4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Impact of day 3 or day 5 embryo transfer on pregnancy rates and multiple gestations

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 91, Issue 5, Pages 1717-1720

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.02.003

Keywords

Embryo transfer; blastocyst transfer; multiple gestation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To test the hypothesis that day 5 ET (D5ET) is superior to day 3 ET (D3ET) in pregnancy outcome and that it also reduces multiple gestations. Design: Retrospective cohort Study. Setting: Assisted reproductive technologies program at Wilford Hall Medical Center. Patient(s): Patients electing for either D3ET or D5ET. Intervention(s): Participants meeting inclusion criteria for D5ET elected either D3ET or D5ET. Main Outcome Measure(s): Cycles were compared by day of transfer and further stratified by patient age (< 35 years and 35-40 years). The number of oocytes retrieved, embryos on day 3, embryos transferred, pregnancy rate, implantation rate, and twin and high order multiples (triplets) rates were compared. Result(s): Of the 274 patients who met our inclusion criteria, 153 underwent a D3ET and 121 underwent a D5ET. The D5ET group had a significantly lower mean age and number of embryos transferred and a higher implantation rate (56% vs. 42%) than the D3ET group. Patients who were 35-40 years old had a significantly higher live-birth rate (68% vs. 40%). Although not statistically significant, the D5ET groups had higher clinical pregnancy (73% vs. 65%) and twin pregnancy (33% vs. 25%) rates. Conclusion(s): Blastocyst transfer resulted in fewer embryos transferred, with a trend toward improved clinical pregnancy and higher twin pregnancy rates. Live-birth rates were improved in patients 35-40 years of age. Younger patients opting for D5ET should do so with a commitment toward single ET. (Fertil Steril (R) 2009;91:1717-20. (C)2009 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available