Embryo transfer.

Embryo transfer is a critical step in the overall success of in vitro fertilization (IVF). Despite its apparent simplicity, it is an integral part of the IVF cycle that can be difficult to teach and perform well. In this chapter we describe the procedure of embryo transfer and discuss various modifications that have been evaluated in an effort to improve the probability of embryo implantation including ultrasound guidance, catheter design, transfer technique, as well as enrichment of the embryo transfer media.

Follicular flushing and in vitro fertilization outcomes in the poorest responders: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Does follicular flushing during oocyte retrieval improve the number of oocytes retrieved in the poorest responders? SUMMARY ANSWER: Follicular flushing in the poorest responders does not increase the number of oocytes retrieved and may result in lower implantation and clinical pregnancy rates. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Although previous studies have shown no beneficial effect of follicular flushing in normal responders, no study has demonstrated a detrimental effect and many IVF centers continue to perform this technique in poor responders. Data on follicular flushing in this patient group are limited, with no randomized trial to date assessing its utility in the poorest responders. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This randomized controlled trial compared the effects of follicular flushing and direct aspiration on IVF outcomes in the poorest responders, defined as having four or fewer follicles ≥12 mm on the day of hCG administration. Fifty patients were randomized during the 12-month enrollment period. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The patients were treated at an academic fertility center at Weill Cornell Medical College, New York. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Fifty women were randomized to follicular flushing (n = 25) or direct aspiration (n = 25). One patient in the direct aspiration group was canceled prior to oocyte retrieval for premature ovulation and was included in the intent-to-treat analysis. There was no difference in the number of oocytes retrieved with a median (IQR) of 4 (2-6) in the aspiration group versus 3 (2-5) in the flushing group (95% CI: -0.78, 1.98; P = 0.41). Patients who underwent follicular flushing had significantly fewer embryos transferred {1.7 [standard deviation (SD) 0.6] versus 2.5 (SD 1.2), P = 0.03}, a lower implantation rate (5.3 versus 34.2%, P = 0.006) and a lower clinical pregnancy rate (4 versus 36%, P = 0.01). The difference in pregnancy rates remained significant after adjusting for embryos transferred. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Findings, including results for secondary outcome measures, may not be generalizable to natural IVF cycles as these were excluded from the study. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This is the first randomized trial to evaluate the utility of follicular flushing in the poorest responders, and the first to demonstrate a potentially detrimental effect of flushing on IVF outcomes. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): None. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT 01558141.

In vitro fertilization for Orthodox Jewish couples: antagonist cycle modifications allowing for mikveh attendance before oocyte retrieval.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a novel method of altering conventional gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles, thereby allowing for the observance of ritual Jewish practices, and to investigate the impact of these cycle modifications on IVF outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Academic medical center. PATIENT(S): Orthodox Jewish couples undergoing GnRH antagonist IVF cycles at The Ronald O. Perelman and Claudia Cohen Center for Reproductive Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College from January 1, 2007, to November 1, 2011, in whom cycle starts were delayed using GnRH antagonists and estradiol patches. INTERVENTION(S): GnRH antagonist administration on cycle days 2, 3, and 4, as well as estradiol patch application on cycle days 2, 4, and 6. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Days of stimulation, total cycle length, implantation, clinical pregnancy, and live-birth rate were compared for 42 Orthodox Jewish couples undergoing a "mikveh patching protocol" versus 42 control patients matched for age, diagnosis, and IVF cycle characteristics. RESULT(S): The protocol modifications successfully ensured the ability to visit the mikveh before retrieval by extending total cycle length by 3.85 days on average, with no decrement in implantation (43.2% vs. 39.3%), clinical pregnancy (57.1% vs. 59.5%), or live-birth rates (50.0% vs. 54.8%) as compared with controls. CONCLUSION(S): GnRH antagonist cycles can be successfully modified to allow for IVF that remains consistent with the observance of Orthodox Jewish practices.