Comparison of early and fully expanded blastocysts on pregnancy and birth outcomes in patients with fresh IVF/ICSI cycles: A retrospective cohort study

Objective To investigate the effect of the early blastocyst on pregnancy and birth outcomes in patients in vitro fertilization/(early rescue) intracytoplasmic sperm injection-embryo transfer [IVF/(early rescue)ICSI-ET] cycles. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, 289 patients with single-blastocyst transfer within IVF/(early rescue)ICSI-ET treatment cycle were included and divided into the early (n = 48, Gardner stage = 1 or 2) and the fully expanded blastocyst (n = 241, Gardner stage ≥ 3) groups. The differences in pregnancy and birth outcomes between the two groups were compared. Results There was no significant differences between the two groups in baseline indicators, including demographic characteristics and clinical treatment ( P > 0.05).The clinical outcomes indicators in the early and the fully expanded blastocyst groups were compared, including the number of transferable embryos on the third day (D3)5.0 (4.0, 6.8) vs. 6.0 (5.0, 8.0) ( P = 0.001), the number of remaining embryos frozen per cycle 1.0 (0.3, 2.0) vs. 3.0 (2.0, 5.0) ( P <0.001); the number of cycles of unfrozen embryos 13/48 (27.1%) vs. 12/241 (5.0%) ( P <0.001); the pregnancy outcome including the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) 20/48 (41.7%) vs. 129/241 (53.5%) ( P >0.05); the live birth rate (LBR)15/48 (31.3%) vs.106/241 (44.0%) ( P >0.05). There were no significant differences in birth outcomes, such as gestational week of labor, mode of delivery, neonatal birth weight, height, Apgar score, sex ratio, and birth defects between the two groups ( P >0.05).Multivariate binary logistic regression showed the same result, i.e., early blastocyst transfer in fresh cycle was not a risk factor for clinical pregnancy (OR = 0.516, 95% CI = 0.260–1.022) and live birth (OR = 0.521, 95% CI = 0.252–1.079). Conclusion Compared with the fully expanded blastocyst group, the CPR and LBR in the early blastocyst group of the fresh transfer cycles were relatively ideal, and there were no significant differences in birth outcomes and neonatal status between the two groups.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2024-08-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0308130
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Reproductive Biology and Fertility
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.54
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of early and fully expanded blastocysts on pregnancy and birth outcomes in patients with fresh IVF/ICSI cycles: A retrospective cohort study

Pan Xiao-qin, Yuanping Zhou, Liwen Shen
1 citations
PLoS ONE
Reproductive Biology and Fertility
0.54
article

Comparison of early and fully expanded blastocysts on pregnancy and birth outcomes in patients with fresh IVF/ICSI cycles: A retrospective cohort study

Pan Xiao-qin, Yuanping Zhou, Liwen Shen
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Objective To investigate the effect of the early blastocyst on pregnancy and birth outcomes in patients in vitro fertilization/(early rescue) intracytoplasmic sperm injection-embryo transfer [IVF/(early rescue)ICSI-ET] cycles. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, 289 patients with single-blastocyst transfer within IVF/(early rescue)ICSI-ET treatment cycle were included and divided into the early (n = 48, Gardner stage = 1 or 2) and the fully expanded blastocyst (n = 241, Gardner stage ≥ 3) groups. The differences in pregnancy and birth outcomes between the two groups were compared. Results There was no significant differences between the two groups in baseline indicators, including demographic characteristics and clinical treatment ( P > 0.05).The clinical outcomes indicators in the early and the fully expanded blastocyst groups were compared, including the number of transferable embryos on the third day (D3)5.0 (4.0, 6.8) vs. 6.0 (5.0, 8.0) ( P = 0.001), the number of remaining embryos frozen per cycle 1.0 (0.3, 2.0) vs. 3.0 (2.0, 5.0) ( P <0.001); the number of cycles of unfrozen embryos 13/48 (27.1%) vs. 12/241 (5.0%) ( P <0.001); the pregnancy outcome including the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) 20/48 (41.7%) vs. 129/241 (53.5%) ( P >0.05); the live birth rate (LBR)15/48 (31.3%) vs.106/241 (44.0%) ( P >0.05). There were no significant differences in birth outcomes, such as gestational week of labor, mode of delivery, neonatal birth weight, height, Apgar score, sex ratio, and birth defects between the two groups ( P >0.05).Multivariate binary logistic regression showed the same result, i.e., early blastocyst transfer in fresh cycle was not a risk factor for clinical pregnancy (OR = 0.516, 95% CI = 0.260–1.022) and live birth (OR = 0.521, 95% CI = 0.252–1.079). Conclusion Compared with the fully expanded blastocyst group, the CPR and LBR in the early blastocyst group of the fresh transfer cycles were relatively ideal, and there were no significant differences in birth outcomes and neonatal status between the two groups.

PLoS ONEVol. 19(8)
Huzhou Women and Children's Hospital (CN)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 29%
Reproductive Biology and Fertility
0.54
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.