Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (27)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Guerif, F.
Right arrow Articles by Royere, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Guerif, F.
Right arrow Articles by Royere, D.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 17, No. 5, 1321-1326, May 2002
© 2002 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

Parameters guiding selection of best embryos for transfer after cryopreservation: a reappraisal

Fabrice Guerif, Rachel Bidault, Veronique Cadoret, Marie-Laure Couet, Jacques Lansac and Dominique Royere,1

Biologie de la Reproduction, Département de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Reproduction Humaine, CHU Bretonneau, 37044 Tours, France

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the respective influences of blastomere survival and resumption of mitosis on the outcome of frozen–thawed embryos. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed in our centre on 363 thawing cycles, involving 4-cell day 2 grade 1 embryos with <10% fragmentation. RESULTS: A higher implantation rate per transferred embryo was observed when all transferred embryos were characterized by fully intact blastomeres (100% blastomere survival) as compared with damaged embryos (50 or 75% blastomere survival) (22.0 versus 7.2%; P < 0.0001). Moreover, the implantation rate per transferred embryo was significantly higher for cleaved embryos compared with uncleaved embryos (19.7 versus 3%; P < 0.0001). Transfer of fully intact, cleaved embryos resulted in the highest implantation rates compared with transfer of damaged and uncleaved embryos (27.4 versus 0%; P < 0.0001). Intermediate implantation rates were observed when only one of the two criteria was fulfilled (13 versus 11% respectively; P > 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that the clinical pregnancy rate was influenced by both criteria (odds ratio = 3.4 for transfer of embryos with six or more cells versus embryos with less than six cells. CONCLUSION: The results of our study suggest that the most important factor to predict further embryo development is the total number of blastomeres in transferred embryos, however they are obtained (good survival and/or resumption of mitosis).

Key words: blastomere survival/cleavage/cryopreservation/embryo transfer/freezing-thawing

1 To whom correspondence should be addressed: E-mail: royere{at}med.univ-tours.fr


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
F. Guerif, M. Lemseffer, R. Bidault, O. Gasnier, M.H. Saussereau, V. Cadoret, C. Jamet, and D. Royere
Single Day 2 embryo versus blastocyst-stage transfer: a prospective study integrating fresh and frozen embryo transfers
Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2009; 24(5): 1051 - 1058.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
D. A. Gook and D. H. Edgar
Human oocyte cryopreservation
Hum. Reprod. Update, November 1, 2007; 13(6): 591 - 605.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
P. J. Stokes, J. A. Hawkhead, R. K. Fawthrop, H. M. Picton, V. Sharma, H. J. Leese, and F. D. Houghton
Metabolism of human embryos following cryopreservation: Implications for the safety and selection of embryos for transfer in clinical IVF
Hum. Reprod., March 1, 2007; 22(3): 829 - 835.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
C. Sifer, A. Sellami, C. Poncelet, P. Kulski, B. Martin-Pont, J. Bottero, R. Porcher, I. Cedrin-Durnerin, J.N. Hugues, and J.P. Wolf
A prospective randomized study to assess the benefit of partial zona pellucida digestion before frozen-thawed embryo transfers
Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2006; 21(9): 2384 - 2389.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
R. Tang, J. Catt, and D. Howlett
Towards defining parameters for a successful single embryo transfer in frozen cycles
Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2006; 21(5): 1179 - 1183.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
W.T. Zheng, G.L. Zhuang, C.Q. Zhou, C. Fang, J.P. Ou, T. Li, M.F. Zhang, and X.Y. Liang
Comparison of the survival of human biopsied embryos after cryopreservation with four different methods using non-transferable embryos
Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2005; 20(6): 1615 - 1618.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
J. Archer, D. A. Gook, and D. H. Edgar
Blastocyst formation and cell numbers in human frozen-thawed embryos following extended culture
Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2003; 18(8): 1669 - 1673.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
A. Vahratian, L. A. Schieve, M. A. Reynolds, and G. Jeng
Live-birth rates and multiple-birth risk of assisted reproductive technology pregnancies conceived using thawed embryos, USA 1999-2000
Hum. Reprod., July 1, 2003; 18(7): 1442 - 1448.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
T. El-Toukhy, Y. Khalaf, K. Al-Darazi, F. O'Mahony, E. Wharf, A. Taylor, and P. Braude
Cryo-thawed embryos obtained from conception cycles have double the implantation and pregnancy potential of those from unsuccessful cycles
Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2003; 18(6): 1313 - 1318.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
H. Jericho, L. Wilton, D. A. Gook, and D. H. Edgar
A modified cryopreservation method increases the survival of human biopsied cleavage stage embryos
Hum. Reprod., March 1, 2003; 18(3): 568 - 571.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.