The euploid blastocysts obtained after luteal phase stimulation show the same clinical, obstetric and perinatal outcomes as follicular phase stimulation-derived ones: a multicenter study.

STUDY QUESTION: Are the reproductive outcomes (clinical, obstetric and perinatal) different between follicular phase stimulation (FPS)- and luteal phase stimulation (LPS)-derived euploid blastocysts? SUMMARY ANSWER: No difference was observed between FPS- and LPS-derived euploid blastocysts after vitrified-warmed single embryo transfer (SET). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Technical improvements in IVF allow the implementation non-conventional controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocols for oncologic and poor prognosis patients. One of these protocols begins LPS 5 days after FPS is ended (DuoStim). Although, several studies have reported similar embryological outcomes (e.g. fertilization, blastulation, euploidy) between FPS- and LPS-derived cohort of oocytes, information on the reproductive (clinical, obstetric and perinatal) outcomes of LPS-derived blastocysts is limited to small and retrospective studies. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Multicenter study conducted between October 2015 and March 2019 including all vitrified-warmed euploid single blastocyst transfers after DuoStim. Only first transfers of good quality blastocysts (≥BB according to Gardner and Schoolcraft's classification) were included. If euploid blastocysts obtained after both FPS and LPS were available the embryo to transfer was chosen blindly. The primary outcome was the live birth rate (LBR) per vitrified-warmed single euploid blastocyst transfer in the two groups. To achieve 80% power (α = 0.05) to rule-out a 15% difference in the LBR, a total of 366 first transfers were required. Every other clinical, as well as obstetric and perinatal outcomes, were recorded. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Throughout the study period, 827 patients concluded a DuoStim cycle and among them, 339 did not identify any transferable blastocyst, 145 had an euploid blastocyst after FPS, 186 after LPS and 157 after both FPS and LPS. Fifty transfers of poor quality euploid blastocysts were excluded and 49 patients did not undergo an embryo transfer during the study period. Thus, 389 patients had a vitrified-warmed SET of a good quality euploid blastocyst (182 after FPS and 207 after LPS). For 126 cases (32%) where both FPS- and LPS-derived good quality blastocysts were available, the embryo transferred was chosen blindly with a 'True Random Number Generator' function where '0' stood for FPS-derived euploid blastocysts and '1' for LPS-derived ones (n = 70 and 56, respectively) on the website random.org. All embryos were obtained with the same ovarian stimulation protocol in FPS and LPS (GnRH antagonist protocol with fixed dose of rec-FSH plus rec-LH and GnRH-agonist trigger), culture conditions (continuous culture in a humidified atmosphere with 37°C, 6% CO2 and 5% O2) and laboratory protocols (ICSI, trophectoderm biopsy in Day 5-7 without assisted hatching in Day 3, vitrification and comprehensive chromosome testing). The women whose embryos were included had similar age (FPS: 38.5 ± 3.1 and LPS: 38.5 ± 3.2 years), prevalence of male factor, antral follicle count, basal hormonal characteristics, main cause of infertility and previous reproductive history (i.e. previous live births, miscarriages and implantation failures) whether the embryo came from FPS or LPS. All transfers were conducted after warming in an artificial cycle. The blastocysts transferred after FPS and LPS were similar in terms of day of full-development and morphological quality. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The positive pregnancy test rates for FPS- and LPS-derived euploid blastocysts were 57% and 62%, biochemical pregnancy loss rates were 10% and 8%, miscarriage rates were 15% and 14% and LBRs were 44% (n = 80/182, 95% CI 37-51%) and 49% (n = 102/207, 95% CI 42-56%; P = 0.3), respectively. The overall odds ratio for live birth (LPS vs FPS (reference)) adjusted for day of blastocyst development and quality, was 1.3, 95% CI 0.8-2.0, P = 0.2. Among patients with euploid blastocysts obtained following both FPS and LPS, the LBRs were also similar (53% (n = 37/70, 95% CI 41-65%) and 48% (n = 27/56, 95% CI 35-62%) respectively; P = 0.7). Gestational issues were experienced by 7.5% of pregnant women after FPS- and 10% of women following LPS-derived euploid single blastocyst transfer. Perinatal issues were reported in 5% and 0% of the FPS- and LPS-derived newborns, respectively. The gestational weeks and birthweight were similar in the two groups. A 5% pre-term delivery rate was reported in both groups. A low birthweight was registered in 2.5% and 5% of the newborns, while 4% and 7% showed high birthweight, in FPS- and LPS-derived euploid blastocyst, respectively. Encompassing the 81 FPS-derived newborns, a total of 9% were small and 11% large for gestational age. Among the 102 LPS-derived newborns, 8% were small and 6% large for gestational age. No significant difference was reported for all these comparisons. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The LPS-derived blastocysts were all obtained after FPS in a DuoStim protocol. Therefore, studies are required with LPS-only, late-FPS and random start approaches. The study is powered to assess differences in the LBR per embryo transfer, therefore obstetric and perinatal outcomes should be considered observational. Although prospective, the study was not registered. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study represents a further backing of the safety of non-conventional COS protocols. Therefore, LPS after FPS (DuoStim protocol) is confirmed a feasible and efficient approach also from clinical, obstetric and perinatal perspectives, targeted at patients who need to reach the transfer of an euploid blastocyst in the shortest timeframe possible due to reasons such as cancer, advanced maternal age and/or reduced ovarian reserve and poor ovarian response. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): None. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Double Stimulation in the Same Ovarian Cycle (DuoStim) to Maximize the Number of Oocytes Retrieved From Poor Prognosis Patients: A Multicenter Experience and SWOT Analysis.

A panel of experts known as the POSEIDON group has recently redefined the spectrum of poor responder patients and introduced the concept of suboptimal response. Since an ideal management for these patients is still missing, they highlighted the importance of tailoring the ovarian stimulation based on the chance of each woman to obtain an euploid blastocyst. Interestingly, a novel pattern of follicle recruitment has been defined: multiple waves may arise during a single ovarian cycle. This evidence opened important clinical implications for the treatment of poor responders. For instance, double stimulation in the follicular (FPS) and luteal phase (LPS) of the same ovarian cycle (DuoStim) is an intriguing option to perform two oocyte retrievals in the shortest possible time. Here, we reported our 2-year experience of DuoStim application in four private IVF centers. To date, 310 poor prognosis patients completed a DuoStim protocol and underwent IVF with blastocyst-stage preimplantation-genetic-testing. LPS resulted into a higher mean number of oocytes collected than FPS; however, their competence (i.e., fertilization, blastocyst, euploidy rates, and clinical outcomes after euploid single-embryo-transfer) was comparable. Importantly, the rate of patients obtaining at least one euploid blastocyst increased from 42.3% (n = 131/310) after FPS to 65.5% (n = 203/310) with the contribution of LPS. A summary of the putative advantages and disadvantages of DuoStim was reported here through a Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats analysis. The strengths of this approach make it very promising. However, more studies are needed in the future to limit its weaknesses, shed light on its putative threats, and realize its opportunities.

Vitrification is a highly efficient method to cryopreserve human embryos in in vitro fertilization patients at high risk of developing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of embryo vitrification as an emergency procedure for patients at high risk of developing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). A total of 69 embryos, derived from 24 patients for whom embryo transfer could not be performed because of the risk of developing OHSS, were vitrified and warmed for deferred embryo transfer. Surviving embryos were transferred, resulting in 10 clinical pregnancies, of which 4 were successfully delivered and the remaining 6 are still ongoing.

Examination of bacterial contamination at the time of embryo transfer, and its impact on the IVF/pregnancy outcome.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to examine the effect of bacterial contamination on in vitro fertilization treatment outcomes. METHOD: In a prospective clinical trial, 152 patients aged 23-38 years, mean 33.3 +/- 4.6, undergoing IVF treatment were selected for this study. During embryo transfer, separate samples were collected for microbial examination from the following sites: the fundus of the vagina, the cervix, the embryo culture medium prior and post-embryo transfer, the tip of the catheter, and the external sheet. All the samples were separately cultured to identify any bacteria or yeast present. RESULTS: Pregnancy rates in patients testing positive for Entrobacteriaceae (22.2% versus 51%) and Staphylococcus species (17.6% versus 44%) were significantly lower than those in the negative culture group (p < 0.001). The pregnancy rates do not seem to be affected by the other isolated microorganisms. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the presence of vaginal-cervical microbial contamination at the time of embryo transfer is associated with significantly decreased pregnancy rates.

Impact of physician performing embryo transfer on pregnancy rates in an assisted reproductive program.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of the individual physician performing embryo transfer, on clinical pregnancy rates. METHOD: Data from a total of 485 consecutive embryo transfers performed on 485 women aged 23-37 years were prospectively collected for this study. All patients underwent a standard downregulation long protocol for ovarian stimulation. Oocyte recovery was performed at 36 h after hCG administration. Embryo transfer took place at 48 h after insemination. The patients were matched in two groups that have been linked to two different ET providers (A and B). The same method of loading embryos into the embryo transfer catheter was used. RESULTS: Clinical pregnancy rates varied significantly (p< or =0.01) between the two providers: 36.1% in group A and 20.6% in group B. The number and quality of embryos transferred did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that the physician factor may be an important variable in embryo transfer technique.

Ongoing pregnancies after vitrification of human oocytes using a combined solution of ethylene glycol and dimethyl sulfoxide.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a vitrification solution using a mixture of two cryprotectant agents, dimethyl sulfoxide and ethylyne glycol plus sucrose, on the survival of human oocytes. DESIGN: Clinical study of cryopreservation of human metaphase II (MII) oocytes by vitrification. SETTING: University-affiliated IVF center. PATIENT(S): Infertile couples who agreed to have their surplus oocytes vitrified during the fresh IVF cycle. INTERVENTION(S): Vitrification of surplus oocytes subsequently used in the next cycle and assisted fertilization by intracytoplasmic sperm injection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Morphologic survival and normal fertilization, embryo development, and clinical outcome. RESULT(S): A total of 53 surplus MII oocytes from 6 patients were vitrified, of which 24 were thawed, resulting in 18 which survived morphologically (75%). Following insemination, 14 of the 18 surviving eggs were fertilized (77.7%). All zygotes developed into viable embryos that were replaced into each patient's uterus, resulting in two healthy pregnancies: one singleton and one twin. The pregnancies were ongoing. CONCLUSION(S): Cryopreservation of human MII oocytes by vitrification appears to be a promising procedure, though to assure optimal effectiveness of this protocol further studies should be undertaken.