with single versus multiple chromosomal errors. Fertil Steril. 2014;102(2):394–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dokras A, Sargent IL, Barlow DH. Human blastocyst grading: an indicator of developmental potential? Hum Reprod. 1993;8:2119–27.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB. In vitro culture of human blastocysts. In: Jansen R, Mortimer D, editors. Towards reproductive certainty: fertility and genetics beyond. London: Parthenon Publishing; 1999. p. 378–88.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB. Culture and transfer of human blastocysts. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 1999;11:307–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gardner D, Lane M, Stevens J, Schlenker T, Schoolcraft WB. Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome: towards a single blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril. 2000;73:1155–58.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Balaban B, Urman B, Sertac A, Alatas C, Aksoy S, Mercan R. Blastocyst quality affects the success of blastocyst-stage embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2000;74:282–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Balaban B, Yakin K, Urman B. Randomized comparison of two different blastocyst grading systems. Fertil Steril. 2006;85:559–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Richter K, Harris D, Daneshmand S, Shapiro B. Quantitative grading of a human blastocyst: optimal inner cell mass size and shape. Fertil Steril. 2001;76:1157–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Treff NR, Tao X, Ferry KM, Su J, Taylor D, Scott Jr RT. Development and validation of an accurate quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction-based assay for human blastocyst comprehensive chromosomal aneuploidy screening. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(4):819–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Scott Jr RT, Upham KM, Forman EJ, Hong KH, Scott KL, Taylor D, et al. Blastocyst biopsy with comprehensive chromosome screening and fresh embryo transfer significantly increases in vitro fertilization implantation and delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(3):697–703.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wells D, Kaur K, Grifo J, Glassner M, Taylor JC, Fragouli E, et al. Clinical utilization of a rapid low-pass whole genome sequencing technique for the diagnosis of aneuploidy in human embryos prior to implantation. J Med Genet. 2014;51(8):553–62.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Valbuena D, Martin J, de Pablo JL, Remohi J, Pellicer A, Simon C. Increasing levels of estradiol are deleterious to embryonic implantation because they directly affect the embryo. Fertil Steril. 2001;76(5):962–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Fanchin R, Ayoubi JM. Uterine dynamics: impact on the human reproduction process. Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;18 Suppl 2:57–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kawachiya S, Bodri D, Shimada N, Kato K, Takehara Y, Kato O. Blastocyst culture is associated with an elevated incidence of monozygotic twinning after single embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(6):2140–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Glujovsky D, Blake D, Bardach A, Farquhar C. Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;7:CD002118.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Skiadas CC, Missmer SA, Benson CB, Gee RE, Racowsky C. Risk factors associated with pregnancies containing a monochorionic pair following assisted reproductive technologies. Hum Reprod. 2008;23(6):1366–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Papanikolaou EG, Kolibianakis EM, Tournaye H, Venetis C, Fatemi H, Tarlatzis B, et al. Live birth rates after transfer of equal number of blastocysts and cleavage stage embryos in IVF. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:91–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Thomas MR, Sparks AE, Ryan GL, van Voorhis BJ. Clinical predictors of human blastocyst formation and pregnancy after extended culture and transfer. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:543–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Dessolle L, Freour T, Barriere P, Darai E, Ravel C, Jean M, et al. A cycle-based model to predict blastocyst transfer cancellation. Hum Reprod. 2010;25:598–604.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Braga DP, Setti AS, de Cássia S, Figueira R, Machado RB, Iaconelli Jr A, et al. Patient selection criteria for blastocyst transfers in extended embryo culture programs. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012;29(12):1357–62.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kaser DJ, Racowsky C. Clinical outcomes following selection of human preimplantation embryos with time-lapse monitoring: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20(5):617–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kirkegaard K, Ahlstrom A, Ingerslev HJ, Hardarson T. Choosing the best embryo by time lapse versus standard morphology. Fertil Steril. 2015;103(2):323–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Braga DP, Setti AS, Figueira RC, Iaconelli Jr A, Borges Jr E. The importance of the cleavage stage morphology evaluation for blastocyst transfer in patients with good prognosis. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014;31(8):1105–10.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Reichman DE, Jackson KV, Racowsky C. Incidence and development of zygotes exhibiting abnormal pronuclear disposition after identification of two pronuclei at the fertilization check. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:965–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Racowsky C, Jackson KV, Cekleniak NA, Fox JH, Hornstein MD, Ginsburg ES. The number of eight-cell embryos is a key determinant for selecting day 3 or day 5 transfer. Fertil Steril. 2000;73(3):558–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ceyhan ST, Jackson KV, Racowsky C. Selecting the most competent embryo. In: Carrell DT, Racowsky C, Schlegel PN, Van Voorhis BJ, editors. Biennial Review of Infertility, vol. 1. New York: Humana Press; 2009. p. 143–69.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

    Clara J. Men, Charles L. Bormann, Brian W. Walsh & Catherine Racowsky

Authors
  1. Clara J. Men
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Charles L. Bormann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Brian W. Walsh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Catherine Racowsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Catherine Racowsky.

Additional information

Capsule Our findings show that the presence of an uncleaved embryo on D3 is not a valuable predictor of clinical outcome after D5 ET in good prognosis patients and is, therefore, unlikely to be a useful criterion when deciding to take a patient to D5 transfer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Men, C.J., Bormann, C.L., Walsh, B.W. et al. Is the presence of an uncleaved embryo on day 3 a useful predictor of outcomes following day 5 transfer?. J Assist Reprod Genet 32, 1379–1384 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-015-0532-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-015-0532-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation