Double vitrification-warming cycles, coupled with blastocyst biopsy, impair live birth but do not affect neonatal outcomes

Double vitrification and warming does not compromise the chance of live birth after single unbiopsied blastocyst transfer

STUDY QUESTION

Does double vitrification and thawing of an embryo compromise the chance of live birth after a single blastocyst transfer?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The live birth rate (LBR) obtained after double vitrification was comparable to that obtained after single vitrification.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Double vitrification-warming (DVW) is commonly practiced to accommodate surplus viable embryos suitable for transfer, to allow retesting of inconclusively diagnosed blastocysts in preimplantation genetic testing (PGT), and to circumvent limitations associated with national policies on embryo culture in certain countries. Despite its popularity, the evidence concerning the impact of DVW practice on ART outcomes is limited and lacking credibility. This is the first thorough investigation of clinical pregnancy and LBR following DVW in the case where the first round of vitrification occurred at the zygote stage and the second round occurred at the blastocyst stage in the absence of biopsy.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

This is a retrospective observational analysis of n = 407 single blastocyst transfers whereby embryos created by IVF/ICSI were vitrified-warmed once (single vitrification-warming (SVW) n = 310) or twice (DVW, n = 97) between January 2017 and December 2021.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

In the SVW group, blastocysts were vitrified on Day 5/6 and warmed on the day of embryo transfer (ET). In the DVW group, two pronuclear (2PN) zygotes were first vitrified-warmed and then re-vitrified on Day 5/6 and warmed on the day of ET. Exclusion criteria were ETs from PGT and vitrified-warmed oocyte cycles. All of the ETs were single blastocyst transfers performed at the University Hospital Zurich in Switzerland following natural or artificial endometrial preparation.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), and LBR were all comparable between the DVW and SVW groups. The CPR for DVW was 44.3% and for SVW it was 42.3% (P = 0.719). The LBR for DVW was 30.9% and for SVW it was 28.7% (P = 0.675). The miscarriage rate was additionally similar between the groups: 27.9% for DVW and 32.1% for SVW groups (P = 0.765).

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

The study is limited by its retrospective nature. Caution should be taken concerning interpretation of these findings in cases where DVW occurs at different stages of embryo development.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The result of the present study on DVW procedure provides a framework for counselling couples on their chance of clinical pregnancy per warming cycle. It additionally provides confidence and reassurance to laboratory professionals in certain countries where national policies limit embryo culture strategies making DVW inevitable.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

This work was supported by the University Research Priority Program 'Human Reproduction Reloaded' of the University of Zurich. The authors have no conflict of interest related to this study to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Should embryo rebiopsy be considered a regular strategy to increase the number of embryos available for transfer?

PURPOSE

To investigate whether embryo rebiopsy increases the yield of in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles.

METHODS

Retrospective study including 18,028 blastocysts submitted for trophectoderm biopsy and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) between January 2016 and December 2021 in a private IVF center. Out of the 517 embryos categorized as inconclusive, 400 survived intact to the warming procedure, re-expanded, and were suitable for rebiopsy. Of them, 71 rebiopsied blastocysts were transferred. Factors affecting the probability of obtaining an undiagnosed blastocyst and clinical outcomes from blastocysts biopsied once and twice were investigated.

RESULTS

The overall diagnostic rate was 97.1%, with 517 blastocysts receiving inconclusive reports. Several blastocyst and laboratory features, such as the day of the biopsy, the stage of development, and the biopsy methodology, were related to the risk of obtaining an inconclusive diagnosis after PGT-A. A successful diagnosis was obtained in 384 of the rebiopsied blastocysts, 238 of which were chromosomally transferable. A total of 71 rebiopsied blastocysts were transferred, resulting in 32 clinical pregnancies [(clinical pregnancy rate (CPR)=45.1%], 16 miscarriages [(miscarriage rate (MR)=41%], and, until September 2020, 12 live births [(live birth rate (LBR)=23.1%]. A significantly lower LBR and higher MR were obtained after transferring rebiopsied blastocysts compared to those biopsied once.

CONCLUSION

Although an extra round of biopsy and vitrification may cause a detrimental effect on embryo viability, re-analyzing the test-failure blastocysts contributes to increasing the number of euploid blastocysts available for transfer and the LBR.

Impact of Multiple Vitrification-Warming Procedures and Insemination Methods on Pregnancy and Neonatal Outcomes in Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy

This study was to determine whether multiple vitrification-warming procedures and insemination method are associated with pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A). This was a retrospective, single-center, observational study of 112 patients who underwent standard PGT-A practice and 154 patients who desired PGT-A for their vitrified unbiopsied blastocysts. A total of 97 euploid blastocysts biopsied and vitrified-warmed once and 117 euploid blastocysts biopsied once but vitrified-warmed twice (83 in vitro fertilization [IVF]-derived and 34 intracytoplasmic sperm injection [ICSI]-derived euploid blastocysts) were transferred. The primary outcome was the blastocyst survival rate for transfer, live birth rate, and neonatal outcomes. The results showed that an additional vitrification-warming procedure on blastocysts resulted in a lower but not statistically different survival rate for transfer. Compared with euploid blastocysts vitrified-warmed once, those vitrified-warmed twice provided statistically similar live birth rate. Neonatal outcomes, including the sex ratio, gestational age, birthweight, preterm birth rate, and low birthweight rate, did not differ between single and double vitrification. No significant differences were observed in rates of blastocyst survival, blastocyst euploid and live birth, and neonatal outcomes resulting from either conventional IVF or ICSI. The neonatal follow-up of babies live-born so far did not report any congenital malformations. In conclusion, an additional vitrification-warming on blastocysts had no detectable adverse impact on clinical outcomes after frozen-thawed single euploid blastocyst transfer in PGT-A cases; and ICSI did not confer any benefit in improving clinical outcomes compared with conventional IVF in cases requiring PGT-A on already vitrified nonbiopsied blastocysts.