Routine Laser Assisted Hatching Results in Significantly Increased Clinical Pregnancies
Purpose: To elucidate the appropriateness of current indications for assisted hatching (AH) in cleavage stage human embryos and to confirm our preliminary findings that only young patients (about 67%) benefit from AH.
Methods: Prior to transfer, 2 of 3 embryos selected for ET were subjected to laser assisted hatching (LAH). Control group consisted of patients matched by similar characteristics and protocol except LAH was not performed.
Results: The clinical pregnancy rate in women ≤36 years was 64.9% (24/37) for embryos subjected to LAH but was significantly lower (p = 0.029) in the control (33.3%; 10/30). The implantation rate in women ≤36 years in the test group was 38.1% (40/105) that was significantly higher than that of the control group (17.5%, 14/80; p = 0.0039).
Conclusions: LAH is beneficial for women ≤36 years but not for women ≤37 years, for embryos with thin zonae (≤16μ) but not with thick zonae (≥17μ), and for those with repeated failures (37–50%).
Assisted hatching increased laser pregnancies
CohenJ, ElsnerC, KortH, MalterH, MasseyJ, MayerMP, WiemerK: Impairment of the hatching process following IVF in the human and improvement of implantation by assisting hatching using micromanipulation. Hum Reprod 1990;5:7–13PubMedGoogle Scholar
CohenJ, AlikaniM, TrowbridgeJ, Rosenwaks, Z: Implantation enhancement by selective assisted hatching using zona drilling of human embryos with poor prognosis. Hum Reprod 1992;7:685–691PubMedGoogle Scholar
TadirY, WrightWH, VafaO, LiawLH, AschR, BernsMW: Micromanipulation of gametes using laser microbeams. Hum Reprod 1991;6:1011–1016PubMedGoogle Scholar
GottAL, HardyK, WinstonRML, LeeseHJ: Non-invasive measurement of pyruvate and glucose uptake and lactate production by single human preimplantation embryos. Hum Reprod 1990;5:104–108PubMedGoogle Scholar
EdwardsRG, FishelSB, CohenJ, FehillyCB, PurdyJM, SlaterJM, SteptoePC, WebsterJM: Factors influencing the success of in vitro fertilization for alleviating human infertility. J. In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf 1984;1:3–23PubMedGoogle Scholar
YaronY, BotchonA, AmitA, PeyserMR, DavidMP, LessingJB: Endometrial receptivity in the light of random assisted reproductive technologies. Fertil Steril 1994;62:225–232PubMedGoogle Scholar
De FeliciM, SiracusaG: Spontaneous hardening of the zona pellucida on mouse oocytes during in vitro culture. Gamete Res 1982;6:107–113Google Scholar
AliJ, Al-NatshaSD, ShahataMAM: Formulation of a protein-free medium for human assisted reproduction. Hum Reprod 2000;15:145–156PubMedGoogle Scholar
GardnerDK, SchoolcraftWB, WagleyL, SchlenkerT, StevensJ, HeslaJ: A prospective randomized trial of blastocyst culture and transfer in in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 1998;13:3434–3440PubMedGoogle Scholar
AliJ, RahbarS, BurjaqH, SultanAM, ShahataMAM: Possible mediation by autocrine and paracrine factors during ultra micro-environment human day 2 embryo culture result in significant improvement in embryo quality, pregnancy and implantation (submitted for publication)Google Scholar
GermondM, NoceraD, SennA, RinkK, DelacretazG, FakanS: Microdissection of mouse and human zona pellucida of the procedure. Fertil Steril 1995;64:604–611PubMedGoogle Scholar
MantoudisE, PodsiadlyBT, GorgyA, VenkatG, CraftLL: A comparison between quarter, partial and total laser assisted hatching in selected infertility patients. Hum Reprod 2001;16:2182–2186PubMedGoogle Scholar
© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2003