Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Deferred Embryo Transfer Strategy Seems Not to be a Good Option After Repeated IVF/ICSI Cycle Failures

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Reproductive Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study was to assess whether a deferred frozen—thawed embryo transfer (Def-ET) offers any benefits compared to a fresh ET strategy in women who have had 2 or more consecutive in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic injection (ICSI) cycle failures.

Design

An observational cohort study in a tertiary referral care center including 416 cycles from women with a previous history of 2 or more consecutive IVF/ICSI failures cycles. Both Def-ET and fresh ET strategies were compared using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. The main outcome measured was the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR).

Results

A total of 416 cycles were included in the analysis: 197 in the fresh ET group and 219 in the Def-ET group. The CLBR was not significantly different between the fresh and Def-ET groups (58/197 [29.4%] and 57/219 [26.0%], respectively, P =.437). In addition, after the first ET, there was no significant difference in the live birth rate between the fresh ET and Def-ET groups (50/197 [25.4%] vs 44/219 [20.1%], respectively). Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that compared to the fresh strategy, the Def-ET strategy was not associated with a higher probability of live birth.

Conclusions

In cases with 2 or more consecutive prior IVF/ICSI cycle failures, a Def-ET strategy did not result in better ART outcomes than a fresh ET strategy.

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. Salamonsen LA, Nie G, Hannan NJ, Dimitriadis E. Society for Reproductive Biology Founders’ Lecture 2009. Preparing fertile soil: the importance of endometrial receptivity. Reprod Fertil Dev. 2009;21(7):923–934.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Achache H, Revel A. Endometrial receptivity markers, the journey to successful embryo implantation. Hum Reprod Update. 2006;12(6):731–746.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. European IVF-Monitoring Consortium (EIM), European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE); Kupka MS, D’Hooghe T, Ferraretti AP, et al. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2011: results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 2016;31(2):233–248.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Roberts SA, Stylianou C. The non-independence of treatment outcomes from repeat IVF cycles: estimates and consequences. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 2012;27(2):436–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Sharma V, Allgar V, Rajkhowa M. Factors influencing the cumulative conception rate and discontinuation of in vitro fertilization treatment for infertility. Fertil Steril. 2002;78(1):40–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nikas G, Develioglu OH, Toner JP, Jones HW. Endometrial pinopodes indicate a shift in the window of receptivity in IVF cycles. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 1999;14(3):787–792.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ubaldi F, Bourgain C, Tournaye H, Smitz J, Van Steirteghem A, Devroey P. Endometrial evaluation by aspiration biopsy on the day of oocyte retrieval in the embryo transfer cycles in patients with serum progesterone rise during the follicular phase. Fertil Steril. 1997;67(3):521–526.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lass A, Peat D, Avery S, Brinsden P. Histological evaluation of endometrium on the day of oocyte retrieval after gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist-follicle stimulating hormone ovulation induction for in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 1998;13(11):3203–3205.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bourgain C, Devroey P. The endometrium in stimulated cycles for IVF. Hum Reprod Update. 2003;9(6):515–522.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Haouzi D, Assou S, Mahmoud K, et al. Gene expression profile of human endometrial receptivity: comparison between natural and stimulated cycles for the same patients. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 2009;24(6):1436–1445.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Horcajadas JA, Mínguez P, Dopazo J, et al. Controlled ovarian stimulation induces a functional genomic delay of the endometrium with potential clinical implications. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008;93(11):4500–4510.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Junovich G, Mayer Y, Azpiroz A, et al. Ovarian stimulation affects the levels of regulatory endometrial NK cells and angiogenic cytokine VEGF. Am J Reprod Immunol N Y N 1989. 2011;65(2):146–153.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Weinerman R, Mainigi M. Why we should transfer frozen instead of fresh embryos: the translational rationale. Fertil Steril. 2014;102(1):10–18.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Evans J, Hannan NJ, Edgell TA, et al. Fresh versus frozen embryo transfer: backing clinical decisions with scientific and clinical evidence. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20(6):808–821.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, Garner FC, Aguirre M, Hudson C. Freeze-all can be a superior therapy to another fresh cycle in patients with prior fresh blastocyst implantation failure. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;29(3):286–290.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 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(2):389–392.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Roque M, Lattes K, Serra S, et al. Fresh embryo transfer versus frozen embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(1):156–162.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Braddock CH, Edwards KA, Hasenberg NM, Laidley TL, Levinson W. Informed decision making in outpatient practice: time to get back to basics. JAMA. 1999;282(24):2313–2320.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bourdon M, Santulli P, Gayet V, et al. Assisted reproduction technique outcomes for fresh versus deferred cryopreserved day-2 embryo transfer: a retrospective matched cohort study. Reprod Biomed Online. 2016;34(3):248–257.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. de Ziegler D, Gayet V, Aubriot FX, et al. Use of oral contraceptives in women with endometriosis before assisted reproduction treatment improves outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(7):2796–2799.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Santulli P, Gayet V, Fauque P, et al. HIV-positive patients undertaking ART have longer infertility histories than age-matched control subjects. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(2):507–512.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fauque P, Léandri R, Merlet F, et al. Pregnancy outcome and live birth after IVF and ICSI according to embryo quality. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2007;24(5):159–165.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Gardner DK, Lane M, Schoolcraft WB. Physiology and culture of the human blastocyst. J Reprod Immunol. 2002;55(1-2):85–100.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine and ESHRE Special Interest Group of Embryology. The Istanbul consensus workshop on embryo assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 2011;26(6):1270–1283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, de Mouzon J, et al. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary of ART terminology, 2009. Fertil Steril. 2009;92(5):1520–1524.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Maheshwari A, McLernon D, Bhattacharya S. Cumulative live birth rate: time for a consensus? Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 2015;30(12):2703–2707.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Germond M, Urner F, Chanson A, Primi MP, Wirthner D, Senn A. What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? The cumulated singleton/twin delivery rates per oocyte pick-up: the CUSIDERA and CUTWIDERA. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. 2004;19(11):2442–2444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wong KM, van Wely M, Mol F, Repping S, Mastenbroek S. Fresh versus frozen embryo transfers in assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;3:CD011184.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Glujovsky D, Farquhar C, Quinteiro Retamar AM, Alvarez Sedo CR, Blake D. Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;(6):CD002118.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Bourdon M, Santulli P, Gayet V, Maignien C, Marcellin L, Chapron C. Deferred frozen embryo transfer: what benefits can be expected from this strategy in patients with and without endometriosis? J Endometr Pelvic Pain Disord. 2017;9(2):87–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Liu L, Li L, Ma X, et al. Altered circular RNA expression in patients with repeated implantation failure. Cell Physiol Biochem. 2017;44(1):303–313.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Gao M, Sun Y, Xie H, Fang S, Zhao X. Hysteroscopy prior to repeat embryo transfer may improve pregnancy outcomes for asymptomatic women with repeated implantation failure. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2015;41(10):1569–1576.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Lédée N, Munaut C, Aubert J, et al. Specific and extensive endometrial deregulation is present before conception in IVF/ICSI repeated implantation failures (IF) or recurrent miscarriages. J Pathol. 2011;225(4):554–564.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Mao X, Zhang J, Chen Q, Kuang Y, Zhang S. Short-term copper intrauterine device placement improves the implantation and pregnancy rates in women with repeated implantation failure. Fertil Steril. 2017;108(1):55–61.e1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Siristatidis C, Dafopoulos K, El-Khayat W, et al. Administration of prednisolone and low molecular weight heparin in patients with repeated implantation failures: a cohort study. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2018;34(2):136–139.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculté de Médecine, Département de gynécologie, obstétrique II et médecine de la reproduction, Assistance Publique—Hôpitaux de Paris (AP—HP), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Cochin, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France

