双囊胚移植与顺序移植对冷冻胚胎移植和反复植入失败史患者妊娠结局的比较:一项随机对照试验。

IF 1.8 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
International Journal of Reproductive Biomedicine Pub Date : 2025-06-10 eCollection Date: 2025-04-01 DOI:10.18502/ijrm.v23i4.18783
Nooshin Hatamizadeh, Maryam Eftekhar, Zahra Aminimajomerd, Shahrzad Moeinaddini
{"title":"双囊胚移植与顺序移植对冷冻胚胎移植和反复植入失败史患者妊娠结局的比较:一项随机对照试验。","authors":"Nooshin Hatamizadeh, Maryam Eftekhar, Zahra Aminimajomerd, Shahrzad Moeinaddini","doi":"10.18502/ijrm.v23i4.18783","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recurrent implantation failure poses a significant challenge in assisted reproductive technology despite the transfer of high-quality embryos over multiple cycles.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between double blastocyst transfer and sequential single cleavage-stage and blastocyst transfer in individuals undergoing frozen embryo transfer and those with a history of repeated implantation failure.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This randomized clinical trial was conducted at the Yazd Research and Clinical Center for Infertility, Yazd, Iran from February to November 2024 and included 125 women ( <math><mo><</mo></math> 45 yr) with a history of more than 2 implantation failures. Participants were randomized into 2 groups: one receiving double blastocyst transfer and the other receiving sequential single cleavage-stage and blastocyst transfer. The primary and secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy, chemical pregnancy, early abortion, multiple pregnancy, and implantation rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. Chemical pregnancy rates were comparable (51.6% for double blastocyst transfer vs. 49.2% for sequential transfer, p = 0.790), as were clinical pregnancy rates (46.9% vs. 44.3%, p = 0.769). Early abortion rates showed no significant difference (27.3% vs. 20%, p = 0.498). Multiple pregnancy rates were similar (23.3% vs. 25.9%, p = 0.820), and implantation rates did not differ significantly (28.9% vs. 27.86%, p = 0.889).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrated that sequential single cleavage-stage and blastocyst transfer does not significantly improve assisted reproductive technology outcomes compared with double blastocyst transfer in individuals with recurrent implantation failure. Both methods had similar efficacy rates in terms of chemical pregnancy rates, clinical pregnancy rates, early abortion rates, multiple pregnancy rates, and implantation rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":14386,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Reproductive Biomedicine","volume":"23 4","pages":"313-322"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12268269/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of double blastocyst transfer versus sequential transfer on pregnancy outcomes in individuals with frozen embryo transfer and a history of recurrent implantation failure: An RCT.\",\"authors\":\"Nooshin Hatamizadeh, Maryam Eftekhar, Zahra Aminimajomerd, Shahrzad Moeinaddini\",\"doi\":\"10.18502/ijrm.v23i4.18783\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recurrent implantation failure poses a significant challenge in assisted reproductive technology despite the transfer of high-quality embryos over multiple cycles.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between double blastocyst transfer and sequential single cleavage-stage and blastocyst transfer in individuals undergoing frozen embryo transfer and those with a history of repeated implantation failure.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This randomized clinical trial was conducted at the Yazd Research and Clinical Center for Infertility, Yazd, Iran from February to November 2024 and included 125 women ( <math><mo><</mo></math> 45 yr) with a history of more than 2 implantation failures. Participants were randomized into 2 groups: one receiving double blastocyst transfer and the other receiving sequential single cleavage-stage and blastocyst transfer. The primary and secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy, chemical pregnancy, early abortion, multiple pregnancy, and implantation rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. Chemical pregnancy rates were comparable (51.6% for double blastocyst transfer vs. 49.2% for sequential transfer, p = 0.790), as were clinical pregnancy rates (46.9% vs. 44.3%, p = 0.769). Early abortion rates showed no significant difference (27.3% vs. 20%, p = 0.498). Multiple pregnancy rates were similar (23.3% vs. 25.9%, p = 0.820), and implantation rates did not differ significantly (28.9% vs. 27.86%, p = 0.889).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrated that sequential single cleavage-stage and blastocyst transfer does not significantly improve assisted reproductive technology outcomes compared with double blastocyst transfer in individuals with recurrent implantation failure. Both methods had similar efficacy rates in terms of chemical pregnancy rates, clinical pregnancy rates, early abortion rates, multiple pregnancy rates, and implantation rates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14386,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Reproductive Biomedicine\",\"volume\":\"23 4\",\"pages\":\"313-322\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12268269/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Reproductive Biomedicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18502/ijrm.v23i4.18783\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Reproductive Biomedicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/ijrm.v23i4.18783","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管在多个周期内移植了高质量的胚胎,但反复植入失败对辅助生殖技术提出了重大挑战。目的:本研究旨在比较冷冻胚胎移植和多次植入失败个体双囊胚移植与顺序单卵裂期囊胚移植的临床结果。材料和方法:这项随机临床试验于2024年2月至11月在伊朗Yazd不孕不育研究和临床中心进行,包括125名45岁的女性,有2次以上植入失败的历史。参与者被随机分为两组:一组接受双囊胚移植,另一组接受顺序的单卵裂期囊胚移植。主要和次要结局包括临床妊娠、化学妊娠、早期流产、多胎妊娠和着床率。结果:两组患者的基线特征相似。化学妊娠率(双囊胚移植51.6%,序贯移植49.2%,p = 0.790)和临床妊娠率(46.9%,44.3%,p = 0.769)相似。早期流产率差异无统计学意义(27.3% vs. 20%, p = 0.498)。两组多胎妊娠率相似(23.3%比25.9%,p = 0.820),植入率差异无统计学意义(28.9%比27.86%,p = 0.889)。结论:本研究表明,与双囊胚移植相比,单卵裂期和单囊胚移植对反复着床失败患者的辅助生殖技术效果没有显著改善。两种方法在化学妊娠率、临床妊娠率、早期流产率、多胎妊娠率、着床率等方面疗效相近。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparison of double blastocyst transfer versus sequential transfer on pregnancy outcomes in individuals with frozen embryo transfer and a history of recurrent implantation failure: An RCT.

Comparison of double blastocyst transfer versus sequential transfer on pregnancy outcomes in individuals with frozen embryo transfer and a history of recurrent implantation failure: An RCT.

Background: Recurrent implantation failure poses a significant challenge in assisted reproductive technology despite the transfer of high-quality embryos over multiple cycles.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between double blastocyst transfer and sequential single cleavage-stage and blastocyst transfer in individuals undergoing frozen embryo transfer and those with a history of repeated implantation failure.

Materials and methods: This randomized clinical trial was conducted at the Yazd Research and Clinical Center for Infertility, Yazd, Iran from February to November 2024 and included 125 women ( < 45 yr) with a history of more than 2 implantation failures. Participants were randomized into 2 groups: one receiving double blastocyst transfer and the other receiving sequential single cleavage-stage and blastocyst transfer. The primary and secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy, chemical pregnancy, early abortion, multiple pregnancy, and implantation rates.

Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. Chemical pregnancy rates were comparable (51.6% for double blastocyst transfer vs. 49.2% for sequential transfer, p = 0.790), as were clinical pregnancy rates (46.9% vs. 44.3%, p = 0.769). Early abortion rates showed no significant difference (27.3% vs. 20%, p = 0.498). Multiple pregnancy rates were similar (23.3% vs. 25.9%, p = 0.820), and implantation rates did not differ significantly (28.9% vs. 27.86%, p = 0.889).

Conclusion: This study demonstrated that sequential single cleavage-stage and blastocyst transfer does not significantly improve assisted reproductive technology outcomes compared with double blastocyst transfer in individuals with recurrent implantation failure. Both methods had similar efficacy rates in terms of chemical pregnancy rates, clinical pregnancy rates, early abortion rates, multiple pregnancy rates, and implantation rates.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
7.70%
发文量
93
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Reproductive BioMedicine (IJRM), formerly published as "Iranian Journal of Reproductive Medicine (ISSN: 1680-6433)", is an international monthly scientific journal for who treat and investigate problems of infertility and human reproductive disorders. This journal accepts Original Papers, Review Articles, Short Communications, Case Reports, Photo Clinics, and Letters to the Editor in the fields of fertility and infertility, ethical and social issues of assisted reproductive technologies, cellular and molecular biology of reproduction including the development of gametes and early embryos, assisted reproductive technologies in model system and in a clinical environment, reproductive endocrinology, andrology, epidemiology, pathology, genetics, oncology, surgery, psychology, and physiology. Emerging topics including cloning and stem cells are encouraged.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信