Ultrasound-guided miduterine cavity embryo transfer is associated with a decreased incidence of retained embryos in the transfer catheter

Effect of retained embryos on pregnancy outcomes of in vitro fertilization: a matched retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To explore the incidence of retained embryos (REs) in embryo transfer (ET) cycles and its effects on pregnancy outcomes in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF).

METHODS

This was a matched retrospective cohort study involving 29,160 ET cycles conducted from March 2016 to February 2021, in which ET cycles without RE were matched to the RE group at a 2:1 ratio. Clinical pregnancy, implantation, miscarriage, and live birth rates were compared between the with-RE and without-RE groups.

RESULTS

Our study showed that the overall incidence of REs was 0.33% (95/29,160). There was a statistically significant difference in RE rate among the operators (P < 0.001), suggesting that the embryo retention rate may be affected by the individual operator. A total of 95 repeated ET cycles due to RE were included in the study group, and 190 ET cycles without RE were matched to the study group (1:2). There were no significant differences between the RE and matched groups in terms of implantation rate (35.6 vs. 38.0%; P = 0.608), clinical pregnancy rate (47.4 vs. 54.7%; P = 0.240), biochemical pregnancy rate (5.3 vs. 4.7%; P = 0.846), miscarriage rate (11.1 vs. 9.6%; P = 0.781), ectopic pregnancy rate (2.2 vs. 1.9%; P = 1.000) or live birth rate (41.1 vs. 48.9%; P = 0.208).

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings demonstrated that immediate retransfer of REs did not significantly affect IVF outcomes, which may provide counselling information for patients when REs are identified and ET is reattempted. The incidence of REs was associated with the operator who expelled the embryos from the catheter. Attention to detail and frequent assessment of the operator's technique may facilitate avoidance of embryo retention.

Effects of embryo retention during embryo transfer on IVF outcomes

PROPOSE

To investigate embryo retention (ER) rate in embryo transfer (ET) cycles and its effects on reproductive outcomes in a large database.

METHODS

A matched retrospective cohort study in a tertiary academic hospital-based reproductive center. A total of 15,321 ET cycles were performed from January 2008 to December 2018. Each woman was matched with three separate control subjects of the same age (± 1 year), embryo condition, main causes of infertility, and type of protocol used for fresh or frozen ET cycles. The main outcomes were ER rate, and implantation, clinical pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, and live birth rates.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of ER was 1.4% (213/15,321). There was no difference in the rate of ER rate in fresh ET cycles compared with frozen transfer cycles (P = 0.54). We matched 188/213 (88%) of cases in the ER group to 564 non-ER cases. There were no cases of the blood in the catheter seen in the ER group. Pregnancy outcomes were similar between the ER and the non-ER cycles: clinical pregnancy rate (31.3% vs. 36.1%, P = 0.29), implantation rate (26.2% vs. 31.3%, P = 0.2), live birth rate (20.3% vs. 24%, P = 0.53), ectopic pregnancy rate (0.5% vs. 0.4%, P = 0.18), and miscarriage rate (10.7% vs. 11.3%, P = 0.53).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that ER rate does not affect the reproductive outcomes including clinical pregnancy rate, implantation rate, and live birth rate. Patients and physicians should not be concerned about the retention of embryos during transfer since there is no effect on pregnancy outcome.

Embryo retention significantly decreases clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate: a matched retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the embryo retention (ER) rate in embryo transfer (ET) cycles and its effects on reproductive outcomes.

DESIGN

Matched retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

A tertiary hospital-based reproductive medicine center.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 6,089 ET cycles were performed from January 2013 to December 2018 in our unit.

INTERVENTION(S)

Each woman was matched with two separate control subjects of the same age (±1 year), embryo condition, main causes of infertility, type of protocol used for fresh or frozen ET cycles.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

ER rate, implantation, clinical pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, and live birth rate.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of ER was 1.59% (97/6,089). A significantly increased ER rate was observed in fresh ET cycles compared with frozen transfer cycles (2.71% vs. 1.08%). In fresh transfer cycles, the rate of mucus in or on the catheter after ET in ER group was significantly higher than in the non-ER group (48.09% vs. 13.65%). A total of 194 non-ER cycles were matched to the ER group. Compared with the matched group, the ER group was associated with a significantly lower clinical pregnancy rate (32.98% vs. 48.96%), implantation rate (20.88% vs. 35.97%), and live birth rate (22.68% vs. 37.63%, P<.01), and a higher ectopic pregnancy rate (12.50% vs. 3.16%).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that ER rate is correlated with mucus on or in the transfer catheter in fresh transfer cycles. Retained embryos are associated with lower implantation, clinical pregnancy, live birth, and increases risk of ectopic pregnancy.

The Influence Of Intrauterine Pressure On Embryo Retention In A Catheter After Embryo Transfer

The retention of the embryo in the transfer catheter after embryo transfer (ET) during in vitro fertilization is a very common phenomenon, encountered by even the most experienced operators, and embryos retained in the transfer catheter or its sleeve require a repeat transfer. The exact mechanism of embryo retention has not been explained. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate the mechanism of embryo retention in the catheter during embryo transfer by using a transparent uterus model equipped with pressure sensors and a video recorder. The results indicate that pressure changes in the uterine cavity during ET can influence the distribution of the transferred fluid containing the embryo. Under certain conditions, the transferred fluid can flow backward in the catheter, which may lead to retention of the embryo in the catheter.

Reproductive outcomes of retransferring retained embryos in blastocyst transfer cycles

Objective

To determine the incidence of embryo retention (ER) in the transfer catheter following embryo transfer (ET) in blastocyst transfer and investigate whether retransferring retained embryos has an impact on reproductive outcomes in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization-ET.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the records of 1,131 blastocyst transfers, which comprised 223 single blastocyst transfer (SBT) and 908 double blastocyst transfer (DBT) cycles. Each SBT and DBT group was classified depending on whether ET was performed without retained embryos in the catheter during the first attempt (without-ER group) or whether any retained embryos were found following ET (ER group) for the purpose of comparing reproductive outcomes in a homogenous population.

Results

The overall incidence of finding retained embryos was 2.8% (32/1,131). There were no retained embryos in SBT cycles. In DBT cycles, implantation rates (30.0% vs. 26.6%), positive β-hCG rates (57.2% vs. 56.2%), clinical pregnancy rates (45.3% vs. 46.9%), and live birth rates (38.9% vs. 43.8%) were not significantly different between the without-ER and ER groups. There were no significant differences in the mean birth weight (g) 2,928.4±631.8 vs. 2,948.7±497.8 and the mean gestational age at birth (269.3±17.2 days vs. 264.2±25.7 days). A total of nine cases of congenital birth defects were found in this study population. Eight were observed in the without-ER group and one in the ER group.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that retransfer of retained embryos does not have any adverse impact on reproductive outcomes in blastocyst transfer cycles. Furthermore, our results support finding that SBT might be advantageous for decreasing the incidence of retained embryos in catheters.

Ultrasound versus 'clinical touch' for catheter guidance during embryo transfer in women

BACKGROUND

Many women undergoing an assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycle will not achieve a live birth. Failure at the embryo transfer stage may be due to lack of good-quality embryo/s, lack of uterine receptivity, or the transfer technique itself. Numerous methods, including the use of ultrasound guidance for proper catheter placement in the endometrial cavity, have been suggested as more effective techniques of embryo transfer. This review evaluates the efficacy of ultrasound-guided embryo transfer (UGET) compared with 'clinical touch' (CTET), which is the traditional method of embryo transfer and relies on the clinician's tactile senses to judge when the transfer catheter is in the correct position.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether ultrasound guidance compared with clinical touch improves pregnancy outcomes in women undergoing embryo transfer during ART cycles.

SEARCH METHODS

For the 2016 update of this review, we ran updated searches in the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group trials register (May 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (the Cochrane Library, May 2015), MEDLINE (2009 to May 2015), and EMBASE (2009 to May 2015). We also handsearched relevant conference proceedings: American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO). There were no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised controlled trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility and quality of trials and extracted data from those selected. We calculated odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous outcomes. No outcomes were reported using continuous data. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence for the main findings using the GRADE working group methods.

MAIN RESULTS

This systematic review now has 21 included studies (four of which we added in the 2016 update), two studies awaiting assessment, and 47 excluded studies. In total, data for meta-analyses were available in 21 trials (n = 6218 women), of which only four reported live births.UGET was associated with an increased chance of a live birth/ongoing pregnancy compared with CTET (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.65; 13 trials; n = 5859 women; I(2) = 74%; low-quality evidence). Sensitivity analysis by including only trials with low risk of selection bias or by using a random-effects model did not alter the effect. We estimate that for women with a chance of a live birth/ongoing pregnancy of 23% using CTET, this would increase to between 28% and 33% using UGET. We considered the quality of the evidence using GRADE methodology to be low.UGET was associated with an increase in the chance of a clinical pregnancy (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.45; 20 trials; n = 6711 women; I(2) = 42%; moderate-quality evidence). We identified no differences between groups for the incidence of adverse events including multiple pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, or miscarriage. These events were relatively rare, and sample sizes limited the ability to detect such differences.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence suggests ultrasound guidance improves the chance of live birth/ongoing and clinical pregnancies compared with clinical touch, without increasing the chance of multiple pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, or miscarriage. Methodological limitations included: only four studies reporting details of both computerised randomisation techniques and adequate allocation concealment, only four studies reported on the outcome of live birth, and none of the nine studies that reported on ongoing pregnancy reported on live birth, suggesting possible reporting bias. Adequate reporting of randomisation and allocation concealment will improve the quality of future studies. The primary outcome measure of future studies should be the reporting of live births per woman randomised.

Ultrasound versus 'clinical touch' for catheter guidance during embryo transfer in women

BACKGROUND

Many women undergoing an Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) cycle will not achieve a live birth. Failure at the embryo transfer stage may be due to lack of good quality embryo/s, lack of uterine receptivity, or the transfer technique itself. Numerous methods, including the use of ultrasound guidance for proper catheter placement in the endometrial cavity, have been suggested as a more effective technique of embryo transfer. This review evaluates the effectiveness of ultrasound guided embryo transfer (UGET) compared with 'clinical touch' (CTET) the traditional method of embryo transfer.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether ultrasound guidance influences treatment outcomes in women undergoing embryo transfer (ET) during assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic databases were searched in November 2009. We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group trials register (searched November 2009), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2009), MEDLINE (1970-2009), EMBASE (1985-2009), BIO Extracts (1980-2009). Relevant conference proceedings were also hand searched (ASRM, ESHRE and FIGO).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised controlled trials were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and quality of trials and extracted data from those selected.

MAIN RESULTS

This update identified 59 potential trials of which 42 were excluded. Data for analysis was available in seventeen studies. One study reported live births and personal communication resulted in data relating to this outcome being obtained in two additional studies. There is no evidence of a significant difference in the outcome of live birth (OR 1.14 (95%CI0.93 to 1.39; P=0.02) although heterogeneity was high (64%) and the results should be interpreted with caution. Seven studies reported on ongoing pregnancies. The ongoing pregnancies per woman randomised associated with UGET (441/1254) was significantly higher than for clinical touch (350/1218) OR 1.38, 95%CI 1.16 to 1.64, P<0.0003). No statistically significant differences in the incidence of adverse events were identified between the comparison groups. These events are relatively rare and sample sizes limit the ability to detect such differences.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The studies are limited by their quality with only two studies reporting details of both computerised randomisation techniques and adequate allocation concealment. Ultrasound guidance does appear to improve the chances of live/ongoing and clinical pregnancies compared with clinical touch methods. The quality of future studies should be improved with adequate reporting of randomisation, allocation concealment, and power calculations. The primary outcome measure of future studies should be the reporting of live births per woman randomised.

The effect of retained embryos on pregnancy outcome in an in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer program

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of retained embryos and its impact on pregnancy outcome in the absence of known risk factors like blood and mucus in the transfer catheter. The factors that could be associated with embryo retention were also investigated.

STUDY DESIGN

The results of all embryo transfer procedures performed at Ankara IVF Center between January 2003 and December 2005 were analyzed retrospectively. Three hundred and five embryo transfers, in which the transfer catheter was contaminated with blood or mucus, were excluded and the remaining 1,454 embryo transfers, with clean catheter, were enrolled into the study. Both fresh (n=1,422) and frozen (n=32) embryo transfers were included.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of retained embryos during study period was 2.8% (41/1,454) following a clean initial embryo transfer. The mean age of the female partner, mean number of retrieved oocytes, MII oocytes, fertilized oocytes and the embryos transferred were similar in patients with and without retained embryos. The 1,454 embryo transfers performed during the study period resulted in 712 pregnancies (49%), of which 639 proved to be clinical pregnancies with a rate of 44%. The implantation rate was 22.8%. Pregnancy outcomes including positive beta-hCG (58.5% versus 48.7%), biochemical (4.7% versus 5.1%) and clinical pregnancy rates (53.6% versus 43.6%), implantation rate (24% versus 22.7%) and multiple pregnancy rate (36.3% versus 44.7%) were not significantly different between patients with and without retained embryos. An influence of individual physicians and embryologists on the frequency of retained embryos was not detected. The type of embryo transfer catheter used did not show any difference in terms of embryo retention. The cleavage stages of embryos were not different between groups. Although it was not statistically significant, the number of embryos transferred appeared to be a potentially confounding factor for retained embryos (p=0.053) and it might be significant in a slightly larger sample. When transfer of one or two embryos was compared to three or more embryos, the likelihood of retained embryos increased from 1.2% (4/321) to 3.2% (37/1,133).

CONCLUSION

Retained embryos in the transfer catheter and immediate retransfer of them have no adverse impact on clinical pregnancy and implantation rates unless other previously reported signs of difficult transfer are also observed.

Ultrasound versus 'clinical touch' for catheter guidance during embryo transfer in women

BACKGROUND

Many women undergoing an Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) cycle will not achieve a live birth. Failure at the embryo transfer stage may be due to poor embryo quality, lack of uterine receptivity, or the transfer technique itself. Numerous methods, including the use of ultrasound guidance for proper catheter placement in the endometrial cavity, have been suggested as a means of improving the technique of embryo transfer. This review evaluates the effectiveness of ultrasound (UGET) in comparison with 'clinical touch' embryo transfer (CTET) the traditional method of embryo transfer.

OBJECTIVES

:To determine whether ultrasound guidance influences treatment outcomes in women undergoing embryo transfer (ET) during assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles.

SEARCH STRATEGY

All electronic databases were searched on 20 th August 2006. We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group trials register (searched August 2006), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2006), MEDLINE (1970-2006), EMBASE (1985-2006), BIO Extracts (1980-2006). Relevant conference proceedings were also hand searched (ASRM, ESHRE and FIGO).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised controlled trials were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and quality of trials and extracted data from those selected.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen out of fifteen identified studies were eligible for analysis. No study reported live births, however, personal communication resulted in data relating to this outcome being obtained in two of the studies. Six studies reported on ongoing pregnancies. The live birth/ ongoing pregnancies per woman randomised associated with UGET (452/1376) was significantly higher than for clinical touch (353/1338) OR 1.40, 95%CI 1.18 to 1.66, P<0.0001). This means, for example, that for a population of women with a 25% chance of pregnancy using clinical touch this would be increased to 32% (28% to 46%) by using UGET. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of adverse events between the two comparison groups with the exception of blood on the catheter.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The studies are limited by their quality with only one of the thirteen studies reporting details of both computerised randomisation techniques and adequate allocation concealment. Ultrasound guidance does appear to improve the chances of live/ongoing and clinical pregnancies compared with clinical touch methods. The quality of future studies should be improved with adequate reporting of randomisation, allocation concealment, and power calculations. The primary outcome measure of future studies should be the reporting of live births per woman randomised.