Comparing endometrial receptivity array to histologic dating of the endometrium in women with a history of implantation failure

Dynamic changes in AI-based analysis of endometrial cellular composition: Analysis of PCOS and RIF endometrium

Background

The human endometrium undergoes a monthly cycle of tissue growth and degeneration. During the mid-secretory phase, the endometrium establishes an optimal niche for embryo implantation by regulating cellular composition (e.g., epithelial and stromal cells) and differentiation. Impaired endometrial development observed in conditions such as polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and recurrent implantation failure (RIF) contributes to infertility. Surprisingly, despite the importance of the endometrial lining properly developing prior to pregnancy, precise measures of endometrial cellular composition in these two infertility-associated conditions are entirely lacking. Additionally, current methods for measuring the epithelial and stromal area have limitations, including intra- and inter-observer variability and efficiency.

Methods

We utilized a deep-learning artificial intelligence (AI) model, created on a cloud-based platform and developed in our previous study. The AI model underwent training to segment both areas populated by epithelial and stromal endometrial cells. During the training step, a total of 28.36 mm2 areas were annotated, comprising 2.56 mm2 of epithelium and 24.87 mm2 of stroma. Two experienced pathologists validated the performance of the AI model. 73 endometrial samples from healthy control women were included in the sample set to establish cycle phase-dependent dynamics of the endometrial epithelial-to-stroma ratio from the proliferative (PE) to secretory (SE) phases. In addition, 91 samples from PCOS cases, accounting for the presence or absence of ovulation and representing all menstrual cycle phases, and 29 samples from RIF patients on day 5 after progesterone administration in the hormone replacement treatment cycle were also included and analyzed in terms of cellular composition.

Results

Our AI model exhibited reliable and reproducible performance in delineating epithelial and stromal compartments, achieving an accuracy of 92.40% and 99.23%, respectively. Moreover, the performance of the AI model was comparable to the pathologists' assessment, with F1 scores exceeding 82% for the epithelium and >96% for the stroma. Next, we compared the endometrial epithelial-to-stromal ratio during the menstrual cycle in women with PCOS and in relation to endometrial receptivity status in RIF patients. The ovulatory PCOS endometrium exhibited epithelial cell proportions similar to those of control and healthy women's samples in every cycle phase, from the PE to the late SE, correlating with progesterone levels (control SE, r2 = 0.64, FDR < 0.001; PCOS SE, r2 = 0.52, FDR < 0.001). The mid-SE endometrium showed the highest epithelial percentage compared to both the early and late SE endometrium in both healthy women and PCOS patients. Anovulatory PCOS cases showed epithelial cellular fractions comparable to those of PCOS cases in the PE (Anovulatory, 14.54%; PCOS PE, 15.56%, p = 1.00). We did not observe significant differences in the epithelial-to-stroma ratio in the hormone-induced endometrium in RIF patients with different receptivity statuses.

Conclusion

The AI model rapidly and accurately identifies endometrial histology features by calculating areas occupied by epithelial and stromal cells. The AI model demonstrates changes in epithelial cellular proportions according to the menstrual cycle phase and reveals no changes in epithelial cellular proportions based on PCOS and RIF conditions. In conclusion, the AI model can potentially improve endometrial histology assessment by accelerating the analysis of the cellular composition of the tissue and by ensuring maximal objectivity for research and clinical purposes.

Analyzing the infertility burden of polycystic ovarian syndrome in China: A comprehensive age-period-cohort analysis with future burden prediction (1990-2030)

OBJECTIVE

Polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) is a common but complex endocrine disorder widely linked to infertility and miscarriage. This study assessed the correlation between PCOS and infertility.

METHODS

Using the latest data from the Global Burden of Disease 2019 database, we conducted an in-depth assessment of the disease burden attributed to PCOS in China. This analysis was performed using the joinpoint regression, age-period-cohort, and autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) models.

RESULTS

Between 1990-2019, an upward trend was observed in the age-standardized prevalence of PCOS-related female infertility in China. Joinpoint regression analysis revealed an increasing trend in the age-standardized prevalence of PCOS-related female infertility burden indicators as well as the average annual percentage change and annual percentage change across all age groups in China. In terms of the cohort effect, the period rate ratios associated with the age-standardized prevalence of PCOS-related infertility increased steadily over time. The ARIMA model predicted a relatively swift upward trend in the age-standardized prevalence of PCOS-related infertility in China from 2020-2030.

