Advertisement

Should All Patients Undergo Blastocyst Transfer? No

  • Wellington P. Martins
  • Catherine Racowsky
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter summarizes the arguments against always transferring embryos at the blastocyst stage.

Keywords

Embryo Blastocyst Perinatal Fertilization Oocyte 

References

  1. 1.
    Ng KYB, Mingels R, Morgan H, Macklon N, Cheong Y. In vivo oxygen, temperature and pH dynamics in the female reproductive tract and their importance in human conception: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2018;24:15–34.  https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmx028.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    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. 2017;49(5):583–91.  https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.17327.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Glujovsky D, Farquhar C, Quinteiro Retamar AM, Alvarez Sedo CR, Blake D. Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;(6):CD002118.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002118.pub5.
  4. 4.
    Groen H, Tonch N, Simons AH, van der Veen F, Hoek A, Land JA. Modified natural cycle versus controlled ovarian hyperstimulation IVF: a cost-effectiveness evaluation of three simulated treatment scenarios. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(12):3236–46.  https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/det386.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roesner S, Pflaumer U, Germeyer A, Montag M, Strowitzki T, Toth B. Natural cycle IVF: evaluation of 463 cycles and summary of the current literature. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014;289(6):1347–54.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-013-3123-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Allersma T, Farquhar C, Cantineau AE. Natural cycle in vitro fertilisation (IVF) for subfertile couples. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(8):CD010550.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010550.pub2.
  7. 7.
    Tonkens R. The moral unacceptability of abandoning human embryos. Monash Bioeth Rev. 2016;34(1):52–69.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-016-0060-4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Samorinha C, Pereira M, Machado H, Figueiredo B, Silva S. Factors associated with the donation and non-donation of embryos for research: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20(5):641–55.  https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmu026.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    ASRM. Disposition of abandoned embryos: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(7):1848–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.02.024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kovalevsky G, Carney SM, Morrison LS, Boylan CF, Neithardt AB, Feinberg RF. Should embryos developing to blastocysts on day 7 be cryopreserved and transferred: an analysis of pregnancy and implantation rates. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(4):1008–12.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.06.021.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Su Y, Li JJ, Wang C, Haddad G, Wang WH. Aneuploidy analysis in day 7 human blastocysts produced by in vitro fertilization. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2016;14:20.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-016-0157-x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bechtejew TN, Nadai MN, Nastri CO, Martins WP. Clomiphene citrate and letrozole to reduce follicle-stimulating hormone consumption during ovarian stimulation: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;50(3):315–23.  https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.17442.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martins WP, Nastri CO, Rienzi L, van der Poel SZ, Gracia CR, Racowsky C. Obstetrical and perinatal outcomes following blastocyst transfer compared to cleavage transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2016;31(11):2561–9.  https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew244.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ginstrom Ernstad E, Bergh C, Khatibi A, Kallen KB, Westlander G, Nilsson S, Wennerholm UB. Neonatal and maternal outcome after blastocyst transfer: a population-based registry study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214(3):378 e371–10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.12.040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nastri CO, Nobrega BN, Teixeira DM, Amorim J, Diniz LMM, Barbosa MWP, Giorgi VSI, Pileggi VN, Martins WP. Low versus atmospheric oxygen tension for embryo culture in assisted reproduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2016;106(1):95–104.e117.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.02.037.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ribeirao Preto Medical SchoolUniversity of Sao PauloRibeirao PretoBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive BiologyBrigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations