Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Number of Blastomeres in Day-2 Embryos Affect the Rates of Blastocyst Formation and Clinical Pregnancy During In Vitro Fertilization Cycles

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

Abstract

In the current in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer protocol, the 8 blastomeres in the day-3 embryo are selected for transfer because these embryos can produce high rates of blastocyst formation and clinical pregnancy. However, the relationship between the blastomere number in day-2 embryos and the rate of blastocyst formation or clinical pregnancy remains unclear. The purpose of this retrospective study is to explore the relationship between the blastomere number in day-2 embryos and the rate of blastocyst formation or clinical pregnancy. From January 2015 to April 2020, we collected 8126 day-3 embryos (8 blastomeres) from 2282 patients. These embryos were classified into 8 groups (1 blastomere, 2 blastomeres, 3 blastomeres, 4 blastomeres, 5 blastomeres, 6 blastomeres, 7 blastomeres, and 8 blastomeres) based on their blastomeres number on day 2 after insemination. Of these groups, the 4 blastomeres group accounted for the largest proportion (74.44%). The 1 blastomere group accounted for the smallest proportion (0.22%). A total of 3554 day-3 embryos (8 blastomeres) from 1648 patients developed into blastocysts. The rate of blastocyst formation from the 4 blastomeres group was the highest (94.06%). Finally, 800 patients received single day-3 embryos (8 blastomeres) transfer. The rate of clinical pregnancy from 4 blastomeres group was the highest (51.98%). In conclusion, our data provide evidence that the number of blastomeres in day-2 embryos affects the rate of blastocyst formation and clinical pregnancy.

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

Data Availability

Not applicable.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Wang S, Ding L, Zhao X, Zhang N, Hu Y, Sun H. Embryo selection for single embryo transfer at day 3 based on combination of cleavage patterns and timing parameters in in vitro fertilization patients. J Reprod Med. 2016;61:254–62.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Awadalla M, Vestal N, McGinnis L, Ahmady A. Effect of age and morphology on live birth rate after cleavage stage embryo transfer. Reprod Sci. 2021;28(1):43–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. 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. 2011;26:1270–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Deng J, Zhao Q, Cinnioglu C, Kayali R, Lathi RB, Behr B. The impact of culture conditions on blastocyst formation and aneuploidy rates: a comparison between single-step and sequential media in a large academic practice. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020;37:161–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Scott L, Alvero R, Leondires M, Miller B. The morphology of human pronuclear embryos is positively related to blastocyst development and implantation. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:2394–403.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Puga-Torres T, Blum-Rojas X, Blum-Narváez M. Blastocyst classification systems used in Latin America: is a consensus possible? JBRA Assist Reprod. 2017;21(3):222–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Lopez-Regalado ML, Martínez-Granados L, González-Utor A, Ortiz N, Iglesias M, Ardoy M, Castilla JA, Special Interest Group in Quality of ASEBIR (Society for the Study of Reproductive Biology). Critical appraisal of the Vienna consensus: performance indicators for assisted reproductive technology laboratories. Reprod Biomed Online. 2018;37:128–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Gardner DK, Balaban B. Assessment of human embryo development using morphological criteria in an era of time-lapse, algorithms and ‘OMICS’: is looking good still important? Mol Hum Reprod. 2016;22:704–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kong X, Yang S, Gong F, Lu C, Zhang S, Lu G, Lin G. The relationship between cell number, division behavior and developmental potential of cleavage stage human embryos: a time-lapse study. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0153697.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Doronin YK, Senechkin IV, Hilkevich LV, Kurcer MA. Cleavage of human embryos: options and diversity. Acta Naturae. 2016;8:88–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Shen X, Long H, Gao H, Guo W, Xie Y, Chen D, Cong Y, Wang Y, Li D, Si J, Zhao L, Lyu Q, Kuang Y, Wang L. The valuable reference of live birth rate in the single vitrified-warmed BB/BC/CB blastocyst transfer: the cleavage-stage embryo quality and embryo development speed. Front Physiol. 2020;11:1102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. McCoy RC. Mosaicism in preimplantation human embryos: when chromosomal abnormalities are the norm. Trends Genet. 2017;33:448–63.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. 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;73:558–64.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Mantzouratou A, Delhanty JD. Aneuploidy in the human cleavage stage embryo. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2011;133(2–4):141–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Griffin DK, Ogur C. Chromosomal analysis in IVF: just how useful is it? Reproduction. 2018;156(1):F29–50.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kim HJ, Park JK, Eum JH, Song H, Lee WS, Lyu SW. Embryo selection based on morphological parameters in a single vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer cycle. Reprod Sci. 2021;28(4):1060–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Luna M, Copperman AB, Duke M, Ezcurra D, Sandler B, Barritt J. Human blastocyst morphological quality is significantly improved in embryos classified as fast on day 3 (>or=10 cells), bringing into question current embryological dogma. Fertil Steril. 2008;89:358–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee MJ, Lee RK, Lin MH, Hwu YM. Cleavage speed and implantation potential of early-cleavage embryos in IVF or ICSI cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012;29(8):745–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Monk D, Mackay DJG, Eggermann T, Maher ER, Riccio A. Genomic imprinting disorders: lessons on how genome, epigenome and environment interact. Nat Rev Genet. 2019;20(4):235–48.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Herbemont C, Sarandi S, Boujenah J, Cedrin-Durnerin I, Sermondade N, Vivot A, Poncelet C, Grynberg M, Sifer C. Should we consider day-2 and day-3 embryo morphology before day-5 transfer when blastocysts reach a similar good quality? Reprod Biomed Online. 2017;35(5):521–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. La Salle S. Growing fast or slow: what makes the best embryo? Biol Reprod. 2012;86((5)142):1–2.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by Natural Science Foundation of Hainan Province (No.2019CXTD408, ZDYF2020117), project supported by Hainan Province Clinical Medical Center, and National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 82072880, 81960283, 81460034).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Zuxia Mi and Zheng Liu contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hainan Provincial Key Laboratory for Human Reproductive Medicine and Genetic Research, Reproductive Medical Center, the First Affiliated Hospital of Hainan Medical University, Hainan Medical University, 3 Longhua Road, Haikou, 570102, Hainan, China

    Zuxia Mi, Yu Zhang, Juan Zhu, Yufei Yao, Yao Zhou, Yuanhua Huang, Qi Li & Yanlin Ma

  2. Key Laboratory of Tropical Translational Medicine of Ministry of Education, Hainan Medical University, Haikou, Hainan, China

    Zuxia Mi, Yu Zhang, Juan Zhu, Yufei Yao, Yao Zhou, Yuanhua Huang, Qi Li & Yanlin Ma

  3. Hainan Provincial Clinical Research Center for Thalassemia, the First Affiliated Hospital of Hainan Medical University, Hainan Medical University, Haikou, Hainan, China

    Zuxia Mi, Yu Zhang, Juan Zhu, Yufei Yao, Yao Zhou, Yuanhua Huang, Qi Li & Yanlin Ma

  4. College of Medical Laboratory Science, Guilin Medical University, Guilin, Guangxi, China

    Zheng Liu

Authors
  1. Zuxia Mi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zheng Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yu Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Juan Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yufei Yao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yao Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yuanhua Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Qi Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Yanlin Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Z.M. and Z.L. contributed equally to the manuscript. Y.M. Z.L. and Q.L. conceptualized and designed the study. Z.M, Z.L., Y.Z., J.Z., Y.Y., Y.Z., Y.H. and Q.L. designed and carried out experiments and collected and analyzed data. Z.M., Z.L., Q.L. and Y.M. discussed and edited the paper. All authors contributed to the writing of this manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yanlin Ma.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate

Approval was obtained from the ethics committee of Hainan Medical University (No. 2015003). The procedures used in this study adhere to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent for Publication

Not applicable.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mi, Z., Liu, Z., Zhang, Y. et al. Number of Blastomeres in Day-2 Embryos Affect the Rates of Blastocyst Formation and Clinical Pregnancy During In Vitro Fertilization Cycles. Reprod. Sci. 28, 3397–3405 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43032-021-00774-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43032-021-00774-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation