Comparison of ICSI and conventional IVF in non-male factor patients with less than four oocytes

Reproductive Outcomes of Conventional In Vitro Fertilization and Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection in Patients with Non-Severe Male Infertility Across Poor and Different Sub-Optimal Ovarian Response Categories: A Cohort Study Based on 30,352 Fresh Cycles from 2009-2019

Due to the influence of economic, social and many other factors, there are more and more reproductive problems. Originally introduced for managing male factor infertility, intracytoplasmic sperm injection had become the most commonly used fertilization treatment in the world, with broadened indications including low oocyte yield, prior fertilization failure with conventional in vitro fertilization etc. However, academic evidence for better live-birth outcomes of intracytoplasmic sperm injection over conventional in vitro fertilization is limited. Thus, we aimed to compare the reproductive outcomes of conventional in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection in patients with non-severe male factor infertility across poor and different sub-optimal ovarian response categories. The fertility rate, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate and other obstetric outcomes were mainly compared. Our results showed that independent of the number of oocytes retrieved, intracytoplasmic sperm injection significantly increased the fertilization rate, while conventional in vitro fertilization cycles showed a higher implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, and live birth rate. No differences were observed in most obstetric outcomes. Our study indicates that poor ovarian response is not an indication for intracytoplasmic sperm injection in couples with non-severe male infertility.

Total Fertilization Failure: A Single Center Analysis

Our main objective was to identify the male and female parameters associated with total fertilization failure (TFF) in IVF with nonmasculine indications. The present work, IRB equivalent INS 63209, is a case-control study that evaluated all cases with TFF after conventional IVF at the Center for Human Reproduction from January 2010 to December 2019 (n = 154). As a control group, we analyzed all patients who did not experience fertilization failure after conventional IVF in the same period (n = 475). We evaluated various parameters, both male and female, assessed during infertility treatment, and only cases without masculine etiology (normal seminal parameters) were included. Ages (female and male) were not different between the groups. Moreover, AMH (anti-Müllerian hormone), semen volume, preprocessing concentration and preprocessing motility were not significantly different (P > 0.05). However, the number of collected oocytes (study versus control groups, median [25-75 interquartile]: 2 [1-5] and 5 [3-8]); MII (2 [1-4] and 5 [2-7]); and postprocessing motility (85 [70-90] and 90 [80-95]) were significantly different between both groups (P < 0.05). Furthermore, a logistic regression analysis including all significant data demonstrated that the number of collected oocytes was significantly related to IVF failure. Patients with fewer than 5 oocytes had an OR of - 1.37 (- 0.938 to - 1.827) for TFF after conventional IVF. Our results showed that a lower follicular response to controlled ovarian stimulation, evidenced by a decreased number of collected oocytes, was the most important parameter associated with IVF failure in nonmasculine infertility.

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection vs. in-vitro fertilization in couples in whom the male partners had a semen analysis within normal reference ranges: An open debate

During recent decades, the application of intracytoplasmic sperm injection has increased considerably worldwide, especially in couples with non-male factor infertility. However, several studies analyzing the broad use of intracytoplasmic sperm injection, even in cases with a normal semen analysis, have collectively demonstrated no benefits compared to conventional in-vitro fertilization. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to support the intracytoplasmic sperm injection technique vs. in-vitro fertilization in cases of poor ovarian response or a low number of oocytes collected, or in patients with advanced maternal age. Since the intracytoplasmic sperm injection technique is more operator-dependent and invasive, its use should only be recommended in cases of male-factor infertility. There is some evidence showing that intracytoplasmic sperm injection is linked with an increased risk of birth defects. Albeit this evidence is limited, and currently it is not possible to draw a firm conclusion on these concerns, we do believe that these risks should be rigorously investigated. Thus, this review aims to clarify the debate on the application of the intracytoplasmic sperm injection procedure, as compared to standard in-vitro fertilization, in those assisted reproductive technology cycles without a clear male factor infertility. Furthermore, we try to clarify whether intracytoplasmic sperm injection would result in a higher live birth rate than in-vitro fertilization, in couples with non-male factor infertility.

Comparisons of conventional in vitro fertilization versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection in women with thyroid autoimmunity and non-male factor infertility, a propensity score matching analysis

The aim of the study is to compare the outcomes between the insemination methods of conventional in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection in infertile women with thyroid autoimmunity and non-male factor infertility. This was a retrospective cohort study which included women with thyroid autoimmunity and non-male factor infertility. Reproductive outcomes such as embryo development parameters and clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups. The propensity score matching was applied to balance the general characteristics with significant differences between the two groups. Generalized estimating equations were used to explore the impact of ICSI on the embryo development potential of the inseminated oocytes. Sensitivity analysis using E-values was used to account for unknown confounders. After 1:2 propensity score matching, the general characteristics were all comparable. The good cleavage embryo rate, blastocyst utilization rate, and good blastocyst rate were significantly lower in the intracytoplasmic sperm injection group than those in the conventional in vitro fertilization group. After controlling for the confounding factors, intracytoplasmic sperm injection was significantly negatively associated with development of usable blastocysts and good blastocysts, while showed no impact on fertilized oocytes, usable cleavage embryos and good cleavage embryos. Although limited by the limited sample size, there were comparable clinical and obstetrical outcomes between conventional in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection groups. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection neither improved the embryo development potential nor increased the clinical pregnancy and live birth rates compared to conventional in vitro fertilization in the studied population. Prospective studies that randomly divide the studied population in two the two groups and compare the reproductive outcomes are warranted.

Opportunities and Limits of Conventional IVF versus ICSI: It Is Time to Come off the Fence

Conventional IVF (c-IVF) is one of the most practiced assisted reproductive technology (ART) approaches used worldwide. However, in the last years, the number of c-IVF procedures has dropped dramatically in favor of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in cases of non-male-related infertility. In this review, we have outlined advantages and disadvantages associated with c-IVF, highlighting the essential steps governing its success, its limitations, the methodology differences among laboratories and the technical progress. In addition, we have debated recent insights into fundamental questions, including indications regarding maternal age, decreased ovarian reserve, endometriosis, autoimmunity, single oocyte retrieval-cases as well as preimplantation genetic testing cycles. The “overuse” of ICSI procedures in several clinical situations of ART has been critically discussed. These insights will provide a framework for a better understanding of opportunities associated with human c-IVF and for best practice guidelines applicability in the reproductive medicine field.