Comparison of in vitro fertilisation/intracytoplasmic sperm injection on live birth rates in couples with non-male factor infertility and advanced maternal age

Comparison of clinical outcomes between conventional in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection in poor responders with only single oocyte retrieved

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical outcomes between conventional insemination (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in poor responders with only a single oocyte retrieved.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective case-control study. Couples who were treated with assisted reproductive technology (ART) with a single oocyte retrieved in Mackay Memorial Hospital from 1996 to 2016 were recruited. All data were categorized into three groups, according to their fertilization method and semen quality: group A, conventional insemination with non-male factor (IVF-NMF, n = 115), group B, ICSI with male factor (ICSI-MF, n = 30), and group C, ICSI with non-male factor (ICSI-NMF, n = 49).

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference was observed between IVF and ICSI groups in pregnancy outcomes, including the chemical or clinical pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, and live birth rate. Similar fertilization rates per oocyte obtained were observed in IVF and ICSI patients, but significantly lower per mature oocyte in the ICSI group (IVF: 91.5%, ICSI-MF: 75.0%, ICSI-NMF: 77.8%). Although there is no statistical significance, the lower live birth rate is observed in group C than others (A:11.5%, B:25%, C:5%, p = 0.187).

CONCLUSION

In this study, pregnancy outcomes of conventional in vitro fertilization and ICSI in poor responders with only a single oocyte retrieved were similar. However, the fertilization rate of matured oocytes in ICSI groups is significantly lower than that in the IVF group, indicating that ICSI procedures might cause oocyte damage. Therefore, the choice of fertilization method should be based on semen quality. A randomized controlled trial should be performed to confirm our findings.

Comparison of Treatment Outcomes among Sibling Oocytes Using Different Culture Systems-Conventional IVF versus INVOcell Device-And Evaluation of INVOcell User Satisfaction: The INVOcIVF Study

INVOcell is considered an alternative to conventional IVF proposed for intravaginal embryo culture; however, implementation is still low because evidence is scanty regarding its outcome and, most importantly, the device's user satisfaction. Thus, we aim to compare the embryo outcome of sibling oocytes following INVOcell culture with conventional IVF (cIVF) by assessing its clinical outcome (fertilization, blastulation rate, and good embryo quality) and the user satisfaction evaluation based on a local validation questionnaire. A prospective study was done at a university-setting hospital for 12 months (July 2021-2022). The oocytes collected were divided into INVOcell and cIVF groups equally. Inclusion criteria included <40 years old and body mass index (BMI) < 30 kg/m². The pre- and post-satisfaction questionnaires were assessed. In total, 23 women were included following standard controlled ovarian stimulation (COS). The mean age was 32.9, and the mean BMI was 24.9 kg/m². Most of them suffered from tubal factors. A total of 252 oocytes were collected and incubated accordingly (cIVF; 138, INVOcell; 114). The blastulation rate was superior in the INVOcell group (p = 0.16); otherwise, the fertilization rate and good embryo quality were not significantly different between both methods (p > 0.05). Overall, women were satisfied with the INVOcell device as they were adequately advised, follow-up was scheduled, and the lowest score was obtained for all side effects of the device. Although both methods produce similar fertilization rates and good-quality embryos, the blastulation rates were better in the INVOcell group. Functionally, it is a user-friendly device and tolerable. Therefore, INVOcell can be used as an alternative method for reproductive treatment in carefully selected patients without jeopardizing the IVF outcomes.

Redox Regulation and Oxidative Stress in Mammalian Oocytes and Embryos Developed In Vivo and In Vitro

Oocytes and preimplantation embryos require careful regulation of the redox environment for optimal development both in vivo and in vitro. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are generated throughout development as a result of cellular metabolism and enzyme reactions. ROS production can result in (i) oxidative eustress, where ROS are helpful signalling molecules with beneficial physiological functions and where the redox state of the cell is maintained within homeostatic range by a closely coupled system of antioxidants and antioxidant enzymes, or (ii) oxidative distress, where excess ROS are deleterious and impair normal cellular function. in vitro culture of embryos exacerbates ROS production due to a range of issues including culture-medium composition and laboratory culture conditions. This increase in ROS can be detrimental not only to assisted reproductive success rates but can also result in epigenetic and genetic changes in the embryo, resulting in transgenerational effects. This review examines the effects of oxidative stress in the oocyte and preimplantation embryo in both the in vivo and in vitro environment, identifies mechanisms responsible for oxidative stress in the oocyte/embryo in culture and approaches to reduce these problems, and briefly examines the potential impacts on future generations.

The Impact of Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection in Non-Male Factor Infertility-A Critical Review

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was originally designed to overcome barriers due to male factor infertility. However, a surveillance study found that ICSI use in non-male factor infertility increased from 15.4% to 66.9% between 1996 and 2012. Numerous studies have investigated fertilization rate, total fertilization failure, and live birth rate per cycle (LBR), comparing the use of ICSI versus conventional in vitro fertilization (IVF) for non-male factor infertility. The overwhelming conclusion shows no increase in fertilization rate or LBR per cycle with the use of ICSI for non-male factor infertility. The overuse of ICSI is likely related to the desire to avoid a higher rate of total fertilization failure in IVF. However, data supporting the benefit of using ICSI for non-male factor infertility is lacking, and 33 couples would need to be treated with ICSI unnecessarily to avoid one case of total fertilization failure. Such practice increases the cost to the patient, increases the burden on embryologist’s time, and is a misapplication of resources. Additionally, there remains conflicting data regarding the safety of offspring conceived by ICSI and potential damage to the oocyte. Thus, the use of ICSI should be limited to those with male factor infertility or a history of total fertilization factor infertility due to uncertainties of potential adverse impact and lack of proven benefit in non-male factor infertility.