Cargando…

Does the transfer of a poor quality embryo with a good quality embryo benefit poor prognosis patients?

BACKGROUND: While single embryo transfer (SET) is widely advocated, double embryo transfer (DET) remains preferable in clinical practice to improve IVF success rate, especially in poor prognosis patients with only poor quality embryos (PQEs) available in addition to one or no good quality embryos (G...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Wenjie, Cai, Jiali, Liu, Lanlan, Xu, Yingpei, Liu, Zhenfang, Chen, Jinghua, Jiang, Xiaoming, Sun, Xiaohua, Ren, Jianzhi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7526391/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32998748
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12958-020-00656-2
_version_ 1783588865032847360
author Wang, Wenjie
Cai, Jiali
Liu, Lanlan
Xu, Yingpei
Liu, Zhenfang
Chen, Jinghua
Jiang, Xiaoming
Sun, Xiaohua
Ren, Jianzhi
author_facet Wang, Wenjie
Cai, Jiali
Liu, Lanlan
Xu, Yingpei
Liu, Zhenfang
Chen, Jinghua
Jiang, Xiaoming
Sun, Xiaohua
Ren, Jianzhi
author_sort Wang, Wenjie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: While single embryo transfer (SET) is widely advocated, double embryo transfer (DET) remains preferable in clinical practice to improve IVF success rate, especially in poor prognosis patients with only poor quality embryos (PQEs) available in addition to one or no good quality embryos (GQEs). Furthermore, previous studies suggest PQE might adversely affect the implantation of a GQE when transferred together. This study aims to evaluate the effect of transferring an additional PQE with a GQE on the outcomes in poor prognosis patients. METHODS: A total of 5037 frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer (FBT) cycles between January 2012 and May 2019 were included. Propensity score matching was applied to control for potential confounders, and we used generalized estimating equations (GEE) models to identify the association between the effect of an additional PQE and the outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, transferring a PQE with GQE (Group GP) achieved significantly higher pregnancy rate (PR), live birth rate (LBR) and multiple pregnancy rate (MPR) than GQE only (group G). The addition of a PQE increased LBR in patients aged 35 and over and in patients who received over 3 cycles of embryo transfer (ET) (48.1% vs 27.2%, OR:2.56, 95% CI: 1.3–5.03 and 46.6% vs 35.4%, OR:1.6, 95% CI: 1.09–2.35), but not in women under 35 and in women who received less than 3 cycles of ET (48.7% vs 43.9%, OR:1.22, 95% CI: 0.93–1.59 and 48.3% vs 41.4%, OR:1.33, 95% CI: 0.96–1.85). Group GP resulted in significantly higher MPR than group G irrespective of age and the number of previous IVF cycles. CONCLUSIONS: An additional PQE does not negatively affect the implantation potential of the co-transferred GQE. Nevertheless, the addition of a PQE contributes to both live birth and multiple birth in poor prognosis patients. Physicians should still balance the benefits and risks of DET.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7526391
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75263912020-10-01 Does the transfer of a poor quality embryo with a good quality embryo benefit poor prognosis patients? Wang, Wenjie Cai, Jiali Liu, Lanlan Xu, Yingpei Liu, Zhenfang Chen, Jinghua Jiang, Xiaoming Sun, Xiaohua Ren, Jianzhi Reprod Biol Endocrinol Research BACKGROUND: While single embryo transfer (SET) is widely advocated, double embryo transfer (DET) remains preferable in clinical practice to improve IVF success rate, especially in poor prognosis patients with only poor quality embryos (PQEs) available in addition to one or no good quality embryos (GQEs). Furthermore, previous studies suggest PQE might adversely affect the implantation of a GQE when transferred together. This study aims to evaluate the effect of transferring an additional PQE with a GQE on the outcomes in poor prognosis patients. METHODS: A total of 5037 frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer (FBT) cycles between January 2012 and May 2019 were included. Propensity score matching was applied to control for potential confounders, and we used generalized estimating equations (GEE) models to identify the association between the effect of an additional PQE and the outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, transferring a PQE with GQE (Group GP) achieved significantly higher pregnancy rate (PR), live birth rate (LBR) and multiple pregnancy rate (MPR) than GQE only (group G). The addition of a PQE increased LBR in patients aged 35 and over and in patients who received over 3 cycles of embryo transfer (ET) (48.1% vs 27.2%, OR:2.56, 95% CI: 1.3–5.03 and 46.6% vs 35.4%, OR:1.6, 95% CI: 1.09–2.35), but not in women under 35 and in women who received less than 3 cycles of ET (48.7% vs 43.9%, OR:1.22, 95% CI: 0.93–1.59 and 48.3% vs 41.4%, OR:1.33, 95% CI: 0.96–1.85). Group GP resulted in significantly higher MPR than group G irrespective of age and the number of previous IVF cycles. CONCLUSIONS: An additional PQE does not negatively affect the implantation potential of the co-transferred GQE. Nevertheless, the addition of a PQE contributes to both live birth and multiple birth in poor prognosis patients. Physicians should still balance the benefits and risks of DET. BioMed Central 2020-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC7526391/ /pubmed/32998748 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12958-020-00656-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Wang, Wenjie
Cai, Jiali
Liu, Lanlan
Xu, Yingpei
Liu, Zhenfang
Chen, Jinghua
Jiang, Xiaoming
Sun, Xiaohua
Ren, Jianzhi
Does the transfer of a poor quality embryo with a good quality embryo benefit poor prognosis patients?
title Does the transfer of a poor quality embryo with a good quality embryo benefit poor prognosis patients?
title_full Does the transfer of a poor quality embryo with a good quality embryo benefit poor prognosis patients?
title_fullStr Does the transfer of a poor quality embryo with a good quality embryo benefit poor prognosis patients?
title_full_unstemmed Does the transfer of a poor quality embryo with a good quality embryo benefit poor prognosis patients?
title_short Does the transfer of a poor quality embryo with a good quality embryo benefit poor prognosis patients?
title_sort does the transfer of a poor quality embryo with a good quality embryo benefit poor prognosis patients?
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7526391/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32998748
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12958-020-00656-2
work_keys_str_mv AT wangwenjie doesthetransferofapoorqualityembryowithagoodqualityembryobenefitpoorprognosispatients
AT caijiali doesthetransferofapoorqualityembryowithagoodqualityembryobenefitpoorprognosispatients
AT liulanlan doesthetransferofapoorqualityembryowithagoodqualityembryobenefitpoorprognosispatients
AT xuyingpei doesthetransferofapoorqualityembryowithagoodqualityembryobenefitpoorprognosispatients
AT liuzhenfang doesthetransferofapoorqualityembryowithagoodqualityembryobenefitpoorprognosispatients
AT chenjinghua doesthetransferofapoorqualityembryowithagoodqualityembryobenefitpoorprognosispatients
AT jiangxiaoming doesthetransferofapoorqualityembryowithagoodqualityembryobenefitpoorprognosispatients
AT sunxiaohua doesthetransferofapoorqualityembryowithagoodqualityembryobenefitpoorprognosispatients
AT renjianzhi doesthetransferofapoorqualityembryowithagoodqualityembryobenefitpoorprognosispatients