In vitro Fertilization Outcomes of Frozen-thawed Embryo Transfer with Hatched Blastocysts versus with Hatching Blastocysts
- PMID: 38811454
- DOI: 10.1007/s43032-024-01499-7
In vitro Fertilization Outcomes of Frozen-thawed Embryo Transfer with Hatched Blastocysts versus with Hatching Blastocysts
Abstract
This study aimed to elucidate the effect of hatching status on in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes in frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer cycles. Frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles performed at a single fertility center between 2016 and 2021 were retrospectively assessed. Analyses were restricted to 6,821 frozen-thawed blastocyst transfers in women aged 24-47 years. For optimal comparability, double embryo transfer (ET) cycles consisting of one hatching and one hatched blastocyst were excluded. The implantation and pregnancy rates were evaluated and compared between the hatching and hatched blastocyst transfer groups based on patients' age (<38 vs. ≥38 years), blastocyst grade (good vs. bad grade), and the number of transferred embryos (single ET vs. double ET). Hatched blastocyst transfer was associated with higher implantation and clinical pregnancy rates in the single ET group (15.7% and 15.6%, respectively; p<0.001). The transfer of two hatched blastocysts had higher implantation and clinical pregnancy rates compared to the transfer of two hatching blastocysts (19.5% and 20.4%, respectively; p<0.001) in the double ET group. In the hatched blastocyst transfer group, the clinical pregnancy and implantation rates were higher, regardless of each woman's age and embryo quality. The IVF treatment outcomes were improved when the blastocysts were hatched during FET cycles. Hence, hatched blastocyst transfer in FET cycles could be considered a superior method in IVF practice.
Keywords: Blastocyst transfer; Clinical outcome; Hatching status; Implantation; Pregnancy.
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society for Reproductive Investigation.
Conflict of interest statement
Declarations. Ethics approval: The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the CHA Fertility Center Seoul Station, CHA Gangnam Medical Center, CHA University (CHAIRB, approval no. GCI-19-25) and performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Consent to participate: Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in this study. Consent for publication: Not applicable
Similar articles
-
Hatching status before embryo transfer is not correlated with implantation rate in chromosomally screened blastocysts.Hum Reprod. 2016 Nov;31(11):2458-2470. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dew205. Epub 2016 Sep 12. Hum Reprod. 2016. PMID: 27619770 Free PMC article.
-
Is there an optimal window of time for transferring single frozen-thawed euploid blastocysts? A cohort study of 1170 embryo transfers.Hum Reprod. 2022 Nov 24;37(12):2797-2807. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deac227. Hum Reprod. 2022. PMID: 36305795
-
Association between hatching status and pregnancy outcomes in single blastocyst transfers: a retrospective cohort analysis.J Assist Reprod Genet. 2025 May;42(5):1707-1715. doi: 10.1007/s10815-025-03450-4. Epub 2025 Mar 28. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2025. PMID: 40153247 Free PMC article.
-
Day 5 versus Day 6 blastocyst transfers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes.Hum Reprod. 2019 Oct 2;34(10):1948-1964. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dez163. Hum Reprod. 2019. PMID: 31644803 Free PMC article.
-
[Increasing the cumulative live birth rate: Low-grade blastocysts, potential overlook].Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2025 Mar;53(3):155-161. doi: 10.1016/j.gofs.2024.12.003. Epub 2024 Dec 21. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2025. PMID: 39716658 Review. French.
References
-
- Hu KL, Zhang D, Li R. Endometrium preparation and perinatal outcomes in women undergoing single-blastocyst transfer in frozen cycles. Fertil Steril. 2021;115:1487–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.12.016 . - DOI - PubMed
-
- Dyer S, Chambers GM, de Mouzon J, Nygren KG, Zegers-Hochschild F, Mansour R, Ishihara O, Banker M, Adamson GD. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies world report: Assisted Reproductive Technology 2008, 2009 and 2010. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:1588–609. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew082 . - DOI - PubMed
-
- De Geyter C, Calhaz-Jorge C, Kupka MS, Wyns C, Mocanu E, Motrenko T, Scaravelli G, Smeenk J, Vidakovic S, Goossens V; European IVF-monitoring Consortium (EIM) for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). ART in Europe, 2014: results generated from European registries by ESHRE: The European IVF-monitoring Consortium (EIM) for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). Hum Reprod. 2018;33:1586-601 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dey242
-
- Kushnir VA, Barad DH, Albertini DF, Darmon SK, Gleicher N. Systematic review of worldwide trends in assisted reproductive technology 2004–2013. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2017;15:6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-016-0225-2 . - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Groenewoud ER, Cohlen BJ, Macklon NS. Programming the endometrium for deferred transfer of cryopreserved embryos: hormone replacement versus modified natural cycles. Fertil Steril. 2018;109:768–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.02.135 . - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials