Skip to main content
Log in

Viability of frozen-thawed human embryos with one–two blastomeres lysis

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

Abstract

Objective

To assess the impact of one–two blastomeres lysis on the viability of thawed day 3 human embryos.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on 248 frozen-thawed embryo replacement cycles in which all embryos were frozen at day 3 at the seven–eight cell stage with ≤10% fragmentation.

Results

Outcomes of transfer cycles with fully intact embryos (intact group) were compared with those in which all transferred embryos have lost one–two blastomeres (damage group). Comparable pregnancy rates (38.46% vs 38.64%), birth rates (34.62% vs 36.36%) and implantation rates (26.31% vs 26.25%) were obtained in intact and damage groups. These results were also not significantly different from mixed transfer cycles in which one intact embryo and one damaged embryo were transferred together.

Conclusion

The developmental potential of partially damaged cryopreserved human embryos with less than 25% cells loss is comparable to that of fully intact embryos. Presence of one–two lysed blastomeres in the thawed day 3 embryo does not appear to have a negative influence on the further development of the sibling intact cells.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Trounson A, Mohr L. Human pregnancy following cryopreservation, thawing and transfer of an eight-cell embryo. Nature 1983;305:707–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hartshorne GM, Wick K, Elder K, Dyson H. Effect of cell number at freezing upon survival and viability of cleaving embryos generated from stimulated IVF cycles. Hum Reprod. 1990;5:857–61.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Burns WN, Gaudet TW, Martin MB, Leal YR, Schoen H, Eddy CA, et al. Survival of cryopreservation and thawing with all blastomeres intact identifies multicell embryos with superior frozen embryo transfer outcome. Fertil Steril. 1999;72:527–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Edgar DH, Bourne H, Speirs AL, Mc Bain JC. A quantitative analysis of the impact of cryopreservation on the implantation potential of human early cleavage stage embryos. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:175–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Guerif F, Bidault R, Cadoret V, Couet ML, Lansac J, Royere D. Parameters guiding selection of best embryos for transfer after cryopreservation: a reappraisal. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:1321–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. El-Toukhy T, Khalaf Y, Al-Darazi K, Andritsos V, Taylor A, Braude P. Effect of blastomere loss on the outcome of frozen embryo replacement cycles. Fertil Steril. 2003;79:1106–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lassalle B, Testart J, Renard JP. Human embryo features that influence the success of cryopreservation with the use of 1,2 propanediol. Fertil Steril. 1985;44:645–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hardy K, Martin KL, Leese HJ, Winston RM, Handyside AH. Human preimplantation development in vitro is not adversely affected by biopsy at the 8-cell stage. Hum Reprod. 1990;5:708–14.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Van de Velde H, De Vos A, Sermon K, Staessen C, De Rycke M, Van Assche E, et al. Embryo implantation after biopsy of one or two cells from cleavage-stage embryos with a view to preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Prenat Diagn. 2000;20:1030–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rienzi L, Nagy ZP, Ubaldi F, Iacobelli M, Anniballo R, Tesarik J, et al. Laser assisted removal of necrotic blastomeres from cryopreserved embryos that were partially damaged. Fertil Steril. 2002;77:1196–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Alikani M, Olivennes F, Cohen J. Microsurgical correction of partially degenerate mouse embryos promotes hatching and restores their viability. Hum Reprod. 1993;10:1723–8.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Tang R, Catt J, Howlett D. Towards defining parameters for a successful single embryo transfer in frozen cycles. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:1179–83.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Liu WX, Zheng Y, Luo MJ, Huang P, Yue LM, Wang L, et al. Effects of removal of necrotic blastomeres from mouse cryopreserved embryos on blastocyst formation and hatching. Theriogenology 2005;64:1114–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Elliott TA, Colturato LF, Taylor TH, Wright G, Kort HI, Nagy ZP. Lysed cell removal promotes frozen-thawed embryo development. Fertil Steril. 2007;87:1444–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rienzi L, Ubaldi F, Iacobelli M, Minasi MG, Romano S, Ferrero S, et al. Developmental potential of fully intact and partially damaged cryopreserved embryos after laser-assisted removal of necrotic blastomeres and post-thaw culture selection. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:888–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nagy ZP, Taylor T, Elliott T, Massey JB, Kort HI, Shapiro DB. Removal of lysed blastomeres from frozen-thawed embryos improves implantation and pregnancy rates in frozen embryo transfer cycles. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:1606–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ping Liu.

Additional information

Capsule Presence of one–two lysed blastomeres in the thawed day 3 embryo does not appear to have a negative influence on the further development of the sibling intact cells.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zheng, X., Liu, P., Chen, G. et al. Viability of frozen-thawed human embryos with one–two blastomeres lysis. J Assist Reprod Genet 25, 281–285 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-008-9224-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-008-9224-3

Keywords

Navigation