A modified flexible GnRH antagonist protocol using antagonist early cessation and a gonadotropin step-down approach improves live birth rates in fresh cycles: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Can pregnancy outcomes following fresh elective single embryo transfer (eSET) in gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocols increase using a gonadotropin (Gn) step-down approach with cessation of GnRH antagonist on the day of hCG administration (hCG day) in patients with normal ovarian response? SUMMARY ANSWER: The modified GnRH antagonist protocol using the Gn step-down approach and cessation of GnRH antagonist on the hCG day is effective in improving live birth rates (LBRs) per fresh eSET cycle. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Currently, there is no consensus on optimal GnRH antagonist regimens. Studies have shown that fresh GnRH antagonist cycles result in poorer pregnancy outcomes than the long GnRH agonist (GnRHa) protocol. Endometrial receptivity is a key factor that contributes to this phenomenon. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: An open label randomized controlled trial (RCT) was performed between November 2021 and August 2022. There were 546 patients allocated to either the modified GnRH antagonist or the conventional antagonist protocol at a 1:1 ratio. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Both IVF and ICSI cycles were included, and the sperm samples used were either fresh or frozen from the partner, or from frozen donor ejaculates. The primary outcome was the LBRs per fresh SET cycle. Secondary outcomes included rates of implantation, clinical and ongoing pregnancy, miscarriage, and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), as well as clinical outcomes of ovarian stimulation. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Baseline demographic features were not significantly different between the two ovarian stimulation groups. However, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, the LBRs in the modified antagonist group were significantly higher than in the conventional group (38.1% [104/273] vs. 27.5% [75/273], relative risk 1.39 [95% CI, 1.09-1.77], P = 0.008). Using a per-protocol (PP) analysis which included all the patients who received an embryo transfer, the LBRs in the modified antagonist group were also significantly higher than in the conventional group (48.6% [103/212] vs. 36.8% [74/201], relative risk 1.32 [95% CI, 1.05-1.66], P = 0.016). The modified antagonist group achieved significantly higher implantation rates, and clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates than the conventional group in both the ITT and PP analyses (P < 0.05). The two groups did not show significant differences between the number of oocytes retrieved or mature oocytes, two-pronuclear zygote (2PN) rates, the number of embryos obtained, blastocyst progression and good-quality embryo rates, early miscarriage rates, or OHSS incidence rates (P > 0.05). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: A limitation of our study was that the subjects were not blinded to the treatment allocation in the RCT trial. Only women under 40 years of age who had a good prognosis were included in the analysis. Therefore, use of the modified antagonist protocol in older patients with a low ovarian reserve remains to be investigated. In addition, the sample size for Day 5 elective SET was small, so larger trials will be required to strengthen these findings. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The modified GnRH antagonist protocol using the Gn step-down approach and cessation of GnRH antagonist on hCG day improved the LBRs per fresh eSET cycle in normal responders. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This project was funded by grant 2022YFC2702503 from the National Key Research & Development Program of China and grant 2021140 from the Beijing Health Promotion Association. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The RCT was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry; Study Number: ChiCTR2100053453. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 21 November 2021. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLLMENT: 23 November 2021.

Is biochemical pregnancy loss associated with embryo or endometrium? A retrospective cohort study in frozen single embryo transfer of own and donated oocytes.

STUDY QUESTION: Does the use of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A), personalized embryo transfer with endometrial receptivity assay (pET-ERA), or the use of donated oocytes modify the incidence of biochemical pregnancy loss (BPL) in frozen single embryo transfer (FSET)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Following FSET, BPL incidence does not differ between own and donated oocytes, and the use of PGT-A with euploid embryo transfer or pET-ERA results in a similar incidence of BPL compared to cycles without embryo or endometrial analysis. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: BPL occurs frequently after IVF, and many factors have been associated with its incidence. The etiology of BPL is not well known, but the most probable cause seems to be either a low-quality embryo or impaired endometrial maintenance. The impact of techniques diagnosing embryonic ploidy or endometrial receptivity on BPL incidence and the BPL incidence between own and donated oocytes have not been analyzed. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This is a retrospective cohort study analyzing the incidence of BPL over 3741 cycles of FSET derived from own (2399 cycles) and donated (1342 cycles) oocytes between January 2013 and January 2022 in 1736 of which PGT-A, pET-ERA, or both were applied. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We defined BPL as a pregnancy diagnosed only by serum ß-hCG > 10 UI/l followed by a decrease that does not result in a clinical pregnancy. Clinical pregnancy was defined as the presence of gestational sac on transvaginal ultrasound. We compared BPL rates among patients undergoing 2399 FSETs from own oocytes, which comprised 1310 cycles of embryos analyzed by PGT-A, 950 cycles of untested embryos, 30 cycles of untested embryos with pET-ERA, and a subgroup of 109 cycles analyzed by both PGT-A and pET-ERA. We also included a total of 1342 FSET cycles from donated oocytes comprising 132, 1055, 140, and 15 cycles in the same groups, respectively. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In FSET from own oocytes, the overall BPL rate per embryo transfer was 8.2% (95% CI [7.09-9.33]). In untested embryo transfers, the BPL rate was 7.5% [5.91-9.37]. In the PGT-A group, the BPL rate was 8.8% [7.32-10.47]. In the pET-ERA group, the rate was 6.7% [0.82-22.07]. In the PGT-A+ERA group, the rate was 6.5% [2.65-12.90]. No significant differences were found (P = 0.626). A multivariate analysis considering clinically meaningful variables that were significantly different among groups, taking the untested embryos/endometrium group as a reference, showed comparable incidences among groups. For PGT-A, the adjusted odds ratio (AdjOR) was 1.154 [0.768-1.735] (P = 0.49) and for PGT-A+ERA 0.885 [0.330-2.375] (P = 0.808). Because of a low number of registered cases in the pET-ERA group, and to prevent statistical errors and convergence issues, this group was excluded from further analysis. In FSET of donated oocytes, the overall BPL rate per embryo transfer was 4.9% [3.76-6.14]. In the PGT-A group, the BPL rate was 6.8% [3.16-12.55]. In the pET-ERA group, the rate was 5.0% [2.03-10.03]. In untested embryo transfers, the rate was 4.7% [3.46-6.10]. No cases occurred in the PGT-A+ERA group, and no significant differences were found (P = 0.578). The multivariate analysis showed comparable incidences among groups. For PGT-A the AdjOR was 1.669 [0.702-3.972] (P = 0.247) and for pET-ERA 1.189 [0.433-3.265] (P = 0.737). The PGT-A+ERA group was eliminated from the model to prevent statistical errors and convergence issues because no BPL cases were registered in this group. In the multivariate analysis, when the sources of oocytes were compared, own versus donated, no significant differences were found in the incidence of BPL. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This was a retrospective cohort study with potential biases. In addition, we were unable to control differences among groups due to modifications in medical or laboratory protocols during this long time period, which may modify the relationships being addressed. Factors previously associated with BPL, such as immunological conditions other than thyroid autoimmunity, were not considered in this study. Limited sample sizes of some groups may limit the statistical power for finding differences that can be present in the general population. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: BPL may be related to a mechanism not associated with the chromosomal constitution of the embryo or the transcriptome of the endometrium. More studies are needed to explore the factors associated with this reproductive issue. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No specific funding was available for this study. None of the authors have a conflict of interest to declare with regard to this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04549909).

ESHRE guideline: number of embryos to transfer during IVF/ICSI†.

STUDY QUESTION: Which clinical and embryological factors should be considered to apply double embryo transfer (DET) instead of elective single embryo transfer (eSET)? SUMMARY ANSWER: No clinical or embryological factor per se justifies a recommendation of DET instead of eSET in IVF/ICSI. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: DET is correlated with a higher rate of multiple pregnancy, leading to a subsequent increase in complications for both mother and babies. These complications include preterm birth, low birthweight, and other perinatal adverse outcomes. To mitigate the risks associated with multiple pregnancy, eSET is recommended by international and national professional organizations as the preferred approach in ART. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The guideline was developed according to the structured methodology for development and update of ESHRE guidelines. Literature searches were performed in PUBMED/MEDLINE and Cochrane databases, and relevant papers published up to May 2023, written in English, were included. Live birth rate, cumulative live birth rate, and multiple pregnancy rate were considered as critical outcomes. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Based on the collected evidence, recommendations were discussed until a consensus was reached within the Guideline Development Group (GDG). A stakeholder review was organized after the guideline draft was finalized. The final version was approved by the GDG and the ESHRE Executive Committee. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The guideline provides 35 recommendations on the medical and non-medical risks associated with multiple pregnancies and on the clinical and embryological factors to be considered when deciding on the number of embryos to transfer. These recommendations include 25 evidence-based recommendations, of which 24 were formulated as strong recommendations and one as conditional, and 10 good practice points. Of the evidence-based recommendations, seven (28%) were supported by moderate-quality evidence. The remaining recommendations were supported by low (three recommendations; 12%), or very low-quality evidence (15 recommendations; 60%). Owing to the lack of evidence-based research, the guideline also clearly mentions recommendations for future studies. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The guideline assessed different factors one by one based on existing evidence. However, in real life, clinicians' decisions are based on several prognostic factors related to each patient's case. Furthermore, the evidence from randomized controlled trials is too scarce to formulate high-quality evidence-based recommendations. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The guideline provides health professionals with clear advice on best practice in the decision-making process during IVF/ICSI, based on the best evidence currently available, and recommendations on relevant information that should be communicated to patients. In addition, a list of research recommendations is provided to stimulate further studies in the field. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The guideline was developed and funded by ESHRE, covering expenses associated with the guideline meetings, the literature searches, and the dissemination of the guideline. The guideline group members did not receive payment. DPB declared receiving honoraria for lectures from Merck, Ferring, and Gedeon Richter. She is a member of ESHRE EXCO, and the Mediterranean Society for reproductive medicine and the president of the Croatian Society for Gynaecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine. CDG is the past Chair of the ESHRE EIM Consortium and a paid deputy member of the Editorial board of Human Reproduction. IR declared receiving reimbursement from ESHRE and EDCD for attending meetings. She holds an unpaid leadership role in OBBCSSR, ECDC Sohonet, and AER. KAR-W declared receiving grants for clinical researchers and funding provision to the institution from the Swedish Cancer Society (200170F), the Senior Clinical Investigator Award, Radiumhemmets Forskningsfonder (Dnr: 201313), Stockholm County Council FoU (FoUI-953912) and Karolinska Institutet (Dnr 2020-01963), NovoNordisk, Merck and Ferring Pharmaceuticals. She received consulting fees from the Swedish Ministry of Health and Welfare. She received honoraria from Roche, Pfizer, and Organon for chairmanship and lectures. She received support from Organon for attending meetings. She participated in advisory boards for Merck, Nordic countries, and Ferring. She declared receiving time-lapse equipment and grants with payment to institution for pre-clinical research from Merck pharmaceuticals and from Ferring. SS-R received research funding from Roche Diagnostics, Organon/MSD, Theramex, and Gedeo-Richter. He received consulting fees from Organon/MSD, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, and Merck Serono. He declared receiving honoraria for lectures from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Besins, Organon/MSD, Theramex, and Gedeon Richter. He received support for attending Gedeon Richter meetings and participated in the Data Safety Monitoring Board of the T-TRANSPORT trial. He is the Deputy of ESHRE SQART special interest group. He holds stock options in IVI Lisboa and received equipment and other services from Roche Diagnostics and Ferring Pharmaceuticals. KT declared receiving payment for honoraria for giving lectures from Merck Serono and Organon. She is member of the safety advisory board of EDQM. She holds a leadership role in the ICCBBA board of directors. ZV received reimbursement from ESHRE for attending meetings. She also received research grants from ESHRE and Juhani Aaltonen Foundation. She is the coordinator of EHSRE SQART special interest group. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. DISCLAIMER: This guideline represents the views of ESHRE, which were achieved after careful consideration of the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. In the absence of scientific evidence on certain aspects, a consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders has been obtained. Adherence to these clinical practice guidelines does not guarantee a successful or specific outcome, nor does it establish a standard of care. Clinical practice guidelines do not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type. ESHRE makes no warranty, express or implied, regarding the clinical practice guidelines and specifically excludes any warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular use or purpose (full disclaimer available at https://www.eshre.eu/Guidelines-and-Legal).

Associations between the artificial intelligence scoring system and live birth outcomes in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy cycles.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have demonstrated that iDAScore is more accurate in predicting pregnancy outcomes in cycles without preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) compared to KIDScore and the Gardner criteria. However, the effectiveness of iDAScore in cycles with PGT-A has not been thoroughly investigated. Therefore, this study aims to assess the association between artificial intelligence (AI)-based iDAScore (version 1.0) and pregnancy outcomes in single-embryo transfer (SET) cycles with PGT-A. METHODS: This retrospective study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Chung Sun Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan. Patients undergoing SET cycles (n = 482) following PGT-A at a single reproductive center between January 2017 and June 2021. The blastocyst morphology and morphokinetics of all embryos were evaluated using a time-lapse system. The blastocysts were ranked based on the scores generated by iDAScore, which were defined as AI scores, or by KIDScore D5 (version 3.2) following the manufacturer's protocols. A single blastocyst without aneuploidy was transferred after examining the embryonic ploidy status using a next-generation sequencing-based PGT-A platform. Logistic regression analysis with generalized estimating equations was conducted to assess whether AI scores are associated with the probability of live birth (LB) while considering confounding factors. RESULTS: Logistic regression analysis revealed that AI score was significantly associated with LB probability (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 2.037, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.632-2.542) when pulsatility index (PI) level and types of chromosomal abnormalities were controlled. Blastocysts were divided into quartiles in accordance with their AI score (group 1: 3.0-7.8; group 2: 7.9-8.6; group 3: 8.7-8.9; and group 4: 9.0-9.5). Group 1 had a lower LB rate (34.6% vs. 59.8-72.3%) and a higher rate of pregnancy loss (26% vs. 4.7-8.9%) compared with the other groups (p < 0.05). The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis verified that the iDAScore had a significant but limited ability to predict LB (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.64); this ability was significantly weaker than that of the combination of iDAScore, type of chromosomal abnormalities, and PI level (AUC = 0.67). In the comparison of the LB groups with the non-LB groups, the AI scores were significantly lower in the non-LB groups, both for euploid (median: 8.6 vs. 8.8) and mosaic (median: 8.0 vs. 8.6) SETs. CONCLUSIONS: Although its predictive ability can be further enhanced, the AI score was significantly associated with LB probability in SET cycles. Euploid or mosaic blastocysts with low AI scores (≤ 7.8) were associated with a lower LB rate, indicating the potential of this annotation-free AI system as a decision-support tool for deselecting embryos with poor pregnancy outcomes following PGT-A.

Considerations for future modification of The Association for the Study of Reproductive Biology embryo grading system incorporating time-lapse observations.

The Association for the Study of Reproductive Biology (ASEBIR) Interest Group in Embryology (in Spanish 'Grupo de Interés de Embriología') reviewed key morphokinetic parameters to assess the contribution of time-lapse technology (TLT) to the ASEBIR grading system. Embryo grading based on morphological characteristics is the most widely used method in human assisted reproduction laboratories. The introduction and implementation of TLT has provided a large amount of information that can be used as a complementary tool for morphological embryo evaluation and selection. As part of IVF treatments, embryologists grade embryos to decide which embryos to transfer or freeze. At the present, the embryo grading system developed by ASEBIR does not consider dynamic events observed through TLT. Laboratories that are using TLT consider those parameters as complementary data for embryo selection. The aim of this review was to evaluate review time-specific morphological changes during embryo development that are not included in the ASEBIR scoring system, and to consider them as candidates to add to the scoring system.

Gestational carrier cycles: embryology trends, national guideline compliance, and resultant perinatal outcomes in the United States, 2014-2020.

BACKGROUND: The increased use of gestational carriers has expanded family-building opportunities for people and couples unable to carry pregnancies on their own. National American Society of Reproductive Medicine guidelines for gestational carriers have changed over time to reflect advances in reproductive technology and mounting evidence supporting the medical benefits associated with singleton gestations. OBJECTIVE: Assess changes in gestational carrier cycle practice patterns and resultant pregnancy outcomes in the United States in relation to changing national American Society of Reproductive Medicine guidelines, which changed in 2013 and 2017. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective study used data from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcomes Reporting System and included all cycles that were reported from 2014-2020 involving an embryo transfer to a gestational carrier. Binomial regression models evaluated trends in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy, American Society of Reproductive Medicine guideline adherence, number of embryos transferred, and pregnancy outcomes over time. RESULTS: Of the 40,177 gestational carrier transfer cycles from 2014-2020, there was a significant increase in frozen-thawed cycles (41.3% increase), use of assisted hatching (53.4% increase), intracytoplasmic sperm injection (50.0% increase), and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (155.7% increase). The likelihood of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy was higher in 2020 than in 2014 for autologous oocyte transfers to gestational carriers, both for those aged ≥38 years (adjusted relative risk, 2.38 [95% confidence interval, 2.11-2.70]) and than those aged <38 years (adjusted relative risk, 2.85 [95% confidence interval, 2.58-3.15]). As preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy usage increased, single embryo transfer rose for both autologous (adjusted relative risk, 2.22 [95% confidence interval, 1.94-2.50]) and donor cycles (relative risk, 1.91 [95% confidence interval, 1.81-2.02]). This shift toward single embryo transfer corresponded with a decrease in multiple embryo transfer by 79.2% and subsequent decreases in multiple gestations by 68.8% in donor and 73.6% in autologous oocyte cycles from 2014-2020. Gestational carrier cycles remained highly adherent to changing American Society of Reproductive Medicine guidelines throughout the study period. Among live births, there was a 19.4% and 7.9% increase in term deliveries among donor and autologous oocyte cycles, respectively, from 2014 to 2020. CONCLUSION: Practice patterns have drastically changed throughout the study period, with major increases in the use of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy, intracytoplasmic sperm injection, assisted hatching, and frozen transfers. In response to changing American Society of Reproductive Medicine guidelines, the use of multiple embryo transfers has decreased for gestational carrier cycles with subsequent decreases in multiple gestations and miscarriages and slight increases in live birth rates.

Single versus double blastocyst transfer in first and second frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycle in advance-aged women: a two-center retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The present evidence is deficient for the trade-offs between the pros and cons of single blastocyst transfer (SBT) versus double blastocyst transfer (DBT) in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles for women in advanced reproductive age, especially in the second cycle. The current study aimed to investigate the impact of transferred blastocyst numbers on pregnancy outcomes in the first and second embryo transfer for women ≥ 35 years. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study including 1284 frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer (FBT) cycles from two reproductive centers. We analyzed the pregnancy outcomes after SBT and DBT in the first and second FBT cycles. Moreover, stratified analysis was conducted by maternal age. RESULTS: In the first FBT cycle, the LBR was higher in the DBT group than that in the SBT group [52.3% vs. 33.9%; adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 1.65; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.26-2.15, P < 0.001]. However, the LBR of the DBT group showed no remarkable difference compared with that of the SBT group in the second cycle of FBT (44.3% vs. 33.3%; aOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.81-2.08; P = 0.271). Furthermore, stratified analysis by age showed a higher LBR for the DBT group than the SBT group in patients aged 38-42 years (43.1% vs. 33.9%; aOR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.05-4.90; P = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrated that the SBT regimen is a better choice for both, the first and second frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles, for women aged 35-37 years. Additionally, the DBT regimen is still recommended to achieve a high LBR in women aged 38-42 years in the second FBT cycle. These findings may be beneficial for deciding the embryo transfer regimens in women of advanced reproductive age.

Mitigating multiples, less is more: examining trends in multifetal gestation rates with assisted reproductive technology.

PURPOSE: Multifetal gestation (MFG) is much more common in pregnancies that utilize assisted reproductive technologies (ART). We assessed how these rates have changed over the previous decade and the impact on live birth rates (LBR). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study uses the National Summary Reports of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) from 2014 to 2020. Data points included only autologous cycles. The data were divided into five age groups as reported in the database: < 35, 35-37, 38-40, 41-42, and > 42 years old. Descriptive statistics and a two-tailed T-test were used to determine the trends and statistical significance (p < 0.05). RESULTS: Rates of twin births decreased substantially from 2014 to 2020 for autologous embryo transfers across all age groups and diagnoses. Surprisingly, the overall LBR for autologous IVF cycles decreased at similar rates from 2014 to 2020 in all age groups. The mean number of embryos transferred has dramatically reduced, especially across age groups < 42. CONCLUSION: Rates of twin and higher-level gestations have decreased substantially over the past decade; the effect correlates with the increased utilization of eSET and PGT. The cause of infertility did not significantly impact the rate of MFG.

Beyond appearance: Can morphologically low-grade euploid blastocysts yield successful pregnancies?

Purpose: The primary objective of this investigation is to evaluate how morphological quality affects the pregnancy outcomes in euploid embryos determined by preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A). Concurrently, as a secondary objective, we aim to identify which specific aspects of morphological evaluation exert the most significant impact on these outcomes. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 451 single euploid embryo transfer cycles at our clinic was conducted. Embryos were evaluated based on the degree of blastocyst expansion, inner cell mass (ICM), trophectoderm (TE) morphology, and the day of blastocyst vitrification. Outcomes between morphologically low-grade and high-grade embryos were compared. Additionally, the study analyzed which morphological factors most influenced pregnancy outcomes. Results: Pregnancy outcomes were significantly lower in morphologically low-grade blastocysts compared to high-grade ones. Among the morphological evaluations, the ICM assessment was significantly associated with the live birth rate. Conclusion: Our study indicates that the morphological quality of euploid embryos, particularly the evaluation of the ICM, plays a crucial role in IVF-ET success.

Predicting the likelihood of live birth: an objective and user-friendly blastocyst grading system.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Can day-5 blastocysts be ranked according to their likelihood of live birth using an objective and user-friendly grading system? DESIGN: A retrospective multicentre study conducted between 2017 and 2019, including 1044 day-5 blastocysts. Blastocyst expansion degree, trophectoderm and inner cell mass quality were assessed morphologically and morphometrically. Several analyses were conducted: the association between the qualitative and quantitative assessment for the blastocyst expansion degree and the number of trophectoderm cells; the effect of the embryo quality on day 3 and the contribution of the three blastocyst parameters to live birth, with logistic regression; and a decision tree with the most significant variables to create the new scoring system. RESULTS: Cut-off points were found to discriminate between expanding and expanded blastocysts (165 µm for blastocyst diameter) and between trophectoderm grades (A: ≥14 cells; B: 11-13 cells; C: ≤10 cells). When the embryos reached the blastocyst stage, their quality on day 3 did not add predictive value for implantation and live birth. In the logistic regression analysis, the only parameter capable of significantly predicting the live birth likelihood was the trophectoderm grade: A versus C (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.26 to 3.0); B versus C (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.4). The decision tree supported the finding that the trophectoderm grade had the highest predictive value for a live birth, followed by the blastocyst expansion degree in a second step. CONCLUSIONS: This new method makes objective blastocyst assessment feasible, allowing for standardization and exportation to other laboratories worldwide.

Ovulation induction in anovulatory infertility is obsolete.

Women with polycystic ovary syndrome make up the vast majority of patients with anovulatory infertility. The commonly accepted treatment guidelines recommend ovulation induction for timed intercourse as the first-line treatment. After a 2-year treatment period, the cumulative pregnancy rates with a singleton live-born baby reached 71% and 78% in two prospective studies. Despite aiming for monofollicular growth, multifollicular responses with subsequent multiple/higher order multiple pregnancies are a dreaded risk associated with ovarian induction. However, the lengthy treatment, the increase of maternal age and the psychological effects of 'obligatory intercourse' are also factors challenging the concept of ovarian induction as the first treatment approach in anovulatory infertility. Nowadays, individualized IVF treatment with cycle segmentation, freeze-all strategies and single-embryo transfers in frozen embryo transfer cycles dramatically reduces the risk of multiple pregnancies, and a cumulative pregnancy rate of 83% can be achieved over three complete cycles, thereby reducing exposure to fertility medication and time to pregnancy. Although on first sight ovarian induction might present the easier and less costly approach, efficient and individualized IVF treatments with low complication rates and the chance of preventing multiple pregnancies challenge this concept, and it seems that the time has come to abandon ovarian induction in anovulatory infertility.

Recurrence risk and risk factors for monozygotic twin and triplet birth in over 65,000 single-embryo transfers.

PURPOSE: To determine the recurrence risk and risk factors for monozygotic splitting after elective single-embryo transfers (eSET). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed investigating 65,664 eSET cycles that resulted in a clinical pregnancy as reported in the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) Clinical Outcomes Reporting System (CORS) between 2004 and 2017. Monozygosity was defined as more than one fetal heart tone by the first-trimester ultrasound and concordant sex at live birth. The primary outcome was recurrence risk, with recurrence defined as one patient having two or more cycles of eSET resulting in monozygotic multiples. The secondary objective was to identify factors associated with smonozygotic splitting, using a multivariable logistic regression model and a stepwise purposeful model selection. RESULTS: There were 1355 (2.05%) pregnancies that resulted in two or more fetal heart tones after SET, including 840 monozygotic twins and triplets at birth. Recurrence occurred in two cases-0.0001% of patients with multiple eSET cycles. One case resulted from embryos created from a single cohort with intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), assisted hatching (AH), and blastocyst transfers. The second case resulted from donor egg embryos with ICSI and blastocyst transfers. Risk factors associated with monozygotic live birth were blastocyst transfer (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.04-1.47, P = 0.0176) and AH (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.05-1.44, P = 0.0081). CONCLUSION: Recurrence of monozygotic live births in eSET was very rare. Blastocyst transfer and AH were confirmed to be risk factors for monozygotic live births, while ICSI, PGT, and FET do not appear to be associated.

Clinical application of noninvasive chromosomal screening for elective single-blastocyst transfer in frozen-thawed cycles.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to explore the clinical application of noninvasive chromosomal screening (NICS) for elective single-blastocyst transfer (eSBT) in frozen-thawed cycles. METHODS: This study retrospectively analysed the data of 212 frozen-thawed single-blastocyst transfers performed in our centre from January 2019 to July 2019. The frozen embryos were selected based on morphological grades and placed in preincubation for 6 h after warming. Then spent microdroplet culture media of frozen-thawed blastocysts were harvested and subjected to NICS. The clinical outcomes were evaluated and further stratified analysis were performed, especially different fertilization approaches. RESULTS: The clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, and live birth rates in the euploidy group were significantly higher than those in the aneuploidy group (56.2% versus 29.4%) but were nonsignificantly different from those in the chaotic abnormal/NA embryos group (56.2% versus 60.4%). Compared with day6 (D6) blastocysts, D5 blastocysts had a nonsignificantly different euploidy rate (40.4% versus 48.1%, P = 0.320) but significantly increased clinical pregnancy (57.7% versus 22.2%, P < 0.001), ongoing pregnancy (48.1% versus 14.8%, P < 0.001), and live birth rates (48.1% versus 13.0%, P < 0.001). The percentage of chaotic abnormal/NA embryos group was significantly higher among D5 embryos than among D6 embryos (30.1% versus 11.1%, P = 0.006). The percentage of aneuploid embryos was higher among the embryos with lower morphological quality(21.5% among 'good' embryos versus 34.6% among 'fair' embryos versus 46.0% among 'poor' embryos, P = 0.013); correspondingly, the overall clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy and live birth rate rates showed similar declines. CONCLUSIONS: NICS combined with morphological assessment is an effective tool to guide frozen-thawed SBT. The optimal embryo for SBT is a 'euploid embryo with good morphology', followed sequentially by a 'chaotic abnormal/NA embryo with good morphology', 'euploid embryo with fair morphology', and 'chaotic abnormal/NA embryo with fair morphology'.

A double-blind randomized controlled trial investigating a time-lapse algorithm for selecting Day 5 blastocysts for transfer.

STUDY QUESTION: Can use of a commercially available time-lapse algorithm for Day 5 blastocyst selection improve pregnancy rates compared with morphology alone? SUMMARY ANSWER: The use of a time-lapse selection model to choose blastocysts for fresh single embryo transfer on Day 5 did not improve ongoing pregnancy rate compared to morphology alone. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Evidence from time-lapse monitoring suggests correlations between timing of key developmental events and embryo viability. No good quality evidence exists to support improved pregnancy rates following time-lapse selection. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial including 776 randomized patients was performed between 2018 and 2021. Patients with at least two good quality blastocysts on Day 5 were allocated by a computer randomization program in a proportion of 1:1 into either the control group, whereby single blastocysts were selected for transfer by morphology alone, or the intervention group whereby final selection was decided by a commercially available time-lapse model. The embryologists at the time of blastocyst morphological scoring were blinded to which study group the patients would be randomized, and the physician and patients were blind to which group they were allocated until after the primary outcome was known. The primary outcome was number of ongoing pregnancies in the two groups. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: From 10 Nordic IVF clinics, 776 patients with a minimum of two good quality blastocysts on Day 5 (D5) were randomized into one of the two study groups. A commercial time-lapse model decided the final selection of blastocysts for 387 patients in the intervention (time-lapse) group, and blastocysts with the highest morphological score were transferred for 389 patients in the control group. Only single embryo transfers in fresh cycles were performed. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In the full analysis set, the ongoing pregnancy rate for the time-lapse group was 47.4% (175/369) and 48.1% (181/376) in the control group. No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups: mean difference -0.7% (95% CI -8.2, 6.7, P = 0.90). Pregnancy rate (60.2% versus 59.0%, mean difference 1.1%, 95% CI -6.2, 8.4, P = 0.81) and early pregnancy loss (21.2% versus 18.5%, mean difference 2.7%, 95% CI -5.2, 10.6, P = 0.55) were the same for the time-lapse and the control group. Subgroup analyses showed that patient and treatment characteristics did not significantly affect the commercial time-lapse model D5 performance. In the time-lapse group, the choice of best blastocyst changed on 42% of occasions (154/369, 95% CI 36.9, 47.2) after the algorithm was applied, and this rate was similar for most treatment clinics. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: During 2020, the patient recruitment rate slowed down at participating clinics owing to coronavirus disease-19 restrictions, so the target sample size was not achieved as planned and it was decided to stop the trial prematurely. The study only investigated embryo selection at the blastocyst stage on D5 in fresh IVF transfer cycles. In addition, only blastocysts of good morphological quality were considered for transfer, limiting the number of embryos for selection in both groups: also, it could be argued that this manual preselection of blastocysts limits the theoretical selection power of time-lapse, as well as restricting the results mainly to a good prognosis patient group. Most patients were aimed for blastocyst stage transfer when a minimum of five zygotes were available for extended culture. Finally, the primary clinical outcome evaluated was pregnancy to only 6-8 weeks. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The study suggests that time-lapse selection with a commercially available time-lapse model does not increase chance of ongoing pregnancy after single blastocyst transfer on Day 5 compared to morphology alone. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was financed by a grant from the Swedish state under the ALF-agreement between the Swedish government and the county councils (ALFGBG-723141). Vitrolife supported the study with embryo culture dishes and culture media. During the study period, T.H. changed his employment from Livio AB to Vitrolife AB. All other authors have no conflicts of interests to disclose. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT03445923. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 26 February 2018. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 11 June 2018.

The influence of regulation of medically assisted reproduction on the risk of hospitalization in the first 2 years of life.

STUDY QUESTION: Do publicly funded fertility treatment and single embryo transfer (SET) result in lower hospitalization rates of children of parents with infertility? SUMMARY ANSWER: Following the 2010 Quebec law introducing free fertility treatment and SET, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admissions decreased among all children born to parents with infertility, but not among singletons, whose risk remained slightly higher than that of children of parents without infertility, even accounting for treatment and maternal age. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Previous studies reported lower NICU admission rates among children conceived with ART after the 2010 law; however, children conceived without ART by parents with infertility were not considered. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Cohort study of children born in 1997-2017 to patients evaluated for infertility ('exposed') at an academic fertility center in Montreal (Canada) in 1996-2015. A random sample of births to Montreal residents served as comparison. Outcomes were identified from Quebec administrative databases. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We compared children's healthcare utilization before and after the 2010 law in 6273 exposed and 12 583 randomly sampled births (6846 and 12 775 children, respectively). We repeated the analysis among children conceived in the 63 months before and after the law ('restricted period'), and examined whether differences in twinning, fertility treatment, and maternal age explained the higher risk of NICU admission among children of parents with infertility. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In the exposed cohort, the proportion of twin births and of several adverse outcomes declined after the law. NICU admission and duration of NICU stay decreased overall, but not in singletons. Both measures remained higher in exposed children. Except for NICU admission, hospitalization rates were similar in exposed and random sample children. After accounting for fertility treatment and maternal age, exposed singletons were 17% more likely to be admitted to the NICU than children of parents with no medical history of infertility. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Sample size was relatively small; infertile patients were from a single center and the random sample from one city. Despite some limitations, administrative databases are likely to accurately reflect healthcare utilization. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Universal access to treatment and, particularly, SET results in an overall reduction of adverse outcomes among children conceived with treatment; however, children of parents with infertility are at a slightly higher risk, regardless of treatment. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded by the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR, grant no. 123362). No competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Comparisons of benefits and risks of single embryo transfer versus double embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Evidence referring to the trade-offs between the benefits and risks of single embryo transfer (SET) versus double embryo transfer (DET) following assisted reproduction technology are insufficient, especially for those women with a defined embryo quality or advanced age. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched based on established search strategy from inception through February 2021. Pre-specified primary outcomes were live birth rate (LBR) and multiple pregnancy rate (MPR). Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled by a random-effects model using R version 4.1.0. RESULTS: Eighty-five studies (14 randomized controlled trials and 71 observational studies) were eligible. Compared with DET, SET decreased the probability of a live birth (OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.71-0.85, P < 0.001, n = 62), and lowered the rate of multiple pregnancy (0.05, 0.04-0.06, P < 0.001, n = 45). In the sub-analyses of age stratification, both the differences of LBR (0.87, 0.54-1.40, P = 0.565, n = 4) and MPR (0.34, 0.06-2.03, P = 0.236, n = 3) between SET and DET groups became insignificant in patients aged ≥40 years. No significant difference in LBR for single GQE versus two embryos of mixed quality [GQE + PQE (non-good quality embryo)] (0.99, 0.77-1.27, P = 0.915, n = 8), nor any difference of MPR in single PQE versus two PQEs (0.23, 0.04-1.49, P = 0.123, n = 6). Moreover, women who conceived through SET were associated with lower risks of poor outcomes, including cesarean section (0.64, 0.43-0.94), antepartum haemorrhage (0.35, 0.15-0.82), preterm birth (0.25, 0.21-0.30), low birth weight (0.20, 0.16-0.25), Apgar1 < 7 rate (0.12, 0.02-0.93) or neonatal intensive care unit admission (0.30, 0.14-0.66) than those following DET. CONCLUSIONS: In women aged < 40 years or if any GQE is available, SET should be incorporated into clinical practice. While in the absence of GQEs, DET may be preferable. However, for elderly women aged ≥40 years, current evidence is not enough to recommend an appropriate number of embryo transfer. The findings need to be further confirmed.

Single-embryo transfer implies quality of care in reproductive medicine.

This review appraises evidence on the difference between single- and double-embryo transfer (SET, DET) in assisted reproductive technology (ART) regarding the four healthcare quality dimensions most important to fertility patients and doctors. Regarding safety, not only does DET create the uncontested perinatal risks of twin pregnancies, but compelling evidence has added that singleton pregnancies after a vanishing twin also have poorer perinatal outcomes. SET is as effective as DET, as shown by meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, comparing two cycles of SET versus DET and shown by cumulative live birth rates of entire ART trajectories of up to six cycles. Proposing SET, which is safer than DET and as effective, as the gold standard is not irreconcilable with patient-centred care if patients are thoroughly informed on the reasoning behind the proposition and welcomed to challenge whether it fits their personal values. The cost-efficiency of SET is clearly higher, which has even induced certain countries to start reimbursing ART on the condition that SET is used. In conclusion, SET should be the gold standard offered to all patients. The question is not whether to apply SET but how to apply it in terms of patient selection, patient-centred counselling and coverage of treatment.

COVID-19 mRNA vaccines have no effect on endometrial receptivity after euploid embryo transfer.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does the COVID-19 vaccination affect endometrial receptivity after single euploid embryo transfer, measured by sustained implantation rate? DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study analysing two groups of single euploid embryo transfers using own oocytes: one historical cohort of 3272 transfers 1 year before the pandemic; and one comprising 890 transfers in women previously vaccinated with mRNA vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. The main outcomes were clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and sustained implantation rate (SIR) per embryo transfer. These outcomes were compared between non-vaccinated and vaccinated women, and women who had received one and two doses. Lastly, vaccinated women were divided into quartiles according to the time from last dose to embryo transfer. RESULTS: Similar CPR and SIR were found between non-vaccinated and vaccinated women, and the odds ratio for both outcomes was not statistically significant after being controlled for potential confounders (OR 0.937, 95% CI 0.695 to 1.265 and OR 0.910, 95% CI 0.648 to 1.227 respectively). Within the vaccinated group, women who had received one or two doses also had similar outcomes. In addition, no differences were found according to the time interval from vaccination to embryo transfer. CONCLUSION: The administration of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 had no effect on endometrial receptivity and embryo implantation, regardless of the number of doses and time interval from vaccination to embryo transfer. The potential negative effect of the vaccine on endometrial receptivity and reproductive outcomes is reassuring for patients in the process of undergoing assisted reproductive treatment.

Transferring more than one embryo simultaneously is justifiable in most patients.

Elective single embryo transfer (eSET) was first introduced to IVF in 1999, and its subsequent integration into mainstream reproductive endocrinology and infertility has been hugely consequential. It can be viewed as the first (among many since) 'add-ons' to IVF that has significantly and adversely affected how IVF is practised, resulting in astonishing declines in live birth rates after fresh non-donor IVF cycles worldwide. We propose that, like most 'add-ons' to IVF over recent years, the almost universal use of eSET worldwide lacks proper validation of its underlying hypothesis and is based on statistically incorrect assumptions and incorrect data interpretation. As with most recent 'add-ons' to IVF, eSET lacks evidentiary support, and, therefore, its remarkable success in the marketplace must be based on expert opinions, the lowest level of evidence in medicine and widely recognized as frequently biased. Like other 'add-ons' to IVF, eSET-practice must be reassessed because it does not offer the benefits it has widely claimed to provide, prolongs time to conception and adversely affects live birth chances for many women. Moreover, by ignoring that infertile women value quick conception over most other considerations, provider-insistence on eSET frequently deprives them of the right to self-determination.

Vanquishing multiple pregnancy in in vitro fertilization in the United States-a 25-year endeavor.

The practice of in vitro fertilization has changed tremendously since the birth of the first in vitro fertilization infant in 1978. With the success of early in vitro fertilization programs in the United States, there was a substantial rise in twin births nationwide. In the mid-1990s, more than 30% of in vitro fertilization cycles resulted in twin or higher-order multifetal pregnancies. Since that time, we not only have witnessed improvements in laboratory and treatment efficacy but also have seen a dramatic impact on pregnancy outcomes, specifically regarding twin pregnancies. Because the field evolved and the risks of multifetal pregnancies became more salient, in 2019, the rate of twin pregnancies had dropped to <7% of cycles. This improvement was largely because of technical advancements and revised professional guidance: culturing embryos longer before transfer, improved freezing technology, embryo preimplantation genetic testing, and revised professional guidance regarding the number of embryos to transfer. These developments have led to single-embryo transfer becoming the standard of care in most scenarios. We used national in vitro fertilization surveillance data of all autologous in vitro fertilization cycles from 1996 to 2019 to illustrate trends in the following improved outcomes: autologous embryo transfer cycles involving blastocyst-stage embryos, vitrified embryos, preimplantation genetic testing cycles, total number of embryos being transferred per cycle, and single-embryo transfer usage over time. Among deliveries from autologous embryo transfers, we highlighted trends in singleton births over time and proportion of deliveries involving twins, triplets, quadruplets, or greater. The notable progress in reducing the rate of multifetal pregnancies with in vitro fertilization was largely attributed to a series of technical and clinical actions, culminating in an 80% reduction in the incidence of multiple births without a loss in overall treatment effectiveness.