Developmental potential of different embryos on day 3: a retrospective study

References

• Adler A, Lee HL, McCulloh DH, Ampeloquio E, Clarke-Williams M, Wertz BH, Grifo J. 2014. Blastocyst culture selects for euploid embryos: comparison of blastomere and trophectoderm biopsies. Reproductive Biomedicine Online 28:485–491.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alikani M, Cohen J, Tomkin G, Garrisi GJ, Mack C, Scott RT. 1999. Human embryo fragmentation in vitro and its implications for pregnancy and implantation. Fertility and Sterility 71:836–842.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bungum M, Bungum L, Humaidan P, Yding Andersen C. 2003. Day 3 versus day 5 embryo transfer: a prospective randomized study. Reproductive Biomedicine Online 7:98–104.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cecchele A, Cermisoni GC, Giacomini E, Pinna M, Vigano P. 2022. Cellular and molecular nature of fragmentation of human embryos. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 23:1349.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coticchio G, Lagalla C, Sturmey R, Pennetta F, Borini A. 2019. The enigmatic morula: mechanisms of development, cell fate determination, self-correction and implications for ART. Human Reproduction Update 25:422–438.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Vos A, Van Landuyt L, Santos-Ribeiro S, Camus M, Van De Velde H, Tournaye H, Verheyen G. 2016. Cumulative live birth rates after fresh and vitrified cleavage-stage versus blastocyst-stage embryo transfer in the first treatment cycle. Human Reproduction 31:2442–2449.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner DK, Lane M, Stevens J, Schlenker T, Schoolcraft WB. 2000. Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome: towards a single blastocyst transfer. Fertility and Sterility 73:1155–1158.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB. 1999. Culture and transfer of human blastocysts. Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology 11:307–311.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giorgetti C, Terriou P, Auquier P, Hans E, Spach JL, Salzmann J, Roulier R. 1995. Embryo score to predict implantation after in-vitro fertilization: based on 957 single embryo transfers. Human Reproduction 10:2427–2431.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hatoum I, Bellon L, Swierkowski N, Ouazana M, Bouba S, Fathallah K, et al. 2018. Disparities in reproductive outcomes according to the endometrial preparation protocol in frozen embryo transfer: the risk of early pregnancy loss in frozen embryo transfer cycles. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 35:425–429.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernandez-Vargas P, Munoz M, Dominguez F. 2020. Identifying biomarkers for predicting successful embryo implantation: applying single to multi-OMICs to improve reproductive outcomes. Human Reproduction Update 26:264–301.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hershko Klement A, Ovadia M, Wiser A, Berkovitz A, Shavit T, Nemerovsky L, et al. 2017. What we learned from extended culture of 'rejected’ day-3 cleavage stage embryos: a prospective cohort study. Journal of Ovarian Research 10:35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inhorn MC, Patrizio P. 2015. Infertility around the globe: new thinking on gender, reproductive technologies and global movements in the 21st century. Human Reproduction Update 21:411–426.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kushnir VA, Barad DH, Albertini DF, Darmon SK, Gleicher N. 2017. Systematic review of worldwide trends in assisted reproductive technology 2004–2013. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 15:6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lan KC, Huang FJ, Lin YC, Kung FT, Hsieh CH, Huang HW, et al. 2003. The predictive value of using a combined Z-score and day 3 embryo morphology score in the assessment of embryo survival on day 5. Human Reproduction 18:1299–1306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levi-Setti PE, Cirillo F, Smeraldi A, Morenghi E, Mulazzani GEG, Albani E. 2018. No advantage of fresh blastocyst versus cleavage stage embryo transfer in women under the age of 39: a randomized controlled study. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 35:457–465.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Machtinger R, Racowsky C. 2013. Morphological systems of human embryo assessment and clinical evidence. Reproductive Biomedicine Online 26:210–221.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ombelet W, Cooke I, Dyer S, Serour G, Devroey P. 2008. Infertility and the provision of infertility medical services in developing countries. Human Reproduction Update 14:605–621.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oron G, Son WY, Buckett W, Tulandi T, Holzer H. 2014. The association between embryo quality and perinatal outcome of singletons born after single embryo transfers: a pilot study. Human Reproduction 29:1444–1451.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Revelli A, Canosa S, Carosso A, Filippini C, Paschero C, Gennarelli G, et al. 2019. Impact of the addition of early embryo viability assessment to morphological evaluation on the accuracy of embryo selection on day 3 or day 5: a retrospective analysis. Journal of Ovarian Research 12:73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez-Purata J, Lee J, Whitehouse M, Duke M, Grunfeld L, Sandler B, et al. 2016. Reproductive outcome is optimized by genomic embryo screening, vitrification, and subsequent transfer into a prepared synchronous endometrium. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 33:401–412.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone BA, Greene J, Vargyas JM, Ringler GE, Marrs RP. 2005. Embryo fragmentation as a determinant of blastocyst development in vitro and pregnancy outcomes following embryo transfer. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 192:2014–2019.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szamatowicz M. 2016. Assisted reproductive technology in reproductive medicine – possibilities and limitations. Ginekologia Polska 87:820–823.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tittle TV, Brown M, Rittenberg MB. 1989. Characterization of lambda class antibodies from the BALB/c memory response to a [glucosyl-alpha(1-3) glucosyl]-protein conjugate. Molecular Immunology 26:809–817.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valbuena D, Martin J, De Pablo JL, Remohi J, Pellicer A, Simon C. 2001. Increasing levels of estradiol are deleterious to embryonic implantation because they directly affect the embryo. Fertility and Sterility 76:962–968.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vega M, Breborowicz A, Moshier EL, McGovern PG, Keltz MD. 2014. Blastulation rates decline in a linear fashion from euploid to aneuploid embryos with single versus multiple chromosomal errors. Fertility and Sterility 102:394–398.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weitzman VN, Schnee-Riesz J, Benadiva C, Nulsen J, Siano L, Maier D. 2010. Predictive value of embryo grading for embryos with known outcomes. Fertility and Sterility 93:658–662.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziebe S, Lundin K, Loft A, Bergh C, Nyboe Andersen A, Selleskog U, et al. 2003. FISH analysis for chromosomes 13, 16, 18, 21, 22, X and Y in all blastomeres of IVF pre-embryos from 144 randomly selected donated human oocytes and impact on pre-embryo morphology. Human Reproduction 18:2575–2581.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziebe S, Petersen K, Lindenberg S, Andersen AG, Gabrielsen A, Andersen AN. 1997. Embryo morphology or cleavage stage: how to select the best embryos for transfer after in-vitro fertilization. Human Reproduction 12:1545–1549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar