Developmentally delayed cleavage-stage embryos maintain comparable implantation rates in frozen embryo transfers.

OA: closed
📄 Open PDF View on PubMed View at publisher
AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-08-07

Frozen embryo transfers using embryos cryopreserved on day 4, despite a higher prevalence of diminished ovarian reserve, showed comparable pregnancy and implantation rates to those cryopreserved on day 3.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

PurposeIn fresh IVF cycles, embryos reaching the eight-cell stage on day 3 of development are thought to have a higher chance of implantation than those reaching this stage on day 4. To determine whether this difference persists after cryopreservation, we compared pregnancy and implantation rates between frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles using delayed cleavage-stage embryos (cryopreserved day 4) and normal cleavage-stage embryos (cryopreserved day 3).MethodsParticipants underwent FET between 2008 and 2012 using embryos cryopreserved on either day 3 (n = 76) or day 4 (n = 48), depending on the length of time needed to achieve the eight-cell stage. All embryos, regardless of day of cryopreservation, were thawed and transferred on the 4th day of vaginal progesterone following endometrial preparation with oral estradiol. Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare patient demographics and cycle outcomes.ResultsMore women in the day 4 group had diminished ovarian reserve (44 vs 16 %, p = 0.003). Pregnancy outcomes in preceding fresh cycles were not different between the two groups. Pregnancy, implantation, and live birth rates following FET did not differ between the day 3 and day 4 groups.ConclusionsThis is the first study to address outcomes using day 3 versus day 4 cryopreserved embryos. Despite a higher prevalence of diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) in the day 4 group, delayed cleavage-stage embryos utilized in FET cycles performed as well as embryos growing at the normal rate, suggesting delayed embryo development does not affect embryo implantation as long as endometrial synchrony is maintained.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-08-30T09:23:35.175841+00:00