Zygote transfer on day 1 versus cleavage stage embryo transfer on day 3: A prospective randomized trial

Human Reproduction

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 645-648

  Jaroudi, Kamal ^a   Al Hassan, Saad ^a   Sieck, Ulla ^a   Al Sufyan, Hamad ^a   Al Kabra, Maya ^a   Coskun, Serdar ^a  

^a KING FAISAL SPECIALIST HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTER   (Saudi Arabia)

Author keywords

Embryo transfer; Pronuclear scorin; Zygote

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CELL COUNT; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CRYOPRESERVATION; DEVELOPMENTAL STAGE; EMBRYO; EMBRYO DEVELOPMENT; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTRACYTOPLASMIC SPERM INJECTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NIDATION; NUCLEOLUS; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PREGNANCY RATE; PRONUCLEUS; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RELIABILITY; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; ZYGOTE;

EID: 1542397162     PISSN: 02681161     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deh125     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Ahuja K, Smith, W, Tucker M and Craft I (1985) Successful pregnancies from the transfer of pronucleate embryo in an outpatient in vitro fertilization program. Fertil Steril 44,181-184.
2. Balaban B, Urman B, Isiklar A, Alatas C, Aksoy S, Mercan R, Mumcu A and Nuhoglu A (2001) The effect of pronuclear morphology on embryo quality parameters and blastocyst transfer outcome. Hum Reprod 16,2357-2361.
3. Coskun S, Roca GL, Elnour A, Al-Mayman H, Hollanders JM and Jaroudi KA (1998) Effects of reducing insemination time in human in vitro fertilization and embryo development by using sibling oocytes. J Assist Reprod Genet 15,605-608.
4. Coskun S, Hollanders J, Al-Hassan S, Al-Sufyan H, Al-Mayman H and Jaroudi K (2000) Day 5 versus day 3 embryo transfer: A controlled randomized trial. Hum Reprod 15,1947-1952.
5. Dale B, Fiorentino A, de Simone ML, di Matteo L, di Frega AS, Wilding M, Fehr P, Bassan E, Lo Giudice C, Maselli A. et al (2002) Zygote versus embryo transfer: A prospective randomized multicenter trial. J Assist Reprod Genet 19,456-461.
6. Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB, Wagley L, Schlenker T, Stevens J and Hesla J (1998) A prospective randomized trial of blastocyst culture and transfer in in vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 13,3434-3440.
7. Gerris J, De Neubourg D, Mangelschots K, Van Royen E, Van de Meerssche M and Valkenburg M (1999) Prevention of twin pregnancy after in-vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection based on strict embryo criteria: A prospective randomized clinical trial. Hum Reprod 14,2581-2587.
8. Gianaroli L, Magli MC, Ferraretti AP, Fiorentino A, Tosti E, Panzella S and Dale B (1996) Reducing the time of sperm-oocyte interaction in human in vitro fertilisation improves the implantation rate. Hum Reprod 11, 166-171.
9. Hurst BS, Tucker KE, Awoniyi CA and Schlaff WD (1998) Pronuclear uterine transfer lowers in vitro fertilization success. J Assist Reprod Genet 15, 575-577.
10. Jaroudi K, Coskun S, Hollanders J, Al-Hassan S, Al-Sufayan H, Atared A and Merdad T (1999) Advanced surgical sperm recovery is a viable option for intracytoplasmic sperm injection in patients with obstructive or nonobstructive azoospermia. Fertil Steril 72,479-483.
11. Ludwig M, Schopper B, Al-Hasani S and Diedrich K (2000) Clinical use of pronuclear stage score following intracytoplasmic sperm injection: Impact on pregnancy rates under the conditions of the German embryo protection law. Hum Reprod 15,325-329.
12. Margreiter M, Weghofer A, Kogosowski A, Mahmoud KZ and Feichtinger WA (2003) Prospective randomized multicenter study to evaluate the best day for embryo transfer: Does the outcome justify prolonged embryo culture? J Assist Reprod Genet 20,91-94.
13. Montag M and Van der Ven H (2001) Evaluation of pronuclear morphology as the only selection criterion for further embryo culture and transfer: Results of a prospective multicentre study. Hum Reprod 16,2384-2389.
14. Payne D, Flaherty SP, Barry MF and Matthews CD (1997) Preliminary observations on polar body extrusion and pronuclear formation in human oocytes using time-lapse video cinematography. Hum Reprod 12,532-541.
15. Quinn P, Stone BA and Marrs RP (1990) Suboptimal laboratory conditions can affect pregnancy outcome after embryo transfer on day 1 or 2 after insemination in vitro. Fertil Steril 53,168-170.
16. Rienzi L, Ubaldi F, Iacobelli M, Ferrero S, Minasi MG, Martinez F, Tesarik J and Greco E (2002) Day 3 embryo transfer with combined evaluation at the pronuclear and cleavage stages compares favourably with day 5 blastocyst transfer. Hum Reprod 17,1852-1855.
17. Salumets A, Hyden-Granskog C, Suikkari AM, Tiitinen A and Tuuri T (2001) The predictive value of pronulcear morphology of zygotes in the assessment of human embryo quality. Hum Reprod 16,2177-2181.
18. Scott LA and Smith S (1998) The successful use of pronuclear embryo transfers the day following oocyte retrieval. Hum Reprod 13,1003-1013.
19. Scott LA, Alvero R, Leondires M and Miller B (2000) The morphology of human pronuclear embryo is positively related to blastocyst development and implantation. Hum Reprod 15,2394-2403.
20. Senn A, Vozzi C, Chanson A, De Grandi P and Germond M (2000) Prospective randomized study of two cryopreservation policies avoiding embryo selection: The pronucleate stage leads to a higher cumulative delivery rate than the early cleavage stage. Fertil Steril 74,946-952.
21. Templeton A and Morris JK (1998) Reducing the risk of multiple births by transfer of two embryos after in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med 339,573-577.
22. Tesarik J and Greco E (1999) The probability of abnormal preimplantation development can be predicted by a single static observation on pronuclear stage morphology. Hum Reprod 14,1318-1323.
23. Tesarik J and Kopecny V (1989) Development of human male pronucleus: Ultrastructure and timing. Gamete Res 24,135-149.
24. Tesarik J, Junca AM, Hazzout A, Aubriot FX, Nathan C, Cohen-Bacrie P and Dumont-Hassan M (2000) Embryos with high implantation potential after intracytoplasmic sperm injection can be recognized by a simple, non-invasive examination of pronuclear morphology. Hum Reprod 15,1396-1399.
25. VanRoyen E, Mangelschots K, De Neubourg D, Valkenburg M, Van de Meerssche M, Ryckaert G, Eestermans W and Gerris J (1999) Characterization of a top quality embryo, a step towards single-embryo transfer. Hum Reprod 14,2345-2349.
26. Wittemer C, Bettahar K, Ohl J, Rongieres C, Nisand I and Gerlinger P (2000) Zygote evaluation: An efficient tool for embryo selection. Hum Reprod 15,2591-2597.
27. Zollner U, Zollner KP, Hartl G, Dietl J and Steck T (2002) The use of a detailed zygote score after IVF/ICSI to obtain good quality blastocysts: The German experience. Hum Reprod 17,1327-1333.