CONCLUSION

The age-standardized prevalence of PCOS-related female infertility in China has increased between 1990-2019. The ARIMA model predicted that the age-standardized prevalence of this disease may continue to increase over the next decade. This study can increase the public's attention, improve women's health awareness, and have a certain significance for reducing female infertility related to PCOS.

Current Status of Ovarian and Endometrial Biomarkers in Predicting ART Outcomes

This review evaluates the role of ovarian and endometrial biomarkers in predicting outcomes in assisted reproductive technology (ART). It highlights established ovarian biomarkers such as the anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), alongside emerging ones like growth differentiation factor 9 (GDF9), bone morphogenetic protein 15 (BMP15), connexin, and granulosa cell gene profiles. Additionally, the paper explores endometrial biomarkers such as ERA, BCL6, and immune markers, as well as the potential for genomic and proteomic technologies in customizing implantation. It concludes that while many of these biomarkers show promise, their clinical integration requires rigorous research and validation to confirm their safety and utility in ART.

Exploring the effectiveness of endometrial receptivity array and immune profiling in patients with multiple implantation failure：A retrospective cohort study based on propensity score matching

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the endometrial receptivity array (ERA), endometrial immune profiling, and a combination of both in improving the pregnancy outcomes for multiple implantation failure patients. According to patients' willingness, 1429 women who incurred at least two or more consecutive implantation failures in IVF/ICSI treatment opted for frozen embryo transfer and were divided into four groups: 'No test', 'Immune Profiling', 'ERA' and 'ERA+ Immune Profiling'. Women in three test groups underwent timed endometrial biopsy for ERA, immune profiling, a combination of both. We observed the overall incidence rates of the displaced window of implantation (WOI) and endometrial immune dysregulation were 75.14% and 79.29%, respectively. After 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), our data revealed that the 'ERA' and 'ERA + Immune Profiling' groups demonstrated significantly higher rates of biochemical, clinical, ongoing pregnancy, and implantation compared to the 'No test' group (p < 0.01). The 'Immune Profiling' group showed a higher implantation rate compared to 'No test' group (p < 0.05). Furthermore, when comparing three test groups, the 'ERA + Immune Profiling' group exhibited notably higher rates of clinical and ongoing pregnancy compared to the 'Immune Profiling' group (p < 0.017). However, there was no association between endometrial immune profiling and ERA phases, and their results did not differ between embryo implantation and non-implantation in these patients. Our findings underline the increased implantation rates by use of ERA and endometrial immune profiling in patients with multiple implantation failure, either individually or corporately. Moreover, a combination of both could improve their pregnancy outcomes significantly.

When the Embryo Meets the Endometrium: Identifying the Features Required for Successful Embryo Implantation

Evaluation of the optimal number of embryos, their quality, and the precise timing for transfer are critical determinants in reproductive success, although still remaining one of the main challenges in assisted reproduction technologies (ART). Indeed, the success of in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments relies on a multitude of events and factors involving both the endometrium and the embryo. Despite concerted efforts on both fronts, the overall success rates of IVF techniques continue to range between 25% and 30%. The role of the endometrium in implantation has been recently recognized, leading to the hypothesis that both the "soil" and the "seed" play a central role in a successful pregnancy. In this respect, identification of the molecular signature of endometrial receptivity together with the selection of the best embryo for transfer become crucial in ART. Currently, efforts have been made to develop accurate, predictive, and personalized tests to identify the window of implantation and the best quality embryo. However, the value of these tests is still debated, as conflicting results are reported in the literature. The purpose of this review is to summarize and critically report the available criteria to optimize the success of embryo transfer and to better understand current limitations and potential areas for improvement.

Factors affecting the ongoing pregnancy rate in women with repeated implantation failure undergoing an endometrial receptivity array

OBJECTIVE

In this retrospective study, we analyzed factors influencing the ongoing pregnancy rate (PR) in women with repeated implantation failure (RIF) undergoing embryo transfer with endometrial receptivity array (ERA).

METHODS

Eighty-three consecutive personalized embryo transfers (pETs) with ERA, from 54 women with RIF, were selected from June 2020 to April 2022. Vitrified blastocyst transfer was timed based on ERA results.

RESULTS

The ongoing PR per pET was 33.7%. Using ERA, the endometrium was identified as pre-receptive in 26 cycles, early receptive in 25 cycles, receptive in 31 cycles, and late receptive in one cycle. With cycles categorized into three receptivity phases (pre-receptive, early receptive, or receptive), no significant differences were found in the clinical PR (27.3%, 55.6%, and 40%, respectively) or ongoing PR (9.1%, 55.6%, and 40%, respectively) after a single blastocyst transfer. Similarly, no significant differences were observed in the clinical PR or ongoing PR after the transfer of two or more blastocysts. Among women with ongoing pregnancy relative to those without, age at first pET was significantly lower (35 years vs. 39 years, p=0.001), while blastocyst score (23 vs. 18, p=0.012) and the proportion of blastocyst scores >18 (71.4% vs. 38.9%, p=0.005) were significantly higher. In multiple logistic regression analysis, the woman's age (odds ratio [OR], 0.814; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.706 to 0.940; p=0.005) and blastocyst score >18 (OR, 3.052; 95% CI, 1.075 to 8.665; p=0.036) were identified as significant factors influencing ongoing pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

In pET with ERA, ongoing pregnancy was closely associated with woman's age and blastocyst quality.

Good practice recommendations on add-ons in reproductive medicine†

STUDY QUESTION

Which add-ons are safe and effective to be used in ART treatment?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Forty-two recommendations were formulated on the use of add-ons in the diagnosis of fertility problems, the IVF laboratory and clinical management of IVF treatment.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The innovative nature of ART combined with the extremely high motivation of the patients has opened the door to the wide application of what has become known as 'add-ons' in reproductive medicine. These supplementary options are available to patients in addition to standard fertility procedures, typically incurring an additional cost. A diverse array of supplementary options is made available, encompassing tests, drugs, equipment, complementary or alternative therapies, laboratory procedures, and surgical interventions. These options share the common aim of stating to enhance pregnancy or live birth rates, mitigate the risk of miscarriage, or expedite the time to achieving pregnancy.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

ESHRE aimed to develop clinically relevant and evidence-based recommendations focusing on the safety and efficacy of add-ons currently used in fertility procedures in order to improve the quality of care for patients with infertility.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

ESHRE appointed a European multidisciplinary working group consisting of practising clinicians, embryologists, and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of infertility. Patient representatives were included in the working group. To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, recommendations were based on the professional experience and consensus of the working group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 46 independent international reviewers. A total of 272 comments were received and incorporated where relevant.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The multidisciplinary working group formulated 42 recommendations in three sections; diagnosis and diagnostic tests, laboratory tests and interventions, and clinical management.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Of the 42 recommendations, none could be based on high-quality evidence and only four could be based on moderate-quality evidence, implicating that 95% of the recommendations are supported only by low-quality randomized controlled trials, observational data, professional experience, or consensus of the development group.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

These guidelines offer valuable direction for healthcare professionals who are responsible for the care of patients undergoing ART treatment for infertility. Their purpose is to promote safe and effective ART treatment, enabling patients to make informed decisions based on realistic expectations. The guidelines aim to ensure that patients are fully informed about the various treatment options available to them and the likelihood of any additional treatment or test to improve the chance of achieving a live birth.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

All costs relating to the development process were covered from ESHRE funds. There was no external funding of the development process or manuscript production. K.L. reports speakers fees from Merck and was part of a research study by Vitrolife (unpaid). T.E. reports consulting fees from Gynemed, speakers fees from Gynemed and is part of the scientific advisory board of Hamilton Thorne. N.P.P. reports grants from Merck Serono, Ferring Pharmaceutical, Theramex, Gedeon Richter, Organon, Roche, IBSA and Besins Healthcare, speakers fees from Merck Serono, Ferring Pharmaceutical, Theramex, Gedeon Richter, Organon, Roche, IBSA and Besins Healthcare. S.R.H. declares being managing director of Fertility Europe, a not-for-profit organization receiving financial support from ESHRE. I.S. is a scientific advisor for and has stock options from Alife Health, is co-founder of IVFvision LTD (unpaid) and received speakers' fee from the 2023 ART Young Leader Prestige workshop in China. A.P. reports grants from Gedeon Richter, Ferring Pharmaceuticals and Merck A/S, consulting fees from Preglem, Novo Nordisk, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Gedeon Richter, Cryos and Merck A/S, speakers fees from Gedeon Richter, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Merck A/S, Theramex and Organon, travel fees from Gedeon Richter. The other authors disclosed no conflicts of interest.

DISCLAIMER

This Good Practice Recommendations (GPRs) document represents the views of ESHRE, which are the result of consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders and are based on the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation.ESHRE GPRs should be used for information and educational purposes. They should not be interpreted as setting a standard of care or bedeemedinclusive of all proper methods of care, or be exclusive of other methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results.Theydo not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, or variations based on locality and facility type.Furthermore, ESHRE GPRs do not constitute or imply the endorsement, or favouring, of any of the included technologies by ESHRE.

Current knowledge on the role of extracellular vesicles in endometrial receptivity

Endometrial receptivity has been widely understood as the capacity of the endometrium to receive implantable embryos. The establishment of endometrial receptivity involves multiple biological processes including decidualization, tissue remodeling, angiogenesis, immune regulation, and oxidative metabolism. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are lipid-bilayer-membrane nanosized vesicles mediating cell-to-cell communication. Recently, EVs and their cargo have been proven as functional factors in the establishment of endometrial receptivity. In this review, we comprehensively summarized the alteration of endometrium/embryo-derived EVs during the receptive phase and retrospected the current findings which revealed the pivotal role and potential mechanism of EVs to promote successful implantation. Furthermore, we highlight the potentiality and limitations of EVs being translated into clinical applications such as biomarkers of endometrial receptivity or reproductive therapeutic mediators, and point out the direction for further research.

Review of Endometrial Receptivity Array: A Personalized Approach to Embryo Transfer and Its Clinical Applications

Successful outcomes of in vitro fertilization (IVF) rely on both the formation of a chromosomally normal embryo and its implantation in a receptive endometrium. Pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) has been widely accepted as a tool to assess the viability of an embryo. In 2011, the endometrial receptivity array (ERA) was first published as a tool to determine when the endometrium is most receptive to an embryo, commonly referred to as the "window of implantation" (WOI). The ERA uses molecular arrays to assess proliferation and differentiation in the endometrium and screens for inflammatory markers. Unlike PGT-A, there has been dissent within the field concerning the efficacy of the ERA. Many studies that contest the success of the ERA found that it did not improve pregnancy outcomes in patients with an already-good prognosis. Alternatively, studies that utilized the ERA in patients with repeated implantation failure (RIF) and transfer of known euploid embryos demonstrated improved outcomes. This review aims to describe the ERA as a novel technique, review the various settings that the ERA may be used in, such as natural frozen embryo transfer (nFET) and hormone replacement therapy frozen embryo transfer (HRT-FET), and provide a summary of the recent clinical data for embryo transfers in patients with RIF utilizing the ERA.

Omics insights into extracellular vesicles in embryo implantation and their therapeutic utility

Implantation success relies on intricate interplay between the developing embryo and the maternal endometrium. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) represent an important player of this intercellular signalling through delivery of functional cargo (proteins and RNAs) that reprogram the target cells protein and RNA landscape. Functionally, the signalling reciprocity of endometrial and embryo EVs regulates the site of implantation, preimplantation embryo development and hatching, antioxidative activity, embryo attachment, trophoblast invasion, arterial remodelling, and immune tolerance. Omics technologies including mass spectrometry have been instrumental in dissecting EV cargo that regulate these processes as well as molecular changes in embryo and endometrium to facilitate implantation. This has also led to discovery of potential cargo in EVs in human uterine fluid (UF) and embryo spent media (ESM) of diagnostic and therapeutic value in implantation success, fertility, and pregnancy outcome. This review discusses the contribution of EVs in functional hallmarks of embryo implantation, and how the integration of various omics technologies is enabling design of EV-based diagnostic and therapeutic platforms in reproductive medicine.

Risk Factors of Pregnancy Failure in Infertile Patients Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technology

Background

Infertile couples need to use assisted reproductive technology (ART) to give birth. However, pregnancy failure after ART is not uncommon. At present, the results of studies on the causes of pregnancy failure after ART are inconsistent.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study involving 715 embryo transfer cycles was conducted at the Reproductive Medicine Center of Meizhou People's Hospital, from December 2015 to June 2022. According to the pregnancy, they were divided into clinical pregnancy group and pregnancy failure group. The relationship between demographic characteristics and pregnancy status between the two groups was analyzed.

Results

The pregnancy failure rate after ART was 49.7% (355/715). There were statistically significant distribution differences of maternal age, paternal age, COH protocols, and number of embryos transferred between clinical pregnancy and pregnancy failure groups (all P<0.01). Multiple logistic regression analysis shows that high maternal age (>35 years old vs ≤35 years old: OR 2.173, 95% CI: 1.386-3.407, P=0.001), and GnRH-a short protocol (GnRH-a short protocol vs GnRH-a long protocol: OR 2.139, 95% CI: 1.127-4.058, P=0.020) may increase risk of pregnancy failure in ART pregnancies, while two embryos transferred (two embryos transferred vs one embryo transferred: OR 0.563, 95% CI: 0.377-0.839, P=0.005) may reduce risk of pregnancy failure. In addition, high maternal age, GnRH antagonist protocol, and GnRH-a short protocol may increase risk of implantation failure, while two embryos transferred may reduce risk of implantation failure. And high maternal age may increase risk of biochemical pregnancy.

Conclusion

The risk of pregnancy failure increased in ART cycles with maternal age >35 years old and GnRH-a short protocol, while reduced with two embryos transferred.

FHL1 mediates HOXA10 deacetylation via SIRT2 to enhance blastocyst-epithelial adhesion

Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) is a rather thorny problem in the clinical practice of assisted reproductive technology. Due to the complex aetiology of RIF, its pathogenesis is far from fully understood, and there is no effective treatment available. Here, We explored the regulatory mechanism of the four half-domains of LIM domain 1 (FHL1), which is significantly downregulated in the endometrium of RIF patients, in blastocyst-epithelial adhesion. Indeed, FHL1 expression was dramatically increased in normal female mid-secretory endometrial epithelial cells and was abnormally reduced in RIF patients. Furthermore, FHL1 overexpression promoted blastocyst-epithelial adhesion, and interfering with FHL1 expression in the mouse uterus significantly inhibited embryo implantation. Mechanistically, FHL1 did not regulate HOXA10 mRNA expression but increased HOXA10 protein stability and activated HOXA10, thereby promoting its regulation of downstream gene expression and the β3 integrin/FAK pathway. Meanwhile, FHL1 regulates HOXA10 function by increasing HOXA10 deacetylation through enhanced binding of HOXA10 and SIRT2. SIRT2-specific inhibitors can significantly inhibit this effect. In the endometrial epithelial cells of RIF patients, the correlation between FHL1 and HOXA10 and its downstream target genes has also been verified. Finally, our data indicated FHL1 is a regulatory molecule that promotes blastocyst-epithelial adhesion. Altogether, downstream dysfunction due to aberrant FHL1 expression is an important molecular basis for embryo implantation failure in patients with RIF and to provide new potential therapeutic targets.

Commercially Available Molecular Approaches to Evaluate Endometrial Receptivity: A Systematic Review and Critical Analysis of the Literature

Despite the advances in the field of reproductive medicine, implantation failure represents a challenging condition affecting 10-30% of patients subjected to in vitro fertilization (IVF). Research has focused on the identification of molecules playing crucial roles in endometrial receptivity, with the aim of designing predictive tools for efficient detection of the implantation window. To that end, novel molecular genomic and transcriptomic approaches have been introduced as promising tools to enable personalized approaches with the aim of optimizing embryo transfer dating. However, the clinical value of these approaches remains unclear. The aim of this study is to provide a systematic review and critical analysis of the existing evidence regarding the employment of commercially available novel approaches to evaluate endometrial receptivity. An Embase and PubMed/Medline search was performed on 1 February 2022. From the 475 articles yielded, only 27 were included and analyzed. The considerable heterogeneity of the included articles indicates the uniqueness of the implantation window, showcasing that the optimal time for embryo transfer varies significantly between women. Moreover, this study provides information regarding the technical aspects of these advanced molecular tools, as well as an analysis of novel possible biomarkers for endometrial receptivity, providing a basis for future research in the field.

Use of the endometrial receptivity array to guide personalized embryo transfer after a failed transfer attempt was associated with a lower cumulative and per transfer live birth rate during donor and autologous cycles

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether personalized embryo transfer (pET) guided by endometrial receptivity array (ERA) test improves reproductive outcomes for fresh embryo transfers (fsETs) or frozen embryo transfers (FETs) during autologous and donor cycles.

DESIGN

A retrospective, observational, multicenter cohort study.

SETTING

University-affiliated in vitro fertilization center.

PATIENT(S)

The study included patients with a single previous failed transfer and yielded 3,239 autologous transfers and 2,133 donor transfers. Among autologous transfers, 255 were pET guided by ERA; among unguided autologous transfers, 1,122 and 1,862 transfers involved fresh or previously frozen embryos, respectively. Among donor transfers, 319 were ERA-guided; among unguided donor transfers, 1,175 and 639 involved fsETs or FETs, respectively.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Primary outcomes were live birth rate per embryo transfer and cumulative live birth rate on consecutive transfers until live birth or cessation of pregnancy. Secondary outcomes were implantation, pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rates per embryo transfer, and miscarriage rate per pregnancy.

RESULT(S)

During both autologous or donor transfers, live birth rate and cumulative live birth rate were higher in FET and fsET than in pET groups, even with euploid transfers. Logistic regression analysis, considering possible confounders, indicated patients receiving pET had poorer outcomes than those undergoing FET and fsET in autologous and donor cycles. Implantation, pregnancy, and clinical pregnancy rates were lower in patients undergoing pET.

CONCLUSION(S)

Using ERA to guide pET during either autologous or donor cycles after a failed transfer attempt did not improve reproductive outcomes. Conversely, worse outcomes were detected when ERA was used.

The Clinical Efficacy of Personalized Embryo Transfer Guided by the Endometrial Receptivity Array/Analysis on IVF/ICSI Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: To assess the prevalence of displaced window of implantation (WOI) in infertile women, and the clinical utility of personalized embryo transfer (pET) guided by the endometrial receptivity array/analysis (ERA) on IVF/ICSI outcomes.

Methods: The protocol was registered at Prospero: CRD42020204237. We systematically searched all published English literature related to the prevalence of WOI displacement and ongoing pregnancy rate/live birth rate in the overall good-prognosis infertile patients (GPP) and/or repeated implantation failure (RIF) patients undergoing IVF/ICSI-ET cycles after ERA test until August 2021.

Result(s): 11 published studies were enrolled in the final analysis. The estimate of the incidence of WOI displacement based on ERA was 38% (95%CI 19–57%) in GPP and 34% (95%CI 24–43%) in RIF, respectively. There was no difference in OPR/LBR between patients undergoing routine ET without ERA test and those who following pET with ERA (39.5 vs. 53.7%, OR 1.28, p = 0.49, 95%CI 0.92–1.77, I² = 0%) in relative GPP. Notably, the meta-analysis revealed that OPR/LBR of patients with RIF undergoing pET who had non-receptive ERA increased to the level of to those undergoing sET with receptive ERA (40.7 vs.49.6%, OR 0.94, p = 0.85, 95%CI 0.70–1.26, I² = 0%).

Conclusion: Considering the approximately one third of infertile women could suffered from displaced WOI, the ERA test emerged as a promising tool. Although the present meta-analysis demonstrates that patients with general good-prognosis may not benefit from ERA, pET guided by ERA significantly increases the chances of pregnancy for non-receptive patients with RIF of endometrial origin.

Non-Invasive and Mechanism-Based Molecular Assessment of Endometrial Receptivity During the Window of Implantation: Current Concepts and Future Prospective Testing Directions

Suboptimal endometrial receptivity and altered embryo-endometrial crosstalk account for approximately two-thirds of human implantation failures. Current tests of the window of implantation, such as endometrial thickness measurements and the endometrial receptivity assay, do not consistently improve clinical outcomes as measured by live birth rates. Understanding the mechanisms regulating the endometrial receptivity during the window of implantation is a critical step toward developing clinically meaningful tests. In this narrative review, the available literature is evaluated regarding mechanisms that regulate the endometrial receptivity during the window of implantation and the current tests developed. Overall, both animal and human studies point to five possible and interrelated mechanisms regulating the endometrial window of implantation: suitable synchrony between endometrial cells, adequate synchrony between the endometrium and the embryo, standard progesterone signaling and endometrial responses to progesterone, silent genetic variations, and typical morphological characteristics of the endometrial glands. The biological basis of current clinical markers or tests of window of implantation is poor. Future studies to elucidate the mechanisms shaping the window of implantation and to investigate the potential markers based on these mechanisms are required. In addition, molecular testing of the endometrium at single-cell resolution should be an initial step toward developing clinically meaningful tests for the optimal window of implantation. As understanding of the optimal window of implantation continues to evolve, one can envision the future development of non-invasive, mechanism-based testing of the window of implantation.

The efficacy of add-ons: selected IVF "add-on" procedures and future directions

Since the advent of ART, technology has continuously evolved to improve embryology and pregnancy outcomes. However, not all technologies that are integrated into practice have convincing evidence of clinical effectiveness, and they often increase the financial burden of fertility care. We discuss here a selection of commonly utilized IVF "add-ons" and discuss the existing evidence for their utility. The procedures included in this review are time-lapse imaging of embryos, assisted hatching, EmbryoGlue, sperm DNA testing, egg activation with calcium ionophore, endometrial receptivity array, and physiological intracytoplasmic sperm injection (PICSI). While there is rather limited supporting evidence for nearly all IVF add-ons that we reviewed, there is strong demand from patients, physicians, and the biotechnology industry to continue further research and development in this arena. We propose that all add-on procedures should provide true efficacy for the patient, and reproductive endocrinologists should inform patients of the costs and benefits of utilizing various technologies before they undergo treatment. In the future, add-ons that show clear evidence of efficacy and justifiable cost should be incorporated into routine practice, while others that do not meet these criteria should be phased out entirely.

The RNA-seq based endometrial receptivity test (rsERT) compared to pinopode: A better diagnostic tool for endometrial receptivity for patients with recurrent implantation failure in Chinese population

Displaced window of implantation (WOI) is one of the endometrial origins that accounts for implantation failure, especially for patients with recurrent implantation failure (RIF), yet no standard diagnostic tool has been recognized. The study consists of two parts, aiming to compare the concordance and efficacy of the diagnostic tools, the newly developed RNA-seq based endometrial receptivity test (rsERT) to the conventional pinopode, in diagnosing WOI and guiding personalized embryo transfer (pET). With the same group of RIF patients, the rsERT diagnosed 32 patients (65.31%) with normal WOIs, and most of the displacements were advancements (30.61%). While according to pinopode, only 14 patients (28.57%) were found with normal WOIs, and most patients (63.27%) presented delayed growth patterns. After conducting pET, patients in the rsERT group had higher successful pregnancy rates while requiring fewer ET cycles (50.00% vs. 16.67%, p=0.001). The study proved poor consistency between the diagnostic tools of endometrial receptivity based on cellular structure and gene profiling, and it supported rsERT as a reliable tool with potential clinical value.

Effectiveness comparison between Endometrial Receptivity Array, Immune Profiling and the combination in treating patients with multiple implantation failure

PROBLEM

The clinical value of endometrial receptivity array (ERA), endometrial immune profiling, or a combination of both for multiple implantation failure patients is unclear.

METHOD OF STUDY

One hundred and seventy-two women with a history of at least two or more consecutive implantation failures in IVF/ICSI treatment were included. According to patients' willingness, they were divided into four groups, 'no treatment', 'Immune Profiling', 'ERA' and 'ERA + Immune Profiling'. Endometrial biopsy was examined by ERA, immune profiling alone, or combination, and intention was adopted accordingly. Pregnancy outcomes were compared, and the association between ERA phases and endometrial immune profiling was also assessed.

RESULTS

The overall incidence rate of the displaced window of implantation (WOI) and endometrial immune dysregulations were 84.9% and 75.3%, respectively. Implantation rate was significantly higher in the 'ERA + Immune Profiling' group than the 'no treatment' group (P = 0.007). Clinical pregnancy rate was somewhat improved in the three treatment groups but with a borderline significance (P = 0.071). After controlling for other confounders, 'ERA + Immune Profiling' treatment was associated with a higher pregnancy rate [aOR (95%CI)  =  3.412 (1.387-8.395), P = 0.008]. There was no association between endometrial immune profiling and ERA phases.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight the high incidence of displaced WOI and endometrial immune dysregulation in multiple implantation failure patients. The combination of ERA and endometrial immune profiling is more likely to have clinical value than ERA or immune profiling alone. These data suggested the unsubstitutability of ERA and endometrial immune profiling on the treatment outcome for multiple implantation failure patients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.