Switching to intracytoplasmic sperm injection provides no benefit in couples of poor embryonic development in the previous in vitro fertilization cycle.
Shuai Liu, Junjie Zhong, Yu Jiang, Lin Wang, Yudi Luo, Bowen Luo, Zengyu Yang
{"title":"Switching to intracytoplasmic sperm injection provides no benefit in couples of poor embryonic development in the previous <i>in vitro</i> fertilization cycle.","authors":"Shuai Liu, Junjie Zhong, Yu Jiang, Lin Wang, Yudi Luo, Bowen Luo, Zengyu Yang","doi":"10.1080/14647273.2024.2442451","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of changing the insemination method in women who experienced poor embryonic development during the preceding cycle. A total of 15,886 conventional IVF in 9,311 women, performed between August 2015 and June 2023, were included in this study. Of these, 270 couples experienced IVF failure due to poor embryonic development in the first oocyte retrieval (OR) cycle, which was cancelled before transfer. The patients were stratified based on whether or not they switched to ICSI for subsequent attempts. Cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) and a series of secondary outcomes were compared. The embryo utilization, high-quality embryo, blastocyst formation, implantation, cumulative clinical pregnancy, CLBR and miscarriage rates were comparable between the two groups, whereas the fertilization rate per oocyte retrieved was significantly lower in the ICSI group during the second OR cycle (60.76% vs. 70.42%, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and all OR cycles (60.02% vs. 71.69%, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Furthermore, the CLBRs in the ICSI and IVF groups after up to seven OR cycles were 41.35% and 36.84%, respectively. Most patients achieved live births during the second OR cycle (58.33%, ICSI vs. 62.86%, IVF). ICSI did not improve clinical or embryonic outcomes in women who experienced poor embryonic development in their preceding cycle.</p>","PeriodicalId":13006,"journal":{"name":"Human Fertility","volume":"28 1","pages":"2442451"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Fertility","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2024.2442451","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of changing the insemination method in women who experienced poor embryonic development during the preceding cycle. A total of 15,886 conventional IVF in 9,311 women, performed between August 2015 and June 2023, were included in this study. Of these, 270 couples experienced IVF failure due to poor embryonic development in the first oocyte retrieval (OR) cycle, which was cancelled before transfer. The patients were stratified based on whether or not they switched to ICSI for subsequent attempts. Cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) and a series of secondary outcomes were compared. The embryo utilization, high-quality embryo, blastocyst formation, implantation, cumulative clinical pregnancy, CLBR and miscarriage rates were comparable between the two groups, whereas the fertilization rate per oocyte retrieved was significantly lower in the ICSI group during the second OR cycle (60.76% vs. 70.42%, p < 0.001) and all OR cycles (60.02% vs. 71.69%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the CLBRs in the ICSI and IVF groups after up to seven OR cycles were 41.35% and 36.84%, respectively. Most patients achieved live births during the second OR cycle (58.33%, ICSI vs. 62.86%, IVF). ICSI did not improve clinical or embryonic outcomes in women who experienced poor embryonic development in their preceding cycle.
期刊介绍:
Human Fertility is a leading international, multidisciplinary journal dedicated to furthering research and promoting good practice in the areas of human fertility and infertility. Topics included span the range from molecular medicine to healthcare delivery, and contributions are welcomed from professionals and academics from the spectrum of disciplines concerned with human fertility. It is published on behalf of the British Fertility Society.
The journal also provides a forum for the publication of peer-reviewed articles arising out of the activities of the Association of Biomedical Andrologists, the Association of Clinical Embryologists, the Association of Irish Clinical Embryologists, the British Andrology Society, the British Infertility Counselling Association, the Irish Fertility Society and the Royal College of Nursing Fertility Nurses Group.
All submissions are welcome. Articles considered include original papers, reviews, policy statements, commentaries, debates, correspondence, and reports of sessions at meetings. The journal also publishes refereed abstracts from the meetings of the constituent organizations.