Strategies in the transfer of varying grades of vitrified-warmed blastocysts in women aged over 35 years: A propensity-matched analysis

ESHRE Guideline Group on the Number of Embryos to Transfer, Alteri A, Arroyo G, Baccino G, Craciunas L, De Geyter C, Ebner T, Koleva M, Kordic K, Mcheik S, Mertes H, Pavicic Baldani D, Rodriguez-Wallberg KA, Rugescu I, Santos-Ribeiro S, Tilleman K, Woodward B, Vermeulen N, Veleva Z. 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).

Effect of frozen-thawed embryo transfer with a poor-quality embryo and a good-quality embryo on pregnancy and neonatal outcomes

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the impact of embryo quality and quantity, specifically a poor quality embryo (PQE) in combination with a good quality embryo (GQE), by double embryo transfer (DET) on the live birth rate (LBR) and neonatal outcomes in patients undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles.

METHODS

A study on a cohort of women who underwent a total of 1462 frozen-thawed cleavage or blastocyst embryo transfer cycles with autologous oocytes was conducted between January 2018 and December 2021. To compare the outcomes between single embryo transfer (SET) with a GQE and DET with a GQE and a PQE, propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to control for potential confounders, and a generalized estimating equation (GEE) model was used to determine the association between the effect of an additional PQE and the outcomes. Subgroup analysis was also performed for patients stratified by female age.

RESULTS

After PS matching, DET-GQE + PQE did not significantly alter the LBR (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.421, 95% CI 0.907-2.228) compared with SET-GQE in cleavage-stage embryo transfer but did increase the multiple birth rate (MBR, [OR] 3.917, 95% CI 1.189-12.911). However, in patients who underwent blastocyst-stage embryo transfer, adding a second PQE increased the live birth rate by 7.8% ([OR] 1.477, 95% CI 1.046-2.086) and the multiple birth rate by 19.6% ([OR] 28.355, 95% CI 3.926-204.790), and resulted in adverse neonatal outcomes. For patients who underwent cleavage-stage embryo transfer, transferring a PQE with a GQE led to a significant increase in the MBR ([OR] 4.724, 95% CI 1.121-19.913) in women under 35 years old but not in the LBR ([OR] 1.227, 95% CI 0.719-2.092). The increases in LBR and MBR for DET-GQE + PQE compared with SET-GQE in women older than 35 years were nonsignificant toward. For patients who underwent blastocyst-stage embryo transfer, DET-GQE + PQE had a greater LBR ([OR] 1.803, 95% CI 1.165-2.789), MBR ([OR] 24.185, 95% CI 3.285-178.062) and preterm birth rate (PBR, [OR] 4.092, 95% CI 1.153-14.518) than did SET-GQE in women under 35 years old, while no significant impact on the LBR ([OR] 1.053, 95% CI 0.589-1.884) or MBR (0% vs. 8.3%) was observed in women older than 35 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of a PQE has no significant benefit on the LBR but significantly increases the MBR in patients who underwent frozen-thawed cleavage-stage embryo transfer. However, for patients who underwent blastocyst-stage embryo transfer, DET-GQE + PQE resulted in an increase in both the LBR and MBR, which may lead to adverse neonatal outcomes. Thus, the benefits and risks of double blastocyst-stage embryo transfer should be balanced. In patients younger than 35 years, SET-GQE achieved satisfactory LBR either in cleavage-stage embryo transfer or blastocyst-stage embryo transfer, while DET-GQE + PQE resulted in a dramatically increased MBR. Considering the low LBR in women older than 35 years who underwent single cleavage-stage embryo transfer, selective single blastocyst-stage embryo transfer appears to be a more promising approach for reducing the risk of multiple live births and adverse neonatal outcomes.

Hormonal treatments for endometriosis: The endocrine background

Endometriosis is a benign uterine disorder characterized by menstrual pain and infertility, deeply affecting women's health. It is a chronic disease and requires a long term management. Hormonal drugs are currently the most used for the medical treatment and are based on the endocrine pathogenetic aspects. Estrogen-dependency and progesterone-resistance are the key events which cause the ectopic implantation of endometrial cells, decreasing apoptosis and increasing oxidative stress, inflammation and neuroangiogenesis. Endometriotic cells express AMH, TGF-related growth factors (inhibin, activin, follistatin) CRH and stress related peptides. Endocrine and inflammatory changes explain pain and infertility, and the systemic comorbidities described in these patients, such as autoimmune (thyroiditis, arthritis, allergies), inflammatory (gastrointestinal/urinary diseases) and mental health disorders.The hormonal treatment of endometriosis aims to block of menstruation through an inhibition of hypothalamus-pituitary-ovary axis or by causing a pseudodecidualization with consequent amenorrhea, impairing the progression of endometriotic implants. GnRH agonists and antagonists are effective on endometriosis by acting on pituitary-ovarian function. Progestins are mostly used for long term treatments (dienogest, NETA, MPA) and act on multiple sites of action. Combined oral contraceptives are also used for reducing endometriosis symptoms by inhibiting ovarian function. Clinical trials are currently going on selective progesterone receptor modulators, selective estrogen receptor modulators and aromatase inhibitors. Nowadays, all these hormonal drugs are considered the first-line treatment for women with endometriosis to improve their symptoms, to postpone surgery or to prevent post-surgical disease recurrence. This review aims to provide a comprehensive state-of-the-art on the current and future hormonal treatments for endometriosis, exploring the endocrine background of the disease.

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.

Should we look for a low-grade threshold for blastocyst transfer? A scoping review

Embryo quality is a key determinant of the success of IVF. Although the focus has been on selecting the best embryo for transfer, the classification of low-grade blastocysts (LGB) in existing scoring systems has received less attention. This is worrisome; embryo freezing allows optimal use of all created embryos, thus maximizing the cumulative live birth rate, which is arguably the most important outcome for infertile couples. A PubMed search was conducted in August 2020, using '((('poor-quality' OR 'poor quality') OR ('low-grade' OR 'low grade')) AND ('embryo' OR 'blastocyst')) AND ('pregnancy' OR 'live birth')'. This scoping review shows that LGB have similar euploidy and pregnancy success rates after implantation and have no adverse effects on pregnancy or perinatal outcomes. Evidence for pregnancy outcomes is lacking for different grades of LGB, with most studies clustering all LQB as one to compare with optimal blastocysts.

Fertility technologies and how to optimize laboratory performance to support the shortening of time to birth of a healthy singleton: a Delphi consensus

PURPOSE

To explore how the assisted reproductive technology (ART) laboratories can be optimized and standardized to enhance embryo culture and selection, to bridge the gap between standard practice and the new concept of shortening time to healthy singleton birth.

METHODS

A Delphi consensus was conducted (January to July 2018) to assess how the ART laboratory could be optimized, in conjunction with existing guidelines, to reduce the time to a healthy singleton birth. Eight experts plus the coordinator discussed and refined statements proposed by the coordinator. The statements were distributed via an online survey to 29 participants (including the eight experts from step 1), who voted on their agreement/disagreement with each statement. Consensus was reached if ≥ 66% of participants agreed/disagreed with a statement. If consensus was not achieved for any statement, that statement was revised and the process repeated until consensus was achieved. Details of statements achieving consensus were communicated to the participants.

RESULTS

Consensus was achieved for all 13 statements, which underlined the need for professional guidelines and standardization of lab processes to increase laboratory competency and quality. The most important points identified were the improvement of embryo culture and embryo assessment to shorten time to live birth through the availability of more high-quality embryos, priority selection of the most viable embryos and improved cryosurvival.

CONCLUSION

The efficiency of the ART laboratory can be improved through professional guidelines on standardized practices and optimized embryo culture environment, assessment, selection and cryopreservation methodologies, thereby reducing the time to a healthy singleton delivery.

Adding a low-quality blastocyst to a high-quality blastocyst for a double embryo transfer does not decrease pregnancy and live birth rate

INTRODUCTION

The effect of embryo quality on clinical outcomes of assisted reproductive technology following a double transfer is not well defined, with some studies suggesting that a low-quality embryo transferred with a high-quality embryo decreases the live birth rate (LBR), compared with transferring a single high-quality embryo. Our study examined whether the quality of a second blastocyst transferred affects the outcome, controlling for the number of the available high-quality blastocysts (HQB).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A historical cohort study of 2346 fresh blastocyst transfers in a single fertility clinic between 2013 and 2019. The main outcomes were pregnancy, miscarriage, live birth, and multiple gestation rates. Outcomes were compared between single embryo transfers with a high-quality blastocyst (SET-H), double embryo transfers with two HQBs (DET-HH), and transfers with one high-quality and one low-quality blastocyst (DET-HL). Outcomes were also assessed between SET and DET when only low-quality blastocysts were available.

RESULTS

With one HQB available, DET-HL increased LBR (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.65, 95% CI 1.09-2.49) compared with SET-H, but increased multiple gestation rate (aOR 23.1, 95% CI 3.0-177.6). With two HQBs available, DET-HH was associated with a higher LBR (aOR 1.62, 95% CI 1.28-2.04) and lower miscarriage rate (aOR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40-0.80), but very high twin rate (aOR 49.8, 95% CI 24.3-102.1) compared with SET-H. A SET-H with at least one or more HQB available to freeze, compared with a SET-H with no other HQB available, had a higher LBR (aOR 1.69, 95% CI 1.17-2.45). When there were no HQBs available, compared with SET-L, a DET-LL had a higher live birth (aOR 3.20, 95% CI 1.78-7.703) and twin rate (aOR 3.72 × 10¹⁰ ) and a lower miscarriage rate (aOR 0.24, 95% CI 0.10-0.58).

CONCLUSIONS

When there is one HQB available, transferring an additional low-quality blastocyst would only slightly increase the LBR, but significantly increase the twin rate, therefore SET should be recommended. When two or more HQBs are available, SET-H would have a reasonably good chance of success without the very high twin rate associated with DET-HH. DET-LL when compared with SET-L, would increase the LBR, but increase the risk of multiple gestation.