Transfer of a poor-quality along with a good-quality embryo on in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection-embryo transfer clinical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Assisted reproductive technology and neurodevelopment in children at 1 year of age: a longitudinal birth cohort study

BACKGROUND

With remarkable advancements in assisted reproductive technology (ART), the number of ART-conceived children continues to increase. Despite increased research investigating the outcomes of ART children, evidence on neurodevelopment remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the association between ART use and neurodevelopment in children at 1 year of age and to determine whether the characteristics of parental infertility and specific ART procedures affect neurodevelopment in children.

STUDY DESIGN

The Jiangsu Birth Cohort enrolled couples who received ART treatment and who conceived spontaneously (2014-2020) in Jiangsu Province, China. In this study, we included 3531 pregnancies with 3840 cohort children who completed neurodevelopment assessment at 1 year of age, including 1906 infants conceived by ART (including 621 twins). Poisson regressions were fitted to estimate unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for ART use with neurodevelopmental outcomes (cognition, receptive communication, expressive communication, fine motor, and gross motor) in children.

RESULTS

Among singletons, ART use was associated with a 24% to 34% decrease in the risk for noncompetent development in 3 domains (cognition, adjusted RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.53-0.82; receptive communication, 0.76; 0.64-0.91; expressive communication, 0.69; 0.51-0.93) after adjustment for conventional covariates. However, an inverse association was observed in the gross motor domain, with ART singletons having a greater risk of being noncompetent in gross motor development than their non-ART counterparts (adjusted RR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.11-1.79). Compared with singletons, twins resulting from ART treatment demonstrated compromised neurodevelopment in several domains. Furthermore, we continued to observe that the transfer of 'poor' quality embryos was associated with greater risks for noncompetent development in receptive communication (adjusted RR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.05-2.14) and gross motor domains (1.55; 1.02-2.36) among ART singletons.

CONCLUSION

These results generally provide reassuring evidence among singletons born after ART in the cognition, communication, and fine motor domains, but drawn attention to their gross motor development. The quality of transferred embryos in ART treatment might be associated with offspring neurodevelopment; however, the potential associations warrant further validation in independent studies, and the clinical significance needs careful interpretation.

Embryo Transfer Procedural Parameters Do Not Predict IVF Cycle Outcome

BACKGROUND

this study aims to assess the effect of embryo transfer (ET) performance parameters of a technical nature on IVF outcome.

METHODS

A total of 1417 ETs from a single IVF center were included in this prospective observational study. The parameters investigated were as follows: the presence of cervical mucus post catheter withdrawal, the presence of blood, catheter reload, the employment of a tenaculum and stylet, catheter resistance as experienced by the physician and patient discomfort.

RESULTS

When ET performance parameters were associated with clinical outcomes on a singular level, none of the ET parameters presented with any statistical significance. The evaluation of covariates indicated that the number and the quality of transferred embryos, as well as maternal age, exerted a statistically significant effect on clinical outcomes. In a multivariate analysis, only the presence of mucus along with significant catheter resistance presented with statistical significance; however, when adjusting for covariates, this combination showed no statistically significant effect on clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

the results indicate that the time-consuming process of recording and analyzing ET performance parameters fails to offer any additional value in predicting the cycle's outcome, while factors like embryo quality and number, as well as maternal age, seem to be the sole robust predictive factors of an IVF cycle.

Effect of frozen-thawed embryo transfer with a poor-quality embryo and a good-quality embryo on pregnancy and neonatal outcomes

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the impact of embryo quality and quantity, specifically a poor quality embryo (PQE) in combination with a good quality embryo (GQE), by double embryo transfer (DET) on the live birth rate (LBR) and neonatal outcomes in patients undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles.

METHODS

A study on a cohort of women who underwent a total of 1462 frozen-thawed cleavage or blastocyst embryo transfer cycles with autologous oocytes was conducted between January 2018 and December 2021. To compare the outcomes between single embryo transfer (SET) with a GQE and DET with a GQE and a PQE, propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to control for potential confounders, and a generalized estimating equation (GEE) model was used to determine the association between the effect of an additional PQE and the outcomes. Subgroup analysis was also performed for patients stratified by female age.

RESULTS

After PS matching, DET-GQE + PQE did not significantly alter the LBR (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.421, 95% CI 0.907-2.228) compared with SET-GQE in cleavage-stage embryo transfer but did increase the multiple birth rate (MBR, [OR] 3.917, 95% CI 1.189-12.911). However, in patients who underwent blastocyst-stage embryo transfer, adding a second PQE increased the live birth rate by 7.8% ([OR] 1.477, 95% CI 1.046-2.086) and the multiple birth rate by 19.6% ([OR] 28.355, 95% CI 3.926-204.790), and resulted in adverse neonatal outcomes. For patients who underwent cleavage-stage embryo transfer, transferring a PQE with a GQE led to a significant increase in the MBR ([OR] 4.724, 95% CI 1.121-19.913) in women under 35 years old but not in the LBR ([OR] 1.227, 95% CI 0.719-2.092). The increases in LBR and MBR for DET-GQE + PQE compared with SET-GQE in women older than 35 years were nonsignificant toward. For patients who underwent blastocyst-stage embryo transfer, DET-GQE + PQE had a greater LBR ([OR] 1.803, 95% CI 1.165-2.789), MBR ([OR] 24.185, 95% CI 3.285-178.062) and preterm birth rate (PBR, [OR] 4.092, 95% CI 1.153-14.518) than did SET-GQE in women under 35 years old, while no significant impact on the LBR ([OR] 1.053, 95% CI 0.589-1.884) or MBR (0% vs. 8.3%) was observed in women older than 35 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of a PQE has no significant benefit on the LBR but significantly increases the MBR in patients who underwent frozen-thawed cleavage-stage embryo transfer. However, for patients who underwent blastocyst-stage embryo transfer, DET-GQE + PQE resulted in an increase in both the LBR and MBR, which may lead to adverse neonatal outcomes. Thus, the benefits and risks of double blastocyst-stage embryo transfer should be balanced. In patients younger than 35 years, SET-GQE achieved satisfactory LBR either in cleavage-stage embryo transfer or blastocyst-stage embryo transfer, while DET-GQE + PQE resulted in a dramatically increased MBR. Considering the low LBR in women older than 35 years who underwent single cleavage-stage embryo transfer, selective single blastocyst-stage embryo transfer appears to be a more promising approach for reducing the risk of multiple live births and adverse neonatal outcomes.

Management strategies following implantation failure of euploid embryos

Background

Euploid blastocyst implantation failure may result from embryonic factors undetectable by preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A); however, various nonembryonic factors can also intricately interfere with implantation. This review seeks to clarify evidence-based testing and treatments for implantation failure after euploid embryo transfer.

Methods

We conducted a review of the literature on implantation failure after euploid embryo transfer or multiple embryo transfer cycles, which mainly included systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Results

The recommended tests for implantation failure include (1) hysteroscopy, (2) endometrial CD138 immunohistochemistry and bacterial culture, (3) serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D3, and (4) thrombophilia screening. Based on diagnostic findings, the following treatments have been recommended: (1) antibiotics for chronic endometritis, (2) vitamin D replacement, (3) lifestyle modification, and (4) low-dose aspirin starting from the postimplantation period for thrombophilia. Moreover, frozen-thawed single euploid blastocyst transfer using assisted hatching and hyaluronan-enriched transfer medium may support embryo implantation.

Conclusion

To ensure a successful pregnancy in subsequent embryo transfers, simple, inexpensive, and evidence-based tests and treatments should be selected.

Novel embryo selection strategies-finding the right balance

The use of novel technologies in the selection of embryos during in vitro fertilisation (IVF) has the potential to improve the chances of pregnancy and birth of a healthy child. However, it is important to be aware of the potential risks and unintended consequences that may arise from the premature implementation of these technologies. This article discusses the ethical considerations surrounding the use of novel embryo selection technologies in IVF, including the growing uptake of genetic testing and others, and argues that prioritising embryos for transfer using these technologies is acceptable, but discarding embryos based on unproven advances is not. Several historical examples are provided, which demonstrate possible harms, where the overall chance of pregnancy may have been reduced, and some patients may have missed out on biological parenthood altogether. We emphasise the need for caution and a balanced approach to ensure that the benefits of these technologies outweigh any potential harm. We also highlight the primacy of patients' autonomy in reproductive decision-making, especially when information gained by utilising novel technologies is imprecise.