Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T19:40:10.711Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The effects of the day of trophectoderm biopsy and blastocyst grade on the clinical and neonatal outcomes of preimplantation genetic testing–frozen embryo transfer cycles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2021

Linjun Chen*
Affiliation:
Reproductive Medical Center, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Zhongshan Road 321#, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China Center for Molecular Reproductive Medicine, Nanjing University, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China
Zhenyu Diao
Affiliation:
Reproductive Medical Center, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Zhongshan Road 321#, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China Center for Molecular Reproductive Medicine, Nanjing University, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China
Jie Wang
Affiliation:
Reproductive Medical Center, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Zhongshan Road 321#, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China Center for Molecular Reproductive Medicine, Nanjing University, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China
Zhipeng Xu
Affiliation:
Reproductive Medical Center, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Zhongshan Road 321#, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China Center for Molecular Reproductive Medicine, Nanjing University, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China
Ningyuan Zhang
Affiliation:
Reproductive Medical Center, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Zhongshan Road 321#, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China Center for Molecular Reproductive Medicine, Nanjing University, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China
Junshun Fang
Affiliation:
Reproductive Medical Center, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Zhongshan Road 321#, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China Center for Molecular Reproductive Medicine, Nanjing University, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China
Fei Lin*
Affiliation:
Reproductive Medical Center, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Zhongshan Road 321#, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China Center for Molecular Reproductive Medicine, Nanjing University, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China
*
Authors for correspondence: Linjun Chen. Reproductive Medical Center, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Zhongshan Road 321#, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China. Email: [email protected]
Fei Lin. Reproductive Medical Center, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Zhongshan Road 321#, Nanjing210008, People’s Republic of China. Email: [email protected]

Summary

This study analyzed the effects of the day of trophectoderm (TE) biopsy and blastocyst grade on clinical and neonatal outcomes. The results showed that the implantation and live birth rates of day 5 (D5) TE biopsy were significantly higher compared with those of D6 TE biopsy. The miscarriage rate of the former was lower than that of the latter, but there was no statistically significant difference. Higher quality blastocysts can achieve better implantation and live birth rates. Among good quality blastocysts, the implantation and live birth rates of D5 and D6 TE biopsy were not significantly different. Among fair quality and poor quality blastocysts, the implantation and live birth rates of D5 TE biopsy were significantly higher compared with those of D6 TE biopsy. Neither blastocyst grade nor the day of TE biopsy significantly affected the miscarriage rate. Neonatal outcomes, including newborn sex, gestational age, preterm birth, birth weight and low birth weight in the D5 and D6 TE biopsies were not significantly different. Both blastocyst grade and the day of TE biopsy must be considered at the same time when performing preimplantation genetic testing–frozen embryo transfer.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barash, OO, Ivani, KA, Willman, SP, Rosenbluth, EM, Wachs, DS, Hinckley, MD, Pittenger Reid, S and Weckstein, LN (2017). Association between growth dynamics, morphological parameters, the chromosomal status of the blastocysts, and clinical outcomes in IVF PGS cycles with single embryo transfer. J Assist Reprod Genet 34, 1007–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bourdon, M, Pocate-Cheriet, K, Finet de Bantel, A, Grzegorczyk-Martin, V, Amar Hoffet, A, Arbo, E, Poulain, M and Santulli, P (2019). Day 5 versus Day 6 blastocyst transfers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes. Hum Reprod 34, 1948–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, L, Diao, Z, Xu, Z, Zhou, J, Wang, W, Li, J, Yan, G and Sun, H (2016). The clinical application of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for the patient affected by congenital contractural arachnodactyly and spinal and bulbar muscular atrophy. J Assist Reprod Genet 33, 1459–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, L, Diao, Z, Xu, Z, Zhou, J, Yan, G and Sun, H (2017). The clinical application of NGS-based SNP haplotyping for PGD of Hb H disease. Syst Biol Reprod Med 63, 212–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, L, Diao, Z, Xu, Z, Zhou, J, Yan, G and Sun, H (2019). The clinical application of single-sperm-based SNP haplotyping for PGD of osteogenesis imperfecta. Syst Biol Reprod Med 65, 7580.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
El-Toukhy, T, Wharf, E, Walavalkar, R, Singh, A, Bolton, V, Khalaf, Y and Braude, P (2011). Delayed blastocyst development does not influence the outcome of frozen–thawed transfer cycles. BJOG 118, 1551–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreux, L, Bourdon, M, Sallem, A, Santulli, P, Barraud-Lange, V, Le Foll, N, Maignien, C, Chapron, C, de Ziegler, D, Wolf, JP and Pocate-Cheriet, K (2018). Live birth rate following frozen–thawed blastocyst transfer is higher with blastocysts expanded on Day 5 than on Day 6. Hum Reprod 33, 390–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Franasiak, JM, Forman, EJ, Patounakis, G, Hong, KH, Werner, MD, Upham, KM, Treff NR and Scott, RT Jr (2018). Investigating the impact of the timing of blastulation on implantation: management of embryo-endometrial synchrony improves outcomes. Hum Reprod 2018, hoy022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, DK and Schoolcraft, WB (1999). Culture and transfer of human blastocysts. Curr Opin Obs Gynecol 11, 307–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hernandez-Nieto, C, Lee, JA, Slifkin, R, Sandler, B, Copperman, AB and Flisser, E (2019). What is the reproductive potential of day 7 euploid embryos? Hum Reprod 34, 16971706.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Irani, M, O’Neill, C, Palermo, GD, Xu, K, Zhang, C, Qin, X, Zhan, Q, Clarke, RN, Ye, Z, Zaninovic, N and Rosenwaks, Z (2018). Blastocyst development rate influences implantation and live birth rates of similarly graded euploid blastocysts. Fertil Steril 110, 95102.e1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaye, L, Will, EA, Bartolucci, A, Nulsen, J, Benadiva, C and Engmann, L (2017). Pregnancy rates for single embryo transfer (SET) of day 5 and day 6 blastocysts after cryopreservation by vitrification and slow freeze. J Assist Reprod Genet 34, 913–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kwek, LK, Saffari, SE, Tan, HH, Chan, JK and Nada, S (2018). Comparison between single and double cleavage-stage embryo transfers, single and double blastocyst transfers in a South East Asian in vitro fertilisation centre. Ann Acad Med Singap 47, 451–4.Google Scholar
Li, YX, Wang, J, Sun, TZ, Lv, MQ, Ge, P, Li, HN and Zhou, DX (2020). Pregnancy outcomes after day 5 versus day 6 blastocyst-stage embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 46, 595605.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Minasi, MG, Colasante, A, Riccio, T, Ruberti, A, Casciani, V, Scarselli, F, Spinella, F, Fiorentino, F, Varricchio, MT and Greco, E (2016). Correlation between aneuploidy, standard morphology evaluation and morphokinetic development in 1730 biopsied blastocysts: a consecutive case series study. Hum Reprod 31, 2245–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ozgur, K, Berkkanoglu, M, Bulut, H, Yoruk, GDA, Candurmaz, NN and Coetzee, K (2019). Single best euploid versus single best unknown-ploidy blastocyst frozen embryo transfers: a randomized controlled trial. J Assist Reprod Genet 36, 629–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poulsen, V, Ingerslev, HJ and Kirkegaard, K (2017). Elective embryo transfers on Day 6 reduce implantation compared with transfers on Day 5. Hum Reprod 32, 1238–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sciorio, R, Thong, KJ and Pickering, SJ (2018). Single blastocyst transfer (SET) and pregnancy outcome of day 5 and day 6 human blastocysts vitrified using a closed device. Cryobiology 84, 40–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sciorio, R, Thong, KJ and Pickering, SJ (2019). Increased pregnancy outcome after day 5 versus day 6 transfers of human vitrified-warmed blastocysts. Zygote 27, 279–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sundhararaj, UM, Madne, MV, Biliangady, R, Gurunath, S, Swamy, AG and Gopal, IST (2017). Single blastocyst transfer: the key to reduce multiple pregnancy rates without compromising the live birth rate. J Hum Reprod Sci 10, 201–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sunkara, SK, Siozos, A, Bolton, VN, Khalaf, Y, Braude, PR and El-Toukhy, T (2010). The influence of delayed blastocyst formation on the outcome of frozen–thawed blastocyst transfer: asystematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod 25, 1906–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tubbing, A, Shaw-Jackson, C, Ameye, L, Colin, J, Rozenberg, S and Autin, C (2018). Increased live births after day 5 versus day 6 transfers of vitrified-warmed blastocysts. J Assist Reprod Genet 35, 417–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Viñals Gonzalez, X, Odia, R, Naja, R, Serhal, P, Saab, W, Seshadri, S and Ben-Nagi, J (2019). Euploid blastocysts implant irrespective of their morphology after NGS-(PGT-A) testing in advanced maternal age patients. J Assist Reprod Genet 36, 1623–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zegers-Hochschild, F, Adamson, GD, Dyer, S, Racowsky, C, de Mouzon, J, Sokol, R, Rienzi, L, Sunde, A, Schmidt, L, Cooke, ID, Simpson, JL and van der Poel, S (2017). The International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility Care, 2017. Hum Reprod 32, 1786–801.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zeng, M, Su Qin, S, Wen, P, Xu, C and Duan, J (2020). Perinatal outcomes after vitrified-warmed day 5 blastocyst transfers compared with vitrified-warmed day 6 blastocyst transfers: a meta analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 247, 219–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhao, YY, Yu, Y and Zhang, XW (2018). Overall blastocyst quality, trophectoderm grade, and inner cell mass grade predict pregnancy outcome in euploid blastocyst transfer cycles. Chin Med J (Engl) 131, 1261–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed