Transfer of nonselected transferable day 3 embryos in low embryo producers

Fertility and Sterility

Volumn 80, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 1364-1370

  Kung, Fu Tsai ^a   Chang, Shiuh Young ^a   Yang, Chun Yuh ^b   Lin, Yi Chi ^a   Lan, Kuo Chung ^a   Huang, Li Ying ^a   Huang, Fu Jen ^a  

^a CHANG GUNG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL   (Taiwan)

^b KAOHSIUNG MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Embryo score; ICSI; Implantation; IVF; Low embryo producer; Low responder; Non selected embryo

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BLASTOMERE; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; EMBRYO; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; INFERTILITY; INTRACYTOPLASMIC SPERM INJECTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NIDATION; OOCYTE; PREGNANCY COMPLICATION; PREGNANCY RATE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

EID: 0348110643     PISSN: 00150282     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.05.011     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Pellicer A., Lightman A., Diamond M.P., Russell J.B., DeCherney A.H. Outcome of in vitro fertilization in women with low response to ovarian stimulation. Fertil Steril. 47:1987;812-815.
2. Keay S.D., Liversedge N.H., Mathur R.S., Jenkins J.M. Assisted conception following poor response to gonadotropin stimulation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 104:1997;521-527.
3. Karande V., Gleicher N. A rational approach to the management of low responders in in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 14:1999;1744-1748.
4. Lashen H., Ledger W., Lopez-Bernal A., Barlow D. Poor responder to ovulation induction is proceeding to in-vitro fertilization worthwhile? Hum Reprod. 14:1999;964-969.
5. Garcia-Velasco J.A., Isaza V., Requena A., Martínez-Salazar F.J., Landazábal A., Remohí J., et al. High doses of gonadotropins combined with stop versus nonstop protocol of GnRH analogue administration in low responder IVF patients a prospective, randomized, controlled trial . Hum Reprod. 15:2000;2292-2296.
6. Bancsi L.F., Broekmans F.J., Eijkemans M.J., de Jong F.H., Habbema J.D., de Velde E.R. Predictors of poor ovarian response in in vitro fertilization a prospective study comparing basal markers of ovarian reserve . Fertil Steril. 77:2002;328-336.
7. Hanoch J., Lavy Y., Holzer H., Hurwitz A., Simon A., Revel A., et al. Young low responders protected from untoward effects of reduced ovarian response. Fertil Steril. 69:1998;1001-1004.
8. Surrey E.S., Schoolcraft W.B. Evaluating strategies for improving ovarian response of the poor responder undergoing assisted reproductive techniques. Fertil Steril. 73:2000;667-676.
9. Akande V.A., Fleming C.F., Hunt L.P., Keay S.D., Jenkins J.M. Biological versus chronological ageing of oocytes, distinguishable by raised FSH levels in relation to the success of IVF treatment. Hum Reprod. 17:2002;2003-2008.
10. Hu Y., Maxson W.S., Hoffman D.I., Ory S.J., Eager S., Dupre J., et al. Maximizing pregnancy rates and limiting higher-order multiple conceptions by determining the optimal number of embryos to transfer based on quality. Fertil Steril. 69:1998;650-657.
11. Roseboom T.J., Vermeiden J.P., Schoute E., Lens J.W., Schats R. The probability of pregnancy after embryo transfer is affected by the age of the patient, cause of infertility, number of embryos transferred and the average morphology score, as revealed by multiple logistic regression analysis. Hum Reprod. 10:1995;3035-3041.
12. Terriou P., Sapin C., Giorgetti C., Hans E., Spach J.L., Roulier R. Embryo score is a better predictor of pregnancy than the number of transferred embryos or female age. Fertil Steril. 75:2001;525-531.
13. Schoolcraft W.B., Surrey E.S., Garner D.K. Embryo transfer techniques and variables affecting success . Fertil Steril. 76:2001;863-870.
14. Tsai M.Y., Huang F.J., Kung F.T., Lin Y.C., Chang S.Y., Wu J.F., et al. Influence of polyvinylpyrrolidone on the outcome of intracytoplasmic sperm injection. J Reprod Med. 45:2000;115-120.
15. Kung F.T., Lin Y.C., Tseng Y.J., Huang F.J., Tsai M.Y., Chang S.Y. Transfer of frozen-thawed blastocysts that underwent quarter laser-assisted hatching at the day 3 cleaving stage before freezing. Fertil Steril. 79:2003;893-899.
16. Templeton A., Morris J.K. Reducing the risk of multiple births by transfer of two embryos after in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 339:1998;573-577.
17. Devreker F., Pogonici E., De Maertelaer V., Revelard P., Van den Bergh M., Englert Y. Selection of good embryos for transfer depends on embryo cohort size implications for the "mild ovarian stimulation debate" Hum Reprod. 14:1999;3002-3008.
18. Giorgetti C., Terriou P., Auquier P., Hans E., Spach J.L., Salzmann J., et al. Embryo score to predict implantation after in-vitro fertilization based on 957 single embryo transfers . Hum Reprod. 10:1995;2427-2431.
19. Ziebe S., Petersen K., Lindenberg S., Andersen A.G., Gabrielsen A., Anderson A.N. Embryo morphology or cleavage stage how to select the best embryos for transfer after in-vitro fertilization . Hum Reprod. 12:1997;1545-1549.
20. Menken J., Trussell J., Larsen U. Age and infertility. Science. 233:1986;1389-1394.
21. Kidd S.A., Eskenazi B., Wyrobek A.J. Effects of male age on semen quality and fertility a review of the literature . Fertil Steril. 75:2001;237-248.
22. Hull M.G., Fleming C.F., Hughes A.O., McDermott A. The age-related decline in female fecundity a quantitative controlled study of implanting capacity and survival of individual embryos after in vitro fertilization . Fertil Steril. 65:1996;783-790.
23. Steer C.V., Mills C.L., Tan S.L., Campbell S., Edwards R.G. The cumulative embryo score a predictive embryo scoring technique to select the optimal number of embryos to transfer in an in-vitro fertilization and embryo transfer programme . Hum Reprod. 7:1992;117-119.
24. Van Royen E., Mangelschots K., De Neubourg D., Valkenburg M., Van de Meerssche M., Ryckaert G., et al. Characterization of a top quality embryo, a step towards single-embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 14:1999;2345-2349.
25. Tsirigotis M. Blastocyst stage transfer pitfalls and benefits. Too soon to abandon current practice? Hum Reprod. 12:1998;3285-3289.
26. Coskun S., Hollanders J., Al-Hassan S., Al-Sufyan H., Al-Mayman H., Jaroudi K. Day 5 versus day 3 embryo transfer a controlled randomized trial . Hum Reprod. 15:2000;1947-1952.
27. Kovač B., Vlaisavljević V., Reljič M., Lovrec V.G. Clinical outcome of day 2 versus day 5 transfer in cycles with one or two developed embryos. Fertil Steril. 77:2002;529-536.
28. Racowsky C., Jackson K.V., Cekleniak N.A., Fox J.H., Hornstein M.D., Ginsburg E.S. The number of eight-cell embryos is the key determinant for selecting day 3 or day 5 transfer. Fertil Steril. 73:2000;558-564.
29. Hsu M.I., Mayer J., Aronshon M., Lanzendorf S., Muasher S., Kolm P., et al. Embryo implantation in in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection impact of cleavage status, morphology grade, and number of embryos transferred . Fertil Steril. 72:1999;679-685.
30. Moreno C., Ruiz A., Simon C., Pellicer A., Remohi J. Intracytoplasmic injection as a routine indication in low responder patients. Hum Reprod. 13:1998;2126-2129.