    Mathilde Bourdon MD, Pietro Santulli MD, PhD, Yulian Chen, Chloé Maignien MD, Louis Marcellin MD, PhD & Charles Chapron MD

  2. Institut Cochin, INSERM U1016, Laboratoire d’immunologie, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France

    Mathilde Bourdon MD, Pietro Santulli MD, PhD, Louis Marcellin MD, PhD & Charles Chapron MD

  3. Faculté de Médecine, Assistance Publique—Hôpitaux de Paris (AP—HP), Hôpital Universitaire Paris Centre, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Cochin, Service d’Histologie-Embryologie-Biologie de la Reproduction, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France

    Catherine Patrat MD, PhD & Khaled Pocate-Cheriet MD

  4. Institut Cochin, Inserm U1016, Département de “Génetique, Développement et Cancer”, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France

    Louis Marcellin MD, PhD & Charles Chapron MD

Authors
  1. Mathilde Bourdon MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pietro Santulli MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yulian Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Catherine Patrat MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Khaled Pocate-Cheriet MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Chloé Maignien MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Louis Marcellin MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Charles Chapron MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pietro Santulli MD, PhD.

Additional information

Authors’ Note

M.B. and P.S. are considered as joint first authors. P.S., M.B., and C.C. conceived and designed the study. All of the authors analyzed and interpreted the data. M.B., P.S., and C.P. supervised and reviewed the statistical analysis. M.B., P.S., Y.C. contributed to the data collection. M.B., P.S., and C.C. authored the manuscript. All of the authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bourdon, M., Santulli, P., Chen, Y. et al. The Deferred Embryo Transfer Strategy Seems Not to be a Good Option After Repeated IVF/ICSI Cycle Failures. Reprod. Sci. 26, 1210–1217 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1177/1933719118811648

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1933719118811648

Keywords

Search

Navigation