The Current Practice of Assisted Hatching for Embryos in Fertility Centres: a General Survey

Overview

Journal Reprod Sci

Publisher Springer

Specialty Reproductive Medicine

Date 2022 Apr 12

PMID 35411451

Authors

Yaqiong Liu

Celine Jones

Kevin Coward

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

At present, there is no standardised protocol for assisted hatching (AH) and the field is beset with contradictory data. We hypothesised that such contradiction may be related to inconsistencies in clinical practice. This study aimed to investigate the application, preferences, and variations of AH in current clinical practice prior to embryo transfer (AHpET) and biopsy (AHpBP). An online voluntary survey, consisted of 25 questions regarding different aspects of AH, was circulated amongst different fertility centres via newsletters between October 2019 and March 2020. One-hundred twenty-nine different fertility centres participated in the survey. AHpBP was widely used (90.6% [48/53]) amongst these centres, especially for trophectoderm biopsy (92.2% [47/51]). In contrast, only 64.6% (73/113) of centres administrated AHpET; the application of AHpET was even lower in UK-based centres (36.6% [15/41]). Although laser pulses have become the predominant technique for AH, significant variation existed in the precise strategy. Zona pellucida (ZP) drilling was the main method for AHpBP, whilst both ZP drilling and ZP thinning were applied equally for AHpET. Furthermore, the ZP manipulation varied widely with regards to the size of the ZP opening and the extension of ZP thinning. This is the first representative survey relating to the current practice of AH. Laser-assisted AH is used extensively, especially for AHpBP. However, there is significant disparity in clinical practice across different centres. Future research should aim to create a standardised protocol for AH to help reduce the evident variation in clinical practice and investigate the true value of AH.

Citing Articles

Unlocking the Potential of Assisted Hatching in Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Narrative Review.

Deotalu S, More A, Karadbhajne P, Chaudhari K Cureus. 2024; 16(5):e60736.

PMID: 38903279 PMC: 11187726. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.60736.

A Case Study on the Efficacy of Hypo-Osmotic Swelling Test and Assisted Hatching in Overcoming Necrozoospermia Challenges.

Khemani S, More A, Shrivastava J, Choudhary N Cureus. 2024; 16(2):e54912.

PMID: 38544637 PMC: 10966423. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.54912.

Dual laser-assisted hatching: an effective technique to salvage low-grade cleavage-stage embryos and harvest day 7 blastocysts.

Xu W, Yu Y, Li S Lasers Med Sci. 2023; 38(1):226.

PMID: 37776389 PMC: 10543824. DOI: 10.1007/s10103-023-03898-9.

Lab partners: oocytes, embryos and company. A personal view on aspects of oocyte maturation and the development of monozygotic twins.

Meinecke B, Meinecke-Tillmann S Anim Reprod. 2023; 20(2):e20230049.

PMID: 37547564 PMC: 10399133. DOI: 10.1590/1984-3143-AR2023-0049.

References

Cohen J, Malter H, Fehilly C, Wright G, Elsner C, Kort H . Implantation of embryos after partial opening of oocyte zona pellucida to facilitate sperm penetration. Lancet. 1988; 2(8603):162. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(88)90710-6. View

Hammadeh M, Fischer-Hammadeh C, Ali K . Assisted hatching in assisted reproduction: a state of the art. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2010; 28(2):119-28. PMC: 3059528. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-010-9495-3. View

Rubino P, Tapia L, Ruiz de Assin Alonso R, Mazmanian K, Guan L, Dearden L . Trophectoderm biopsy protocols can affect clinical outcomes: time to focus on the blastocyst biopsy technique. Fertil Steril. 2020; 113(5):981-989. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.12.034. View

Lu X, Liu Y, Cao X, Liu S, Dong X . Laser-assisted hatching and clinical outcomes in frozen-thawed cleavage-embryo transfers of patients with previous repeated failure. Lasers Med Sci. 2019; 34(6):1137-1145. DOI: 10.1007/s10103-018-02702-3. View

Aoyama N, Kato K . Trophectoderm biopsy for preimplantation genetic test and technical tips: A review. Reprod Med Biol. 2020; 19(3):222-231. PMC: 7360970. DOI: 10.1002/rmb2.12318. View

McLaughlin J, Choi B, Liu Q, Gelfond J, Robinson R, Chang T . Does assisted hatching affect live birth in fresh, first cycle in vitro fertilization in good and poor prognosis patients?. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019; 36(12):2425-2433. PMC: 6911124. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-019-01619-2. View

Carney S, Das S, Blake D, Farquhar C, Seif M, Nelson L . Assisted hatching on assisted conception (in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; 12:CD001894. PMC: 7063386. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001894.pub5. View

Knudtson J, Failor C, Gelfond J, Goros M, Chang T, Schenken R . Assisted hatching and live births in first-cycle frozen embryo transfers. Fertil Steril. 2017; 108(4):628-634. PMC: 5657587. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.07.011. View

Graham M, Hoeger K, Phipps W . Initial IVF-ET experience with assisted hatching performed 3 days after retrieval followed by day 5 embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2000; 74(4):668-71. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(00)01528-4. View

10.

Wong B, Boyd C, Lanzendorf S . Randomized controlled study of human zona pellucida dissection using the zona infrared laser optical system: evaluation of blastomere damage, embryo development, and subsequent hatching. Fertil Steril. 2003; 80(5):1249-54. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(03)02167-8. View

11.

. Role of assisted hatching in in vitro fertilization: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2014; 102(2):348-51. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.05.034. View

12.

Balaban B, Urman B, Alatas C, Mercan R, Mumcu A, Isiklar A . A comparison of four different techniques of assisted hatching. Hum Reprod. 2002; 17(5):1239-43. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/17.5.1239. View

13.

. The role of assisted hatching in in vitro fertilization: a review of the literature. A Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2008; 90(5 Suppl):S196-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.08.043. View

14.

Elnahas A, Elnahas T, Azmy O, Elnoury A, Abdelhalim A, Aboelghar M . The use of laser assisted hatching of frozen/thawed embryos versus laser assisted hatching of fresh embryos in human intracytoplasmic sperm injection. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018; 38(5):729. DOI: 10.1080/01443615.2018.1444392. View

15.

Miyata H, Matsubayashi H, Fukutomi N, Matsuba J, Koizumi A, Tomiyama T . Relevance of the site of assisted hatching in thawed human blastocysts: a preliminary report. Fertil Steril. 2010; 94(6):2444-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.01.056. View

16.

Wang Y, Chen C, Liang J, Fan L, Liu D, Zhang X . A comparison of the clinical effects of thinning and drilling on laser-assisted hatching. Lasers Med Sci. 2021; 37(1):1-9. PMC: 8803699. DOI: 10.1007/s10103-020-03230-9. View

17.

Rufas-Sapir O, Stein A, Orvieto R, Avrech O, Kotler N, Pinkas H . Is assisted hatching beneficial in patients with recurrent implantation failures?. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 31(2):110-2. View

18.

Ng C, Wais M, Nichols T, Garrow S, Hreinsson J, Luo Z . Assisted hatching of vitrified-warmed blastocysts prior to embryo transfer does not improve pregnancy outcomes. J Ovarian Res. 2020; 13(1):88. PMC: 7401203. DOI: 10.1186/s13048-020-00692-x. View

19.

Geng L, Luo J, Liu R, Wu J, Shi Y, Zhang Q . Laser-assisted hatching zona thinning does not improve the pregnancy outcomes of poor-quality blastocysts in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycle: a retrospective cohort study. Lasers Med Sci. 2021; 37(3):1605-1614. DOI: 10.1007/s10103-021-03409-8. View

20.

Vanderzwalmen P, Bertin G, Debauche C, Standaert V, van Roosendaal E, Vandervorst M . Births after vitrification at morula and blastocyst stages: effect of artificial reduction of the blastocoelic cavity before vitrification. Hum Reprod. 2002; 17(3):744-51. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/17.3.744. View