Cargando…

Clinical relevance of a newly developed endometrial receptivity test for patients with recurrent implantation failure in Japan

PURPOSE: To assess the clinical efficacy of personalized embryo transfer (pET) guided by a new endometrial receptivity test, ERPeak(SM), in patients with recurrent implantation failure (RIF). METHODS: Recurrent implantation failure patients of all ages at two private Japanese clinics from April 2019...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ohara, Yasuhiro, Matsubayashi, Hidehiko, Suzuki, Yosuke, Takaya, Yukiko, Yamaguchi, Kohei, Doshida, Masakazu, Takeuchi, Takumi, Ishikawa, Tomomoto, Handa, Mika, Miyake, Tatsuya, Takiuchi, Tsuyoshi, Kimura, Tadashi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8967283/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35386362
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmb2.12444
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: To assess the clinical efficacy of personalized embryo transfer (pET) guided by a new endometrial receptivity test, ERPeak(SM), in patients with recurrent implantation failure (RIF). METHODS: Recurrent implantation failure patients of all ages at two private Japanese clinics from April 2019 to June 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The intervention group (n = 244) received pET in accordance with endometrial receptivity testing results and was compared to control group (n = 306) receiving standardized timing, non‐personalized embryo transfer (npET). In propensity score matching analysis, the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and live birth rate (LBR) were compared between groups, and a subanalysis of advanced maternal age (AMA) (≥38 years old) versus non‐AMA (<38 years old) patients was also conducted. RESULTS: The CPR and LBR of the pET group were significantly higher than those of the npET group (37.7% vs. 20.0%, adjusted OR: 2.64; 95%CI, 1.70–4.11, p < 0.001 and 29.9% vs. 9.7%, adjusted OR: 4.13; 95%CI, 2.40–7.13, p < 0.001, respectively). Furthermore, in the subanalyses, the CPR and LBR of the pET group were significantly higher than those of the npET group in both the AMA non‐AMA patients. CONCLUSIONS: The new ERPeak(SM) endometrial receptivity test is a useful alternative diagnostic tool for poor‐prognosis patients, regardless of age.