4.6 Article

Does the transfer of a poor quality embryo together with a good quality embryo affect the In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) outcome?

期刊

JOURNAL OF OVARIAN RESEARCH
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13048-016-0297-9

关键词

Embryo transfer; Embryo implantation; Embryo quality; Live birth rate

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: IVF cycles which result in only one good quality embryo, and a second poor quality embryo present a dilemma when the decision involves transferring two embryos. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a poor quality embryo has a negative effect on a good quality embryo when transferred along with a good quality embryo. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles involving single embryo transfers (SET) and double embryo transfers (DET). Embryo quality was divided into poor P and good G quality. The main outcome measures were: live birth, implantation rate, miscarriage rate, clinical pregnancy rate and multiple pregnancy ratio. Results: Six hundred three women were included. The study group consisted of 180 (29.9%) patients who had a double embryo transfer (DET) with one poor quality embryo and one good quality embryo (P + G). Control 1 group included 303 (50.2%) patients who had DET with two good quality embryos (G + G), and control 2 group consisted of 120 (19.9%) patients who had a single embryo transfer (SET) with one good quality embryo (G). Live birth rates were not significantly different when compared between study groups: 30.8% in the SET group (G), 27.2% in the (G + P) group and 33.7% in the (G + G) group. The SET group had the highest implantation rate (33.9%) compared to the DET groups (21.8% (G + P), 25.4% (G + G)) (P = 0.022). The clinical pregnancy rate was 33.3% in the SET group (G), 33.3% in the (G + P) group, and 39.3% in the (G + G) group (P = 0.39). The miscarriage rate was comparable in all groups. Conclusion: A poor quality embryo does not negatively affect a good quality embryo, when transferred together in a double embryo transfer.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据