Comparing Day 5 Versus Day 6 Euploid Blastocyst in Frozen Embryo Transfer and Developing a Predictive Model for Optimizing Outcomes: a Retrospective Cohort Study

Overview

Journal Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)

Specialty Endocrinology

Date 2024 Jan 19

PMID 38239982

Authors

Beining Yin

Sichen Li

Lin Sun

Zhiyi Yao

Yueyue Cui

Congli Zhang

Yile Zhang

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Optimal protocols for frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) after preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) remain unclear. This study compared Day 5 (D5) and Day 6 (D6) blastocysts and evaluated predictors of FET success.

Methods: A total of 870 patients with genetic diseases or chromosomal translocations who received PGT at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from January 2015 to December 2019 were recruited. All patients underwent at least one year of follow-up. Patients were divided into groups according to the blastocyst development days and quality. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were applied to identify risk factors that affect clinical outcomes and to construct a predictive nomogram model. Area under the curve (AUC) of the subject's operating characteristic curve and GiViTI calibration belt were conducted to determine the discrimination and fit of the model.

Results: D5 blastocysts, especially high-quality D5, resulted in significantly higher clinical pregnancy (58.4% vs 49.2%) and live birth rates (52.5% vs 45%) compared to D6. Multivariate regression demonstrated the number of blastocysts, endometrial preparation protocol, days of embryonic development and the quality of blastocysts independently affected live birth rates (). A nomogram integrating these factors indicated favorable predictive accuracy (AUC=0.598) and fit (GiViTI, ).

Conclusions: Transferring high-quality D5 euploid blastocysts after PGT maximizes pregnancy outcomes. Blastocyst quality, blastocyst development days, endometrial preparation protocols, and number of blastocysts, independently predicted outcomes. An individualized predictive model integrating these factors displayed favorable accuracy for counseling patients and optimizing clinical management.

References

Wood J, Dumesic D, Abbott D, Strauss 3rd J . Molecular abnormalities in oocytes from women with polycystic ovary syndrome revealed by microarray analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006; 92(2):705-13. DOI: 10.1210/jc.2006-2123. View

McLernon D, Maheshwari A, Lee A, Bhattacharya S . Cumulative live birth rates after one or more complete cycles of IVF: a population-based study of linked cycle data from 178,898 women. Hum Reprod. 2016; 31(3):572-81. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dev336. View

Gardner D, Schoolcraft W . Culture and transfer of human blastocysts. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 11(3):307-11. DOI: 10.1097/00001703-199906000-00013. View

Fragouli E, Alfarawati S, Daphnis D, Goodall N, Mania A, Griffiths T . Cytogenetic analysis of human blastocysts with the use of FISH, CGH and aCGH: scientific data and technical evaluation. Hum Reprod. 2010; 26(2):480-90. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deq344. View

Gardner D, Balaban B . Assessment of human embryo development using morphological criteria in an era of time-lapse, algorithms and 'OMICS': is looking good still important?. Mol Hum Reprod. 2016; 22(10):704-718. DOI: 10.1093/molehr/gaw057. View

Mahutte N, Hartman M, Meng L, Lanes A, Luo Z, Liu K . Optimal endometrial thickness in fresh and frozen-thaw in vitro fertilization cycles: an analysis of live birth rates from 96,000 autologous embryo transfers. Fertil Steril. 2022; 117(4):792-800. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.12.025. View

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

Collins F, Varmus H . A new initiative on precision medicine. N Engl J Med. 2015; 372(9):793-5. PMC: 5101938. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1500523. View

Coonen E, Derhaag J, Dumoulin J, van Wissen L, Bras M, Janssen M . Anaphase lagging mainly explains chromosomal mosaicism in human preimplantation embryos. Hum Reprod. 2004; 19(2):316-24. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deh077. View

10.

Delhanty J . The origins of genetic variation between individual human oocytes and embryos: implications for infertility. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2013; 16(4):241-5. DOI: 10.3109/14647273.2013.843792. View

11.

Knowles B, Evsikov A, de Vries W, Peaston A, Solter D . Molecular control of the oocyte to embryo transition. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2003; 358(1436):1381-7. PMC: 1693239. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2003.1330. View

12.

Wu H, Zhou P, Lin X, Wang S, Zhang S . Endometrial preparation for frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021; 38(8):1913-1926. PMC: 8417182. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-021-02125-0. View

13.

Chen M, Wei S, Hu J, Quan S . Can Comprehensive Chromosome Screening Technology Improve IVF/ICSI Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis. PLoS One. 2015; 10(10):e0140779. PMC: 4607161. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140779. View

14.

Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson G, Dyer S, Racowsky C, de Mouzon J, Sokol R . The International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility Care, 2017. Fertil Steril. 2017; 108(3):393-406. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.06.005. View

15.

Kang S, Lee S, Yoon S, Kim J, Lim J, Lee S . Comparison of clinical outcomes between single and double vitrified-warmed blastocyst embryo transfer according to the day of vitrification. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013; 30(6):779-85. PMC: 3696441. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-013-0017-y. View

16.

Yang H, Yang Q, Dai S, Li G, Jin H, Yao G . Comparison of differences in development potentials between frozen-thawed D5 and D6 blastocysts and their relationship with pregnancy outcomes. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016; 33(7):865-72. PMC: 4930781. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-016-0712-6. View

17.

Mantikou E, Wong K, Repping S, Mastenbroek S . Molecular origin of mitotic aneuploidies in preimplantation embryos. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2012; 1822(12):1921-30. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbadis.2012.06.013. View

18.

Martins W, Nastri C, Rienzi L, van der Poel S, Gracia C, Racowsky C . Blastocyst vs cleavage-stage embryo transfer: systematic review and meta-analysis of reproductive outcomes. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 49(5):583-591. DOI: 10.1002/uog.17327. View

19.

Papanikolaou E, Camus M, Kolibianakis E, Van Landuyt L, Van Steirteghem A, Devroey P . In vitro fertilization with single blastocyst-stage versus single cleavage-stage embryos. N Engl J Med. 2006; 354(11):1139-46. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa053524. View

20.

Yarali H, Polat M, Mumusoglu S, Yarali I, Bozdag G . Preparation of endometrium for frozen embryo replacement cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016; 33(10):1287-1304. PMC: 5065562. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-016-0787-0. View