Live Birth Rate Following a Euploid Blastocyst Transfer is Not Affected by Double Vitrification and Warming at Cleavage or Blastocyst Stage

Overview

Journal J Assist Reprod Genet

Publisher Springer

Specialties Genetics
Reproductive Medicine

Date 2022 Feb 26

PMID 35217947

Authors

Efstathios Theodorou

Benjamin P Jones

Daniella F Cardenas Armas

Carleen Heath

Paul Serhal

Jara Ben-Nagi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare reproductive outcomes following a euploid embryo transfer, between those embryos vitrified-warmed twice to those vitrified-warmed once.

Methods: We retrospectively analysed 694 single euploid frozen embryo transfer cycles following preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A). For cycles in group 1 (N = 451), embryos were biopsied for PGT-A at blastocyst stage and vitrified. For cycles in group 2 (N = 146), embryos were vitrified at blastocyst stage, before being warmed and biopsied for PGT-A and vitrified again. For cycles in group 3 (N = 97), embryos were vitrified on day-3, before being warmed, cultured to day-5 and biopsied for PGT-A and re-vitrified.

Results: The pregnancy, clinical pregnancy and livebirth rate in group 2 were not statistically different to group 1 (pregnancy rate, adjusted OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.62-1.91; clinical pregnancy, aOR 0.89, 95% CI 0.58-1.37; live birth rate, aOR 0.85, 95% CI 0.56-1.28). There was also no significant difference between group 3 and group 1, with similar pregnancy rate (aOR 1.22, 95% CI 0.74-1.99), clinical pregnancy rate (aOR 1.21, 95% CI 0.75-1.96) and live birth rate (aOR 1.15, 95% CI, 0.73-1.80). There was no significant difference in miscarriage rates between all three groups. The age at the oocyte collection, embryo quality and day of biopsy were associated with pregnancy, clinical pregnancy and live birth rate.

Conclusion: This study suggests that vitrifying and warming embryos twice at blastocyst or at cleavage and then blastocyst stage, can lead to similar reproductive outcomes to embryos vitrified-warmed once, after a single euploid embryo transfer.

Citing Articles

Embryonic and neonatal outcomes following double vitrification/thawing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Maleki-Hajiagha A, Shafie A, Rezayi S, Marvi M, Karimi R, Amidi F BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2025; 25(1):206.

PMID: 40012071 PMC: 11863950. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-025-07311-x.

Does double cryopreservation as well as double biopsy affect embryo viability and clinical outcomes? Evidence from a systematic review of the literature.

Bartolacci A, Vitiello C, de Girolamo S, Papaleo E, Pagliardini L J Assist Reprod Genet. 2025; .

PMID: 39893354 DOI: 10.1007/s10815-025-03398-5.

References

Bellver J, Bosch E, Espinos J, Fabregues F, Fontes J, Garcia-Velasco J . Second-generation preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy in assisted reproduction: a SWOT analysis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2019; 39(6):905-915. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2019.07.037. View

Ben Nagi J, Serhal P, Wells D, Jones B . Preimplantation genetic screening should be used in all in vitro fertilisation cycles in women over the age of 35 years: FOR: Optimising reproductive outcomes is cost-effective and minimises adverse sequelae. BJOG. 2019; 126(13):1554. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.15941. View

Kumasako Y, Otsu E, Utsunomiya T, Araki Y . The efficacy of the transfer of twice frozen-thawed embryos with the vitrification method. Fertil Steril. 2008; 91(2):383-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.11.079. View

Koch J, Costello M, Chapman M, Kilani S . Twice-frozen embryos are no detriment to pregnancy success: a retrospective comparative study. Fertil Steril. 2011; 96(1):58-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.04.034. View

Murakami M, Egashira A, Murakami K, Araki Y, Kuramoto T . Perinatal outcome of twice-frozen-thawed embryo transfers: a clinical follow-up study. Fertil Steril. 2011; 95(8):2648-50. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.12.038. View

Zheng X, Chen Y, Yan J, Wu Y, Zhuang X, Lin S . Effect of repeated cryopreservation on human embryo developmental potential. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017; 35(6):627-632. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.08.016. View

Wang M, Jiang J, Xi Q, Li D, Ren X, Li Z . Repeated cryopreservation process impairs embryo implantation potential but does not affect neonatal outcomes. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020; 42(1):75-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.11.007. View

Neal S, Sun L, Jalas C, Morin S, Molinaro T, Scott Jr R . When next-generation sequencing-based preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) yields an inconclusive report: diagnostic results and clinical outcomes after re biopsy. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019; 36(10):2103-2109. PMC: 6823328. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-019-01550-6. View

Bradley C, Livingstone M, Traversa M, McArthur S . Impact of multiple blastocyst biopsy and vitrification-warming procedures on pregnancy outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2017; 108(6):999-1006. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.09.013. View

10.

Aluko A, Vaughan D, Modest A, Penzias A, Hacker M, Thornton K . Multiple cryopreservation-warming cycles, coupled with blastocyst biopsy, negatively affect IVF outcomes. Reprod Biomed Online. 2021; 42(3):572-578. PMC: 10036156. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.11.019. View

11.

Theodorou E, Jones B, Cawood S, Heath C, Serhal P, Ben-Nagi J . Adding a low-quality blastocyst to a high-quality blastocyst for a double embryo transfer does not decrease pregnancy and live birth rate. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2021; 100(6):1124-1131. DOI: 10.1111/aogs.14088. View

12.

Gardner D, Lane M, Stevens J, Schlenker T, Schoolcraft W . Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome: towards a single blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril. 2000; 73(6):1155-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(00)00518-5. View

13.

Ben-Nagi J, Wells D, Doye K, Loutradi K, Exeter H, Drew E . Karyomapping: a single centre's experience from application of methodology to ongoing pregnancy and live-birth rates. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017; 35(3):264-271. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.06.004. View

14.

Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson G, de Mouzon J, Ishihara O, Mansour R, Nygren K . International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary of ART terminology, 2009. Fertil Steril. 2009; 92(5):1520-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.09.009. View

15.

Taylor T, Patrick J, Gitlin S, Wilson J, Crain J, Griffin D . Outcomes of blastocysts biopsied and vitrified once versus those cryopreserved twice for euploid blastocyst transfer. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014; 29(1):59-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.03.001. View

16.

Neal S, Franasiak J, Forman E, Werner M, Morin S, Tao X . High relative deoxyribonucleic acid content of trophectoderm biopsy adversely affects pregnancy outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2016; 107(3):731-736.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.11.013. View

17.

Farhi J, Elizur S, Yonish M, Seidman D, Shulman A, Schiff E . Assessment of a double freezing approach in the management of surplus embryos in IVF. Reprod Biomed Online. 2019; 38(4):517-519. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2018.11.010. View

18.

Wilding M, Terribile M, Parisi I, Nargund G . Thaw, biopsy and refreeze strategy for PGT-A on previously cryopreserved embryos. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2020; 11(3):223-227. PMC: 7020945. View

19.

Reig A, Franasiak J, Scott Jr R, Seli E . The impact of age beyond ploidy: outcome data from 8175 euploid single embryo transfers. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020; 37(3):595-602. PMC: 7125286. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-020-01739-0. View

20.

Irani M, ONeill C, Palermo G, Xu K, Zhang C, Qin X . Blastocyst development rate influences implantation and live birth rates of similarly graded euploid blastocysts. Fertil Steril. 2018; 110(1):95-102.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.03.032. View