Do clinical outcomes differ for day-5 versus day-6 single embryo transfers controlled for endometrial factor?

RESEARCH QUESTION: Is there is a difference in clinical outcomes between day-5 versus day-6 blastocysts when transferred in a personalized embryo transfer (PET) cycle guided by Endometrial Receptivity Analysis (ERA)? DESIGN: Multicentre, retrospective study; 260 patients who underwent a single embryo transfer with either a day-5 or day-6 blastocyst in a PET cycle guided by ERA between January 2017 and December 2019. RESULTS: A total of 260 blastocysts were transferred in a single embryo PET cycle guided by ERA. Of those, 183 (70.4%) were day-5 blastocysts and 77 (29.6%) were day-6 blastocysts. Clinical outcomes were similar when transferring day-5 blastocysts versus day-6 blastocysts: pregnancy rate was 75.4% (138/183) and 70.1% (54/77) (P = 0.465); implantation rate was 67.8% (124/183) and 63.6% (49/77) (P = 0.476); and ongoing pregnancy rate was 57.9% (106/183) and 58.4% (45/77) (P = 0.728), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that the clinical potential of day-5 and day-6 blastocysts are similar, as no difference in clinical outcomes are observed when transferring at the time of optimal endometrial receptivity as determined by ERA.

Preliminary assessment of aneuploidy rates between the polar, mid and mural trophectoderm.

The objective of this study is to compare aneuploidy rates between three distinct areas of the human trophectoderm: mural, polar and a region in between these two locations termed the 'mid' trophectoderm. This is a cohort study on in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients undergoing comprehensive chromosome screening at the blastocyst stage at a private IVF clinic. All embryos underwent assisted hatching on day 3 with blastocyst biopsy and comprehensive chromosome screening. Biopsied blastocysts were divided into three groups depending on which area (polar, mid, or mural) of the trophectoderm was protruding from the zona pellucida and biopsied. Aneuploidy rates were significantly higher with cells from the polar region of the trophectoderm (56.2%) compared with cells removed from the mural region of the trophectoderm (30.0%; P = 0.0243). A comparison of all three areas combined also showed a decreasing trend, but this did not reach clinical significance, polar (56.2%), mid (47.4%) and mural trophectoderm (30.0%; P = 0.1859). The non-concordance demonstrated between polar and mural trophectoderm can be attributed to biological occurrences including chromosomal mosaicism or procedural differences between embryologists.