Comparison of two embryo scoring systems for prediction of outcome in assisted reproductive techniques cycles

Acta Medica Iranica

Volumn 49, Issue 12, 2011, Pages 784-788

  Sohrabvand, Farnaz ^a   Shariat, Mamak ^a   Ghiam, Navid Fotoohi ^a   Hashemi, Mahdi ^a  

^a TEHRAN UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

Author keywords

Assisted reproductive techniques; Cumulative embryo score; Mean score of transferred embryos

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BLASTOMERE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; CUMULATIVE EMBRYO SCORE; DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH; EMBRYO; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; FEMALE INFERTILITY; HUMAN; INFERTILITY THERAPY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MALE INFERTILITY; MEAN SCORE OF TRANSFERRED EMBRYO; METHODOLOGY; OOCYTE RETRIEVAL; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PREGNANCY RATE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

ADULT; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMANS; MALE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PREGNANCY RATE; REPRODUCTIVE TECHNIQUES, ASSISTED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SPERM INJECTIONS, INTRACYTOPLASMIC;

EID: 84856497229     PISSN: 00446025     EISSN: 17359694     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Ludwig M. Complications in ART treatment. In: Brinsden PR, editor. Textbook of In Vitro Fertilisation and Assisted Reproduction: The Bourne Hall Guide to Clinical and Laboratory Practice. 3rd ed.London: Taylor and Francis; 2005. p. 489-500.
2. Wright VC, Chang J, Jeng G, Macaluso M. Assisted reproductive technology surveillance: United States, 2003. MMWR Surveill Summ 2006;55(4):1-22.
3. Beral V, Doyle P, Tan SL, Mason BA, Campbell S. Outcome of pregnancies resulting from assisted conception. Br Med Bull 1990;46(3):753-68.
4. Steer CV, Mills CL, Tan SL, Campbell S, Edwards RG. 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 1992;7(1):117-9.
5. Qian YL, Ye YH, Xu CM, Jin F, Huang HF. Accuracy of a combined score of zygote and embryo morphology for selecting the best embryos for IVF. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B 2008;9(8):649-55.
6. Loi K, Prasath EB, Huang ZW, Loh SF, Loh SK. A cumulative embryo scoring system for the prediction of pregnancy outcome following intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Singapore Med J 2008;49(3):221-7.
7. Staessen C, Camus M, Bollen N, Devroey P, Van Steirteghem AC. The relationship between embryo quality and the occurrence of multiple pregnancies. Fertil Steril 1992;57(3):626-30.
8. Ziebe S, Petersen K, Lindenberg S, Andersen AG, Gabrielsen A, Andersen AN. Embryo morphology or cleavage stage: how to select the best embryos for transfer after in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 1997;12(7):1545-9.
9. Saith RR, Srinivasan A, Michie D, Sargent IL. Relationships between the developmental potential of human in-vitro fertilization embryos and features describing the embryo, oocyte and follicle. Hum Reprod Update 1998;4(2):121-34.
10. Sakkas D, Shoukir Y, Chardonnens D, Bianchi PG, Campana A. Early cleavage of human embryos to the two- cell stage after intracytoplasmic sperm injection as an indicator of embryo viability. Hum Reprod 1998;13(1):182-7.
11. Van Montfoort AP, Dumoulin JC, Kester AD, Evers JL. Early cleavage is a valuable addition to existing embryo selection parameters: a study using single embryo transfers. Hum Reprod 2004;19(9):2103-8.
12. Montag M, van der Ven H; German Pronuclear Morphology Study Group. Evaluation of pronuclear morphology as the only selection criterion for further embryo culture and transfer: results of a prospective multicentre study. Hum Reprod 2001;16(11):2384-9.
13. De Placido G, Wilding M, Strina I, Alviggi E, Alviggi C, Mollo A, Varicchio MT, Tolino A, Schiattarella C, Dale B. High outcome predictability after IVF using a combined score for zygote and embryo morphology and growth rate. Hum Reprod 2002;17(9):2402-9.
14. Cummins JM, Breen TM, Harrison KL, Shaw JM, Wilson LM, Hennessey JF. A formula for scoring human embryo growth rates in in vitro fertilization: its value in predicting pregnancy and in comparison with visual estimates of embryo quality. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf 1986;3(5):284-95.
15. Puissant F, Van Rysselberge M, Barlow P, Deweze J, Leroy F. Embryo scoring as a prognostic tool in IVF treatment. Hum Reprod 1987;2(8):705-8.
16. Visser DS, Fourie FR. The applicability of the cumulative embryo score system for embryo selection and quality control in an in-vitro fertilization/embryo transfer programme. Hum Reprod 1993;8(10):1719-22.
17. Roseboom TJ, Vermeiden JP, Schoute E, Lens JW, 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 1995;10(11):3035-41.
18. Terriou P, Sapin C, Giorgetti C, Hans E, Spach JL, Roulier R. Embryo score is a better predictor of pregnancy than the number of transferred embryos or female age. Fertil Steril 2001;75(3):525-31.
19. Lambers MJ, Mager E, Goutbeek J, McDonnell J, Homburg R, Schats R, Hompes PG, Lambalk CB. Factors determining early pregnancy loss in singleton and multiple implantations. Hum Reprod 2007;22(1):275-9.