EQUIVALENCE TRIAL
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Single embryo transfer by Day 3 time-lapse selection versus Day 5 conventional morphological selection: a randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Does single cleavage-stage (Day 3) embryo transfer using a time-lapse (TL) hierarchical classification model achieve comparable ongoing pregnancy rates (OPR) to single blastocyst (Day 5) transfer by conventional morphological (CM) selection?

SUMMARY ANSWER: Day 3 single embryo transfer (SET) with a hierarchical classification model had a significantly lower OPR compared with Day 5 SET with CM selection.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Cleavage-stage SET is an alternative to blastocyst SET. Time-lapse imaging assists better embryo selection, based on studies of pregnancy outcomes when adding time-lapse imaging to CM selection at the cleavage or blastocyst stage.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This single-centre, randomized, open-label, active-controlled, non-inferiority study included 600 women between October 2015 and April 2017.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Eligible patients were Chinese females, aged ≤36 years, who were undergoing their first or second fresh IVF cycle using their own oocytes, and who had FSH levels ≤12 IU/mL on Day 3 of the cycle and 10 or more oocytes retrieved. Patients who had underlying uterine conditions, oocyte donation, recurrent pregnancy loss, abnormal oocytes or <6 normally fertilized embryos (2PN) were excluded from the study participation. Patients were randomized 1:1 to either the cleavage-stage SET with a time-lapse hierarchical classification model for selection (D3 + TL) or blastocyst SET with CM selection (D5 + CM). All normally fertilized zygotes were cultured in Primo Vision. The study was conducted at a tertiary IVF centre (CITIC-Xiangya) and OPR was the primary outcome.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 600 patients were randomized to the two groups, among which 585 (D3 + TL = 290, D5 + CM = 295) were included in the Modified-intention-to-treat (mITT) population and 517 (D3 + TL = 261, D5 + CM = 256) were included in the PP population. In the per protocol (PP) population, OPR was significantly lower in the D3 group (59.4%, 155/261) than in the D5 group (68.4%, 175/256) (difference: -9.0%, 95% CI: -17.1%, -0.7%, P = 0.03). Analysis in mITT population showed a marginally significant difference in the OPR between the D3 + TL and D5 + CM groups (56.6 versus 64.1%, difference: -7.5%, 95% CI: -15.4%, 0.4%, P = 0.06). The D3 + TL group resulted in a markedly lower implantation rate than the D5 + CM group (64.4 versus 77.0%; P = 0.002) in the PP analysis, however, the early miscarriage rate did not significantly differ between the two groups.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study lacked a direct comparison between time-lapse and CM selections at cleavage-stage SET and was statistically underpowered to detect non-inferiority. The subject's eligibility criteria favouring women with a good prognosis for IVF weakened the generalizability of the results.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The OPR from Day 3 cleavage-stage SET using hierarchical classification time-lapse selection was significantly lower compared with that from Day 5 blastocyst SET using conventional morphology, yet it appeared to be clinically acceptable in women underwent IVF.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study is supported by grants from Ferring Pharmaceuticals and the Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University, China.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR-ICR-15006600.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 16 June 2015.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT: 1 October 2015.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app