Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Birthweight of singletons born after blastocyst-stage or cleavage-stage transfer: analysis of a data set from three randomized controlled trials

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

Abstract

Purpose

The present post hoc analysis aims to study the neonatal data of singletons born from three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the outcome of day 3 and day 5 transfers.

Methods

Our analysis included 208 liveborn singletons from three existing RCTs (publication dates 2004, 2005, and 2006), 93 children from cleavage-stage transfers and 115 from blastocyst-stage transfers. Vanishing twins were excluded from the analysis. Singleton birthweight was the primary outcome measure. Gestational age and gender of the newborn were accounted for in the multiple regression analysis, along with other confounding factors, such as maternal age, BMI, parity, and smoking behavior.

Results

There was no significant difference in gestational age (median, interquartile range) between cleavage-stage transfer (275 days; 267–281) and blastocyst-stage transfer (277 days; 270–281; p = 0.22). Singleton birthweight (median, interquartile range) was not significantly different between cleavage-stage transfer (3330 g; 3020–3610) and blastocyst-stage transfer (3236 g; 2930–3630; p = 0.40), even following multivariable regression analysis to control for potential maternal and newborn confounders.

Conclusion

The gestational age and birthweight were not significantly different after cleavage-stage and blastocyst-stage transfers. One limitation to be recognized is the age of the data, with original data collection dates from 2001 to 2004. Additionally, the RCTs used for the present analysis have a fairly young age restriction.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dyer S, Chambers GM, de Mouzon J, Nygren KG, Zegers-Hochschild F, Mansour R, et al. International committee for monitoring assisted reproductive technologies world report: assisted reproductive technology 2008, 2009 and 2010. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:1588–609.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Chen M, Heilbronn LK. The health outcomes of human offspring conceived by assisted reproductive technologies (ART). J Dev Orig Health Dis. 2017;8:388–402.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Glujovsky D, Blake D, Farguhar C, Bardach A. Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002118.pub4.

  5. De Vos A, Van Landuyt L, Santos-Ribeiro S, Camus M, Van de Velde H, Tournaye H, et al. Cumulative live birth rates after fresh and vitrified cleavage-stage versus blastocyst-stage embryo transfer in the first treatment cycle. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:2442–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Martins WP, Nastri CO, Rienzi L, van der Poel SZ, Gracia C, Racowsky C. Blastocyst vs cleavage-stage embryo transfer: systematic review and meta-analysis of reproductive outcomes. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;49:583–91.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhu Q, Zhu J, Wang Y, Wang B, Wang N, Yin M, et al. Live birth rate and neonatal outcome following cleavage-stage embryo transfer versus blastocyst transfer using the freeze-all strategy. Reprod BioMed Online. 2019;38:892–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Maheshwari A, Kalampokas T, Davidson J, Bhattacharya S. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies resulting from the transfer of blastocyst-stage versus cleavage-stage embryos generated through in vitro fertilization treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:1615–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Dar S, Lazer T, Shah PS, Librach CL. Neonatal outcomes among singleton births after blastocyst versus cleavage stage embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20:439–48.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Wang X, Du M, Guan Y, Wang B, Zhang J, Liu Z. Comparative neonatal outcomes in singleton births from blastocyst transfers or cleavage-stage embryo transfers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2017;15:36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-017-0255-4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Mäkinen S, Söderström-Anttila V, Vainio J, Suikkari AM, Tuuri T. Does long in vitro culture promote large for gestational age babies? Hum Reprod. 2013;28:828–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fernando D, Halliday JL, Breheny S, Healy DL. Outcomes of singleton births after blastocyst versus nonblastocyst transfer in assisted reproductive technology. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:579–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Oron G, Nayot D, Son WY, Holzer H, Buckett W, Tulandi T. Obstetric and perinatal outcome from single cleavage transfer and single blastocyst transfer: a matched case-control study. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2015;31:469–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ginström Ernstad E, Bergh C, Khatibi A, Källén KB, Westlander G, Nilsson S, et al. Neonatal and maternal outcome after blastocyst transfer: a population-based registry study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214:378.e1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Papanikolaou EG, Camus M, Kolibianakis EM, Van Landuyt L, Van Steirteghem A, Devroey P. In vitro fertilization with single blastocyst-stage versus single cleavage-stage embryos. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:1139–46.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kolibianakis EM, Zikopoulos K, Verpoest W, Camus M, Joris H, Van Steirteghem AC, et al. Should we advise patients undergoing IVF to start a cycle leading to a day 3 or day 5 transfer? Hum Reprod. 2004;19:2550–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Papanikolaou EG, D’haeseleer E, Verheyen G, Van de Velde H, Camus M, Van Steirteghem A, et al. Live birth rate is significantly higher after blastocyst transfer than after cleavage-stage embryo transfer when at least four embryos are available on day 3 of embryo culture. A randomized prospective study. Hum Reprod. 2005;11:3198–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Martins WP, Nastri CO, Rienzi L, van der Poel SZ, Gracia C, Racowsky C. Obstetrical and perinatal outcomes following blastocyst transfer compared to cleavage transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:2561–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Alviggi C, Conforti A, Carbone IF, Borrelli R, De Placido G, Guerriero S. Influence of cryopreservation on perinatal outcome after blastocyst- vs cleavage-stage embryo transfer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;51:54–63.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. De Vos A, Santos-Ribeiro S, Van Landuyt L, Van de Velde H, Tournaye H, Verheyen G. Birthweight of singletons born after cleavage-stage or blastocyst transfer in fresh and warming cycles. Hum Reprod. 2018;33:196–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. De Vos A, Janssens R, Van de Velde H, Haentjens P, Bonduelle M, Tournaye H, et al. The type of culture medium and the duration of in vitro culture do not influence birthweight of ART singletons. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:20–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Castillo CM, Horne G, Fitzgerald CT, Johnstone ED, Brison DR, Roberts SA. The impact of IVF on birthweight from 1991 to 2005: a cross-sectional study. Hum Reprod. 2019;34:920–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gardner DK. The impact of physiological oxygen during culture, and vitrification for cryopreservation, on the outcome of extended culture in human IVF. Reprod BioMed Online. 2016;32:137–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Christianson MS, Zhao Y, Shoham G, Granot I, Safran A, Khafagy A, et al. Embryo catheter loading and embryo culture techniques: results of a worldwide web-based survey. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014;31:1029–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Chambers GM, Chugtai AA, Farquhar CM, Wang YA. Risk of preterm birth after blastocyst embryo transfer: a large population study using contemporary registry data from Australia and New Zealand. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:997–1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ding J, Yin T, Zhang Y, Zhou D, Yang J. The effect of blastocyst transfer on newborn sex ratio and monozygotic twinning rate: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod BioMed Online. 2018;37:292–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Reproductive Medicine, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090, Brussels, Belgium

    Anick De Vos, Herman Tournaye & Greta Verheyen

  2. IVI-RMA Lisboa, Avenida Infante Dom Henrique 333 H 1-9, 1800-282, Lisbon, Portugal

    Samuel dos Santos-Ribeiro

Authors
  1. Anick De Vos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samuel dos Santos-Ribeiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Herman Tournaye
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Greta Verheyen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anick De Vos.

Ethics declarations

The present retrospective study was approved by the local ethical committee of the Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (B.U.N. 143201629046).

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

De Vos, A., dos Santos-Ribeiro, S., Tournaye, H. et al. Birthweight of singletons born after blastocyst-stage or cleavage-stage transfer: analysis of a data set from three randomized controlled trials. J Assist Reprod Genet 37, 127–132 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-019-01641-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-019-01641-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation