Optimal embryo management strategies for patients undergoing antagonist protocols in IVF treatment.

Purpose Selection of optimal embryo transfer strategies for IVF patients treated with antagonist protocols.

A retrospective study was conducted to assess whether whole embryo culture to the blastocyst stage could enhance the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR). The study included data from the first oocyte retrieval cycle of 4131 patients who underwent IVF treatment between January 2018 and June 2022. Patients were categorized into two strategies based on whether they underwent partial blastocyst culture (PBC) or whole embryo culture (WEC), and were further subdivided into three subgroups according to the number of high-quality embryos on Day 3: 0–2 embryos (subgroup 1), 3–7 embryos (subgroup 2), and 8 or more embryos (subgroup 3). Propensity score matching was used to perform a 1:1 match for patients across the three subgroups. The primary outcome measure was the CLBR per oocyte retrieval cycle.

After propensity score matching, there were no statistically significant differences in the baseline data among patients across the three corresponding subgroups for the PBC and WEC strategies. The analysis of CLBR in single oocyte retrieval cycles revealed that subgroup 1 had a significantly higher rate with the PBC strategy compared to the WEC strategy (33.0% vs. 25.7%, P = 0.018). In subgroups 2 and 3, there were no statistically significant differences in the CLBR between patients using the two embryo management strategies.

When patients have 0–2 high-quality embryos on Day 3, opting for Day 3 embryo transfer rather than blastocyst culture can increase the chances of embryo transfer and improve the CLBR. Similar content being viewed by others Data Availability Requests for access to the data that support the findings of this study should be directed to the corresponding author at [email protected].

Eftekhar M, Mohammadi B, Tabibnejad N, Mortazavi Lahijani M. Frozen-thawed cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in high responder patients. Zygote (Cambridge, England). 2020;28(6):511–5. Holden EC, Kashani BN, Morelli SS, Alderson D, Jindal SK, Ohman-Strickland PA, McGovern PG. Improved outcomes after blastocyst-stage frozen-thawed embryo transfers compared with cleavage stage: a Society for Assisted Reproductive Technologies Clinical Outcomes Reporting System study. Fertil Steril. 2018;110(1):89-94.e82. Wang SS, Sun HX. Blastocyst transfer ameliorates live birth rate compared with cleavage-stage embryos transfer in fresh in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles: reviews and meta-analysis. Yonsei Med J. 2014;55(3):815–25. Martins WP, Nastri CO, Rienzi L, van der Poel SZ, Gracia C, Racowsky C. Blastocyst vs cleavage-stage embryo transfer: systematic review and meta-analysis of reproductive outcomes. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol : Off J Int Soc Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;49(5):583–91. Embryology ESIGo, Medicine ASiR: The Vienna consensus: report of an expert meeting on the development of art laboratory performance indicators†‡. Human Reprod Open. 2017;2017(2). https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hox011. Kovacic B, Vlaisavljević V, Reljic M, Gavrić Lovrec V. Clinical outcome of day 2 versus day 5 transfer in cycles with one or two developed embryos. Fertil Steril. 2002;77(3):529–36. Alpha scientists in reproductive medicine and ESHRE special interest group of embryology. The istanbul consensus workshop on embryo assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(6):1270–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.02.001 Li D, Parmegiani L, Yang D, Vajta G, Li R. Expert consensus on the morphological evaluation of human cleavage-stage embryos and blastocysts. Chin Med J. 2023;136(9):1009–11. Gardner DK, Lane M, Stevens J, Schlenker T, Schoolcraft WB. Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome: towards a single blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril. 2000;73(6):1155–8. Rienzi L, Ubaldi F, Iacobelli M, Ferrero S, Minasi MG, Martinez F, Tesarik J, Greco E. Day 3 embryo transfer with combined evaluation at the pronuclear and cleavage stages compares favourably with day 5 blastocyst transfer. Human Reprod (Oxford, England). 2002;17(7):1852–5. De Vos A, Van Landuyt L, Santos-Ribeiro S, Camus M, Van de Velde H, Tournaye H, Verheyen G. Cumulative live birth rates after fresh and vitrified cleavage-stage versus blastocyst-stage embryo transfer in the first treatment cycle. Human Reprod (Oxford, England). 2016;31(11):2442–9. Levi-Setti PE, Cirillo F, Smeraldi A, Morenghi E, Mulazzani GEG, Albani E. No advantage of fresh blastocyst versus cleavage stage embryo transfer in women under the age of 39: a randomized controlled study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018;35(3):457–65. Yin Y, Chen G, Li K, Liao Q, Zhang S, Ma N, Chen J, Zhang Y, Ai J. Propensity score-matched study and meta-analysis of cumulative outcomes of day 2/3 versus day 5/6 embryo transfers. Front Med. 2017;11(4):563–9. Han Y, Deng X, Cai J, Peng W, Duan C, Huang K. Trade-off between double cleavage-stage embryos transfer and single blastocyst-stage embryo transfer in patients with few good quality embryos in antagonist cycles: a retrospective study using a propensity score matching analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024;24(1):339. Stimpfel M, Jancar N, Ban-Frangez H, Vrtacnik-Bokal E. When to transfer embryos if there is only 1 or 2? Life (Basel, Switzerland). 2023;13(2):417. Yang J, Li D, Zha H, Yabin C, Bie J, Song J, Chen J, Liang Y, Jiang F, Meng Y. Should blastocyst transfer be performed in patients with 1–3 embryos available on day 3? Reprod Biomed Online. 2022;45(6):1118–23. Bosch E, Broer S, Griesinger G, Grynberg M, Humaidan P, Kolibianakis E, Kunicki M, Marca A, Lainas G, Clef NL, et al. Erratum: ESHRE guideline: ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI. Human Reprod Open. 2020;2020(4):hoaa067. Carvalho F, Coonen E, Goossens V, Kokkali G, Rubio C, Meijer-Hoogeveen M, Moutou C, Vermeulen N, De Rycke M. ESHRE PGT Consortium good practice recommendations for the organisation of PGT. Human Reprod Open. 2020;2020(3):hoaa021. Lin F, Chen C, Li M, Shi H, Xu X, Jiang X, Liu Y, Zhai J, Guo Y. Complex Uterine Cavity Abnormalities Increase the Risk of Miscarriage in In Vitro Fertilization/Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection in Fresh Cycle-Assisted Pregnancies. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2022;29(7):891–904. Karayalcin R, Ozcan S, Moraloglu O, Ozyer S, Mollamahmutoglu L, Batıoglu S. Results of 2500 office-based diagnostic hysteroscopies before IVF. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010;20(5):689–93. Nirgianakis K, Kalaitzopoulos DR, Schwartz ASK, Spaanderman M, Kramer BW, Mueller MD, Mueller M. Fertility, pregnancy and neonatal outcomes of patients with adenomyosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2021;42(1):185–206. Horton J, Sterrenburg M, Lane S, Maheshwari A, Li TC, Cheong Y. Reproductive, obstetric, and perinatal outcomes of women with adenomyosis and endometriosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2019;25(5):592–632. Andrew BY, Alan Brookhart M, Pearse R, Raghunathan K, Krishnamoorthy V. Propensity score methods in observational research: brief review and guide for authors. Br J Anaesth. 2023;131(5):805–9. Connell MT, Richter KS, Devine K, Hill MJ, DeCherney AH, Doyle JO, Tucker MJ, Levy MJ. Larger oocyte cohorts maximize fresh IVF cycle birth rates and availability of surplus high-quality blastocysts for cryopreservation. Reprod Biomed Online. 2019;38(5):711–23. Haviland MJ, Murphy LA, Modest AM, Fox MP, Wise LA, Nillni YI, Sakkas D, Hacker MR. Comparison of pregnancy outcomes following preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy using a matched propensity score design. Human Reprod (Oxford, England). 2020;35(10):2356–64. Austin PC. An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivar Behav Res. 2011;46(3):399–424. Glujovsky D, Blake D, Farquhar C, Bardach A. Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012(7):Cd002118. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002118.pub4. Wu HY, Lin YC, Lan KC. Twin live births following transfer using eight-cell cleavage stage embryos on Day 4 with developmental arrest. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;50(3):381–4. Xia L, Zhao S, Xu H, Wu X, Zhang A, Niu Z. Miscarriage rate is high with frozen-thawed blastocysts arising from poor-quality cleavage stage embryos. Front Endocrinol. 2020;11:561085. Qiu J, Du T, Guo H, Mol BW, Lin J, Zhao D, Wang Y, Kuang Y, Li W. Does Day 3 embryo status matter to reproductive outcomes of single blastocyst transfer cycles? A cohort study. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2023;130(13):1669–76. Papanikolaou EG, Kolibianakis EM, Tournaye H, Venetis CA, Fatemi H, Tarlatzis B, Devroey P. Live birth rates after transfer of equal number of blastocysts or cleavage-stage embryos in IVF. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Human Reprod (Oxford, England). 2008;23(1):91–9. De Croo I, Colman R, De Sutter P, Stoop D, Tilleman K. No difference in cumulative live birth rates between cleavage versus blastocyst transfer in patients with four or fewer zygotes: results from a retrospective study. Human Reprod Open. 2022;2022(3):hoac031. Glujovsky D, Farquhar C. Cleavage-stage or blastocyst transfer: what are the benefits and harms? Fertil Steril. 2016;106(2):244–50. Papanikolaou EG, D’Haeseleer E, Verheyen G, Van de Velde H, Camus M, Van Steirteghem A, Devroey P, Tournaye H. Live birth rate is significantly higher after blastocyst transfer than after cleavage-stage embryo transfer when at least four embryos are available on day 3 of embryo culture. A randomized prospective study. Human Reprod (Oxford, England). 2005;20(11):3198–203. Adamson GD, Norman RJ. Why are multiple pregnancy rates and single embryo transfer rates so different globally, and what do we do about it? Fertil Steril. 2020;114(4):680–9. Multiple gestation associated with infertility therapy: an american society for reproductive medicine practice committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(4):825-834. He, X., Wang, X., Shen, J. et al. Cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy for women with subfertility in China: an economic evaluation using evidence from the CESE-PGS trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2023;23(1):254. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-05563-z Author information Authors and Affiliations Contributions Hao Wei: project development, data collection, and manuscript writing. BaoPing Zhu: data collection. LeiYu Deng: data collection. MeiFang Zeng: data collection. JinLiang Duan: project development. Corresponding author Ethics declarations Consent for publication All authors agreed to the publication of this study. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests. Additional information Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Rights and permissions Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. About this article Cite this article Wei, H., Zhu, B., Deng, L. et al. Optimal embryo management strategies for patients undergoing antagonist protocols in IVF treatment. J Assist Reprod Genet 42, 827–838 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-024-03365-6 Received: Accepted: Published: Version of record: Issue date: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-024-03365-6