Original Article
In Vitro Fertilization with Single Blastocyst-Stage versus Single Cleavage-Stage Embryos
N Engl J Med 2006; 354:1139-1146March 16, 2006
- Abstract
Background
Single-embryo transfer has been recommended to reduce the incidence of multiple gestations when in vitro fertilization is performed in women under 36 years of age. We designed a prospective, randomized, controlled trial to determine whether there were any differences in the rates of pregnancy and delivery between women undergoing transfer of a single cleavage-stage (day 3) embryo and those undergoing transfer of a single blastocyst-stage (day 5) embryo.
Methods
We studied 351 infertile women under 36 years of age who were randomly assigned to undergo transfer of either a single cleavage-stage embryo (176 patients) or a single blastocyst-stage embryo (175 patients). Multifollicular ovarian stimulation was performed with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist and recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone.
Results
The study was terminated early after a prespecified interim analysis (which included 50 percent of the planned number of patients) found a higher rate of pregnancy among women undergoing transfer of a single blastocyst-stage embryo (P=0.02). The rate of delivery was also significantly higher in this group than in the group undergoing transfer of a single cleavage-stage embryo (32.0 percent vs. 21.6 percent; relative risk, 1.48; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.04 to 2.11). Two multiple births occurred, both of monozygotic twins, both of which were in the group undergoing transfer of a single cleavage-stage embryo.
Conclusions
These findings support the transfer of a single blastocyst-stage (day 5) embryo in infertile women under 36 years of age.
Media in This Article
Figure 1
Flow Diagram of the Phases of the Study.Table 1
Patient Demographic, Cycle, and Embryologic Characteristics.Article Activity
- Article
Although the first successful delivery after in vitro fertilization was achieved after the placement of one embryo,1 the practice of single-embryo transfer was soon replaced by multifollicular ovarian stimulation followed by the transfer of multiple embryos. Transfer of multiple embryos results in higher pregnancy rates than single-embryo transfer, but multiple gestations are a common and serious complication of this approach.2,3 The rate of multiple gestations after in vitro fertilization is 26.4 percent in Europe4 and 35.3 percent in the United States,5 as compared with 1.1 percent after natural conception.6 Adverse outcomes associated with high-order gestations include serious perinatal morbidity and mortality and long-term disabilities.6
Single-embryo transfer has been advocated as a strategy to reduce the frequency of multiple births after in vitro fertilization.7-9 The Belgian government has recently instituted a policy whereby the first six in vitro fertilization trials for a couple will be reimbursed by health insurance agencies if elective single-embryo transfer was performed in the first two trials in women under 36 years of age.10 It has been suggested that extending the embryo culture to day 5 and transferring the embryo at the blastocyst stage would enhance the likelihood of pregnancy as compared with the usual procedure in which the embryo is transferred at the cleavage stage (day 3),11,12 but this suggestion remains controversial.13
The main disadvantage of transferring the embryo at the cleavage stage rather than at the blastocyst stage is that the morphologic criteria that govern embryo selection on day 3 are highly subjective14 and less accurately reflect the genetic quality (euploidy status) of embryos than do the criteria used on day 5. For example, among women 36 years of age or older, 59 percent of embryos judged as “top quality” on day 3 were found to be aneuploid, as compared with 35 percent of blastocysts judged as “top quality” on day 5.15,16 If these findings also apply to women under 36 years of age (albeit in a lower proportion),17 then selecting only one cleavage-stage embryo for use (even if it is of top quality) would increase the chances of transferring a chromosomally abnormal embryo. On the other hand, a potential downside to the use of blastocyst-stage embryos is that some embryos are not able to reach the blastocyst stage in culture.18 Additional concerns about the use of blastocysts include the possibilities of an increased risk of monozygotic twins, an altered sex ratio of births, and epigenetic effects on the embryo.
We conducted a study to determine whether there were any differences in the rates of pregnancy and delivery between women randomly assigned to undergo transfer of a single cleavage-stage embryo and those assigned to undergo transfer of a single blastocyst-stage embryo.
Methods
Study Design
Between July 2003 and November 2004, 351 women requesting infertility treatment were randomly assigned to undergo transfer of either a single cleavage-stage embryo or a single blastocyst-stage embryo (Figure 1Figure 1
Flow Diagram of the Phases of the Study.). The randomization was performed after the final consultation at the outpatient clinic. A computer-generated list was used for randomization; this list was not concealed from the physicians, but it did not explicitly state the treatment strategy, identifying the strategies only as “A” or “B.” A patient could enter the study only once. The study was approved by our institutional review board, and all the patients gave written informed consent. The embryo transfers were performed without ultrasound guidance by clinicians and embryologists who were blinded only with respect to the patient's participation in the study.The patients included in the study were women under 36 years of age who were undergoing a first or second trial of in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection, whose serum follicle-stimulating hormone level on day 3 of the menstrual cycle was 12 IU per liter or less, and who were undergoing transfer of one embryo. The use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis was an exclusion criterion. The primary outcomes were the rate of ongoing pregnancy at 12 weeks of gestation or more and the rate of delivery.
Multifollicular Ovarian Stimulation
The protocol for use of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist and recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone has been described elsewhere.19 In brief, injections of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone, follitropin beta (Puregon, NV Organon) were initiated at a dose of 100 to 250 IU on day 2 of the menstrual cycle (day 1 of stimulation) and subcutaneous administration of the antagonist ganirelix (Orgalutran, NV Organon) was started at a dose of 0.25 mg on day 6 of stimulation. Final oocyte maturation was induced by the administration of 10,000 IU of human chorionic gonadotropin (Pregnyl, NV Organon), when at least three follicles 17 mm in diameter were visualized on ultrasonography. The luteal phase was supported by 600 mg of vaginally administered micronized natural progesterone (Utrogestan, Besins International) per day. To assess the treatment outcome, serum human chorionic gonadotropin was measured 14 and 17 days after oocyte retrieval. An increase in serum human chorionic gonadotropin levels above 20 IU per liter indicated pregnancy. Clinical pregnancy was defined by the observation of fetal cardiac activity on ultrasonography after seven weeks of gestation. An ongoing pregnancy was defined by the observation of a fetal heartbeat on ultrasonography after 12 weeks of gestation.
Embryo Culture, Evaluation, and Selection for Transfer
Sperm preparation, in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection procedures, and embryo culture were carried out as described by Van Landuyt et al.20 Embryo quality was assessed daily until the moment of transfer or (for supernumerary embryos) freezing, as described by Papanikolaou et al.21 In brief, on the morning of day 3, the embryos were removed from cleavage medium and placed in blastocyst medium (sequential medium). The embryo quality on day 3 was assessed on the basis of the number of blastomeres (cells), the rate of fragmentation (the volume of the embryo with anucleate fragments), multinucleation of the blastomeres, and early compaction (junction of cells). Each embryo received a score of 1 (top quality), 2 (good quality), 3 (fair quality), or 4 (poor quality). Embryos with a score of 4 were not transferred. Supernumerary embryos were frozen on day 3.
The embryo quality on day 5 was assessed according to the criteria of Gardner and Schoolcraft.22 This scoring system is based on the formation and degree of expansion (from early blastocyst [BL1] to fully expanded blastocyst [BL6]) of the blastocoele, the development of the inner cell mass, and the development of the trophectoderm. The combined score ranged from 1 to 4, with higher scores indicating poorer quality; embryos with a score of 4 (poor quality) were not transferred. Supernumerary embryos were frozen on day 5 or 6.
Statistical Analysis
Analysis was performed according to the intention to treat. For descriptive statistics, we used means ±SD. Normally distributed continuous variables were analyzed by the t-test for independent samples, and non-normally distributed metric variables by the Mann–Whitney test. The chi-square test was used to analyze nominal variables. For the differences in pregnancy rates between the groups, relative risks and 95 percent confidence intervals were calculated. The relative risk was defined as the ratio of the pregnancy rate in the intervention (blastocyst-stage) group to the pregnancy rate in the control (embryo-stage) group; the relative risk was calculated with Review Manager software (RevMan version 4.2.2, Cochrane Collaboration). All tests were two-sided, and a P value of less than 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.
Using group sequential methods, we calculated that the enrollment of 351 patients in each group would give the study a statistical power of 80 percent to detect an absolute difference of 10 percent in the rate of ongoing pregnancy between the groups (given rates of 20 and 30 percent) at an alpha level of 0.05 with the use of a two-sided z-test. These results assume that two sequential tests are performed with the use of the Pocock spending function to determine the test boundaries and that the first interim analysis (time one) yields a P value of 0.03. It was prespecified that the study would be stopped if the first interim analysis identified a significant difference (P=0.03) in pregnancy rates between groups. At the first interim analysis (after the enrollment of 50 percent of the projected 702 patients), the pregnancy rate in the blastocyst-stage group was greater than that in the cleavage-stage group at an alpha level of 0.02, and therefore, the study was terminated.
Results
A total of 351 patients were randomly assigned to undergo transfer of either a single cleavage-stage embryo (176 patients) or a single blastocyst-stage embryo (175 patients). The proportion of patients undergoing their first in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm insertion trial under the new legislation was 92.6 percent in the cleavage-stage group and 90.9 percent in the blastocyst-stage group. There were no significant differences between the groups in demographic, cycle, or embryologic characteristics. However, significantly more embryos were cryopreserved in the cleavage-stage group than in the blastocyst-stage group (4.2 vs. 2.2, P=0.001). The percentage of patients with a top-quality embryo for transfer was similar in the two groups (70.0 percent in the blastocyst-stage group and 65.0 percent in the cleavage-stage group) (Table 1Table 1
Patient Demographic, Cycle, and Embryologic Characteristics.).Six patients starting stimulation in the blastocyst-stage group and five patients starting stimulation in the cleavage-stage group did not undergo oocyte retrieval (Figure 1). In the blastocyst-stage group, 13 of 169 patients (7.7 percent) did not undergo transfer because of lack of embryos (11 patients) or occurrence of early ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (2 patients). Of the 11 women in this group in whom embryo transfer was canceled, only 1 would have received an embryo transfer if she had been randomly assigned to the other group. In the cleavage-stage group, embryo transfer was not performed in 9 of 171 patients (5.3 percent), eight of whom lacked embryos on day 3 and one of whom had early ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.
The pregnancy outcomes of the two groups are shown in Table 2Table 2
Rates of Pregnancy and Delivery after the Transfer of Single Blastocyst-Stage and Cleavage-Stage Embryos.. In both groups, a relatively high percentage of patients had an initial positive human chorionic gonadotropin test (41.7 percent in the blastocyst-stage group and 33.5 percent in the cleavage-stage group, P=0.11). As compared with the cleavage-stage group, the blastocyst-stage group had a significantly higher rate of both ongoing pregnancy (33.1 percent vs. 21.6 percent; relative risk, 1.54; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.08 to 2.18) and delivery (32.0 percent vs. 21.6 percent; relative risk, 1.48; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.04 to 2.11). This difference may be partially attributable to a higher rate of pregnancy loss in the first trimester in the cleavage-stage group than in the blastocyst-stage group, although this difference was not significant (33.9 percent vs. 19.2 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.31 to 1.02). In the blastocyst-stage group, one patient underwent elective termination of pregnancy for anencephaly of the embryo and one patient had a second-trimester miscarriage. The overall rate of multiple births was 2.1 percent (2 of 94 deliveries). Both multiple pregnancies occurred in the cleavage-stage group and consisted of monozygotic twins.Discussion
The results of this randomized, controlled trial suggest that among women under 36 years of age who are undergoing a first or second cycle of in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection, transfer of a single blastocyst-stage embryo significantly increases the probability of pregnancy and birth of a child as compared with transfer of a single cleavage-stage embryo. Furthermore, the low rate of multiple births in the study group as a whole provides more evidence of the ability of single-embryo transfer to markedly reduce this complication of in vitro fertilization procedures.
Despite the well-recognized risks associated with multiple gestations, many patients still want to have multiple embryos transferred to enhance the probability of pregnancy.23 Increasing awareness of the costs and risks of multiple births has led the medical community to reduce the number of embryos transferred. For single-embryo transfer to be accepted by patients, doctors, and payors, however, it must be associated with acceptable pregnancy rates.
One approach to optimizing pregnancy rates after single-embryo transfer is to follow it with transfer of a frozen–thawed embryo in cases in which the initial transfer is not successful. In a previous randomized trial, this strategy achieved a rate of live births that was not substantially lower than the rate after transfer of two fresh cleavage-stage (day 2) embryos (38.8 percent vs. 42.9 percent) and was associated with a dramatic reduction in the rate of multiple births (0.8 percent vs. 33.1 percent).24 However, these results were obtained among women under 36 years of age who had at least two good embryos available for transfer and thus had a good prognosis, and the plausible difference in rates of live births between the two protocols (on the basis of the 95 percent confidence interval) was as high as 11.6 percent. For some couples, this difference may not be acceptable, particularly given the observation that the stress associated with in vitro fertilization leads many couples to abandon treatment without proceeding to a second trial, even if they can afford it.25 Increasing the pregnancy rate in the cycle in which fresh embryos are used would be expected to increase the acceptability of single-embryo transfer.26
In our study of women under 36 years of age who were undergoing a first or second attempt at in vitro fertilization, transfer of a single blastocyst-stage embryo resulted in a higher pregnancy rate than transfer of a single cleavage-stage embryo. Moreover, the rate of live births after transfer of a single fresh blastocyst-stage embryo was similar to that after transfer of two fresh cleavage-stage (day 2) embryos in the Scandinavian study.24 Smaller studies27,28 have found rates of ongoing pregnancy of up to 60 percent after elective transfer of a single blastocyst. Similarly, analysis of a population-based sample of 50,819 in vitro fertilization procedures in the United States in 2001 revealed that transfer of a single blastocyst-stage embryo resulted in a live-birth rate ranging from 31.6 to 39.5 percent among women 20 through 37 years of age.29
The success of single-blastocyst transfer will require effective methods of cryopreservation of blastocysts. Data are needed to compare the rates of live births (including both births resulting from transfer of fresh embryos and those resulting from transfer of frozen–thawed embryos) after transfer of cleavage-stage and blastocyst-stage embryos. We did not include in the initial design a plan for the subsequent transfer of frozen embryos in patients who did not conceive. However, we have recently reported a live-birth rate of 11 percent after transfer of frozen–thawed blastocyst-stage embryos (94 of 857 cycles),30 whereas the live-birth rate after transfer of freeze–thawed cleavage-stage embryos is approximately 15 percent.
A concern in randomly assigning patients to treatment at the time of consultation, before embryologic data were available, was that it might lead to a high rate of cancellation of transfers of blastocyst-stage embryos. However, among this population of women under 36 years of age who were undergoing a first or second trial of in vitro fertilization, cancellation of transfer on day 5 was rare. Prospective studies are needed to determine whether blastocyst transfer is appropriate in older women or in women with repeated implantation failures. Recent data,21,31 however, suggest that the number of embryos with two pronuclei (day 1) or cleavage-stage embryos may serve as a predictor of the success of blastocyst transfer.
An increased risk of monozygotic twins has previously been reported with blastocyst transfer in retrospective studies.32,33 There were no cases of monozygotic twins after single-blastocyst transfer in our study, but the study was not powered to assess the risk of monozygotic twins or other potential risks associated with extension of embryo culture to day 5, such as birth defects and long-term health outcomes. The two second-trimester pregnancy losses in the blastocyst-transfer group, including the elective termination owing to anencephaly, may be a cause of concern, although the rates of such complications did not differ significantly between the groups. Larger studies are required to address these issues.
The higher rates of ongoing pregnancy and delivery after transfer of a single blastocyst-stage embryo than of a single cleavage-stage embryo are probably due to a better selection process.21 Although some genetically abnormal embryos are able to reach the blastocyst stage, the risk of aneuploidy in a top-quality blastocyst is lower than that in a top-quality cleavage-stage embryo.15,16 A recent meta-analysis comparing transfer of cleavage-stage and blastocyst-stage embryos did not show a difference in favor of the latter embryos.13 However, this analysis included studies involving transfer of more cleavage-stage embryos than blastocyst-stage embryos, and the transfer of more cleavage-stage embryos could have compensated for the potentially lower quality of any individual cleavage-stage embryo relative to that of a blastocyst-stage embryo. We have recently shown that in appropriately selected patients (with more than three good embryos on day 3), transfer of two blastocysts results in a significantly higher delivery rate than transfer of two cleavage-stage embryos, but with the drawback that almost half of the initial pregnancies involved twins.21
In conclusion, our findings demonstrate that in women under 36 years of age who are undergoing their first or second trial of in vitro fertilization, transfer of a single blastocyst-stage embryo significantly increases the likelihood of pregnancy and delivery as compared with transfer of a single cleavage-stage embryo. More work is needed to determine whether this approach is appropriate for other groups of women.
Drs. Devroey and Van Steirteghem report having received research support from Organon. No other potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
Source Information
From the Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Academisch Ziekenhuis, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels.
Address reprint requests to Dr. Papanikolaou at the Academisch Ziekenhuis–Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Laarbeeklaan 101, Brussels B-1090, Belgium, or at evangelos.papanikolaou@vub.ac.be.
- References
References
1
Steptoe PC ,Edwards RG . Birth after the reimplantation of a human embryo. Lancet 1978;2:366-366
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline2
Coetsier T ,Dhont M . Avoiding multiple pregnancies in in-vitro fertilization: who's afraid of single embryo transfer? Hum Reprod 1998;13:2663-2664
Web of Science | Medline3
Fauser BC ,Devroey P ,Macklon NS . Multiple birth resulting from ovarian stimulation for subfertility treatment. Lancet 2005;365:1807-1816
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline4
Nyboe-Andersen A ,Gianaroli L ,Nygren KG . Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2000: results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod 2004;19:490-503
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline5
Assisted reproductive technology in the United States: 2000 results generated from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine/Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Registry. Fertil Steril 2004;81:1207-1220
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline6
Crowther CA. Multiple pregnancies. In: James DK, Steer PJ, Weiner CP, Gonik B, eds. High risk pregnancy: management options. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 2002:129-52.
7
Bergh C . Single embryo transfer: a mini-review. Hum Reprod 2005;20:323-327
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline8
Gerris JMR . Single embryo transfer and IVF/ICSI outcome: a balanced appraisal. Hum Reprod Update 2005;11:105-121
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline9
Barlow DH . The debate on single embryo transfer in IVF: how will today's arguments be viewed from the perspective of 2020? Hum Reprod 2005;20:1-3
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline10
Ombelet W ,De Sutter P ,Van der Elst J ,Martens G . Multiple gestation and infertility treatment: registration, reflection and reaction -- the Belgian project. Hum Reprod Update 2005;11:3-14
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline11
Marek D ,Langley M ,Gardner DK ,Confer N ,Doody KM ,Doody KJ . Introduction of blastocyst culture and transfer for all patients in an in vitro fertilization program. Fertil Steril 1999;72:1035-1040
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline12
Gardner DK ,Lane M ,Stevens J ,Schlenker T ,Schoolcraft WB . Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome: towards a single blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril 2000;73:1155-1158
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline13
Blake DA ,Proctor M ,Johnson NP . The merits of blastocyst versus cleavage stage embryo transfer: a Cochrane review. Hum Reprod 2004;19:795-807[Erratum, Hum Reprod 2004;19:2174.]
CrossRef | Medline14
Rijnders PM ,Jansen CA . The predictive value of day 3 embryo morphology regarding blastocyst formation, pregnancy and implantation rate after day 5 transfer following in-vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 1998;13:2869-2873
Web of Science | Medline15
Magli MC ,Jones GM ,Gras L ,Gianaroli L ,Korman I ,Trounson AO . Chromosome mosaicism in day 3 aneuploid embryos that develop to morphologically normal blastocysts in vitro. Hum Reprod 2000;15:1781-1786
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline16
Staessen C ,Platteau P ,Van Assche E , et al. Comparison of blastocyst transfer with or without preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in couples with advanced maternal age: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2004;19:2849-2858
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline17
Munne S ,Sandalinas M ,Magli C ,Gianaroli L ,Cohen J ,Warburton D . Increased rate of aneuploid embryos in young women with previous aneuploid conceptions. Prenat Diagn 2004;24:638-643
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline18
Tsirigotis M . Blastocyst stage transfer: pitfalls and benefits -- too soon to abandon current practice? Hum Reprod 1998;13:3285-3289
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline19
Papanikolaou EG ,Bourgain C ,Kolibianakis E ,Tournaye H ,Devroey P . Steroid receptor expression in late follicular phase endometrium in GnRH antagonist IVF cycles is already altered, indicating initiation of early luteal phase transformation in the absence of secretory changes. Hum Reprod 2005;20:1541-1547
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline20
Van Landuyt L ,De Vos A ,Joris H ,Verheyen G ,Devroey P ,Van Steirteghem A . Blastocyst formation in in vitro fertilization versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles: influence of the fertilization procedure. Fertil Steril 2005;83:1397-1403
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline21
Papanikolaou EG ,D'haeseleer E ,Verheyen G , et al. Live birth rate is significantly higher after blastocyst transfer than after cleavage-stage embryo transfer when at least four embryos are available on day 3 of embryo culture: a randomized prospective study. Hum Reprod 2005;20:3198-3203
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline22
Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB. In vitro culture of human blastocysts. In: Jansen R, Mortimer D, eds. Towards reproductive certainty: infertility & genetics beyond 1999: the plenary proceedings of the 11th World Congress on in Vitro Fertilization & Human Reproductive Genetics. Pearl River, N.Y.: Parthenon Press, 1999:378-88.
23
Blennborn M ,Nilsson S ,Hillervik C ,Hellberg D . The couple's decision-making in IVF: one or two embryos at transfer? Hum Reprod 2005;20:1292-1297
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline24
Thurin A ,Hausken J ,Hillensjo T , et al. Elective single-embryo transfer versus double-embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med 2004;351:2392-2402
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline25
Olivius C ,Friden B ,Borg G ,Bergh C . Why do couples discontinue in vitro fertilization treatment? A cohort study. Fertil Steril 2004;81:258-261
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline26
Davis OK . Elective single-embryo transfer -- has its time arrived? N Engl J Med 2004;351:2440-2442
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline27
Gardner DK ,Surrey E ,Minjarez D ,Leitz A ,Stevens J ,Schoolcraft WB . Single blastocyst transfer: a prospective randomized trial. Fertil Steril 2004;81:551-555
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline28
Milki AA ,Hinckley MD ,Westphal LM ,Behr B . Elective single blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril 2004;81:1697-1698
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline29
Kissin DM ,Schieve LA ,Reynolds MA . Multiple-birth risk associated with IVF and extended embryo culture: USA, 2001. Hum Reprod 2005;20:2215-2223
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline30
Van den Abbeel E ,Camus M ,Verheyen G ,Van Waesberghe L ,Devroey P ,Van Steirteghem A . Slow controlled-rate freezing of sequentially cultured human blastocysts: an evaluation of two freezing strategies. Hum Reprod 2005;20:2939-2945
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline31
Gardner DK ,Lane M . Towards a single embryo transfer. Reprod Biomed Online 2003;6:470-481
CrossRef | Medline32
Behr B ,Fisch JD ,Racowsky C ,Miller K ,Pool TB ,Milki AA . Blastocyst-ET and monozygotic twinning. J Assist Reprod Genet 2000;17:349-351
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline33
Milki AA ,Jun SH ,Hinckley MD ,Behr B ,Giudice LC ,Westphal LM . Incidence of monozygotic twinning with blastocyst transfer compared to cleavage-stage transfer. Fertil Steril 2003;79:503-506
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline
- Citing Articles (98)
Citing Articles
1
Kerri Marquard, Kelle Moley. 2012. Multiple Gestations and Assisted Reproductive Technology. , 60-66.
CrossRef2
Paul Devroey, Antonio Pellicer, Anders Nyboe Andersen, Joan-Carles Arce. (2012) A randomized assessor-blind trial comparing highly purified hMG and recombinant FSH in a GnRH antagonist cycle with compulsory single-blastocyst transfer. Fertility and Sterility
CrossRef3
(2011) Multiple gestation associated with infertility therapy: an American Society for Reproductive Medicine Practice Committee opinion. Fertility and Sterility
CrossRef4
(2011) Elective single-embryo transfer. Fertility and Sterility
CrossRef5
Dietmar Spitzer, R. Haidbauer, C. Corn, J. Stadler, B. Wirleitner, N. H. Zech. (2011) Effects of embryo transfer quality on pregnancy and live birth delivery rates. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
CrossRef6
Chadi Yazbeck, Nadia Ben Jamaa, André Hazout, Paul Cohen-Bacrie, Anne-Marie Junca, Nathalie Rougier. (2011) Advantages of the two-step embryo transfer strategy in human IVF/ICSI cycles. Zygote1-7
CrossRef7
M. G. Larman, M. G. Katz-Jaffe, B. McCallie, J. A. Filipovits, D. K. Gardner. (2011) Analysis of global gene expression following mouse blastocyst cryopreservation. Human Reproduction 26:10, 2672-2680
CrossRef8
Ramazan Mercan, Ozgur Oktem, Zeki Salar, Alp Nuhoglu, Basak Balaban, Bulent Urman. (2011) Conjoined twins after intracytoplasmic sperm injection and transfer of day-3 embryos. Fertility and Sterility 96:2, e111-e114
CrossRef9
Inna Berin, Sarah T. McLellan, Eric A. Macklin, Thomas L. Toth, Diane L. Wright. (2011) Frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: clinical outcomes of single and double blastocyst transfers. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 28:7, 575-581
CrossRef10
Peter Kovacs, Szabolcs Matyas, Steven G. Kaali. (2011) Embryo selection or uterine environment: Which plays the greater role in blastocyst transfer cycles?. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research 37:5, 416-421
CrossRef11
M. Benkhalifa, A. Demirol, T. Sari, E. Balashova, M. Tsouroupaki, Y. Giakoumakis, T. Gurgan. (2011) Autologous embryo–cumulus cells co-culture and blastocyst transfer in repeated implantation failures: a collaborative prospective randomized study. Zygote1-8
CrossRef12
F. Guerif, C. Frapsauce, C. Chavez, V. Cadoret, D. Royere. (2011) Treating women under 36 years old without top-quality embryos on day 2: a prospective study comparing double embryo transfer with single blastocyst transfer. Human Reproduction 26:4, 775-781
CrossRef13
Jennifer L. Eaton, Michele R. Hacker, C. Brent Barrett, Kim L. Thornton, Alan S. Penzias. (2011) Influence of embryo sex on development to the blastocyst stage and euploidy. Fertility and Sterility 95:3, 936-939
CrossRef14
L. Van Landuyt, D. Stoop, G. Verheyen, W. Verpoest, M. Camus, H. Van de Velde, P. Devroey, E. Van den Abbeel. (2011) Outcome of closed blastocyst vitrification in relation to blastocyst quality: evaluation of 759 warming cycles in a single-embryo transfer policy. Human Reproduction 26:3, 527-534
CrossRef15
Dominic Stoop, Lisbet Van Landuyt, Etienne Van den Abbeel, Michel Camus, Greta Verheyen, Paul Devroey. (2011) Should a single blastocyst transfer policy be a clinical decision or should it depend on the embryological evaluation on day 3?. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 9:1, 60
CrossRef16
Mary Ellen Pavone, Jennifer E. Hirshfeld-Cytron, Ralph R. Kazer. (2011) The Progressive Simplification of the Infertility Evaluation. Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey 66:1, 31-41
CrossRef17
Sang Min Kang, Sang Won Lee, Hak Jun Jeong, San Hyun Yoon, Jin Ho Lim, Seong Goo Lee. (2011) Comparison of elective single cleavage-embryo transfer to elective single blastocyst-embryo transfer in human IVF-ET. Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine 38:1, 53
CrossRef18
Brooke E. Friedman, Lynn B. Davis, Ruth B. Lathi, Lynn M. Westphal, Valerie L. Baker, Amin A. Milki. (2011) Age-Related Success with Elective Single versus Double Blastocyst Transfer. ISRN Obstetrics and Gynecology 2011, 1-6
CrossRef19
Evangelos G. Papanikolaou, Human Fatemi, Michel Camus, Dimitra Kyrou, Nikos P. Polyzos, Peter Humaidan, Basil Tarlatzis, Paul Devroey, Herman Tournaye. (2010) Higher birth rate after recombinant hCG triggering compared with urinary-derived hCG in single-blastocyst IVF antagonist cycles: a randomized controlled trial. Fertility and Sterility 94:7, 2902-2904
CrossRef20
Human M. Fatemi, Janine Oberyé, Biljana Popovic-Todorovic, Han Witjes, Bernadette Mannaerts, Paul Devroey. (2010) Corifollitropin alfa in a long GnRH agonist protocol: proof of concept trial. Fertility and Sterility 94:5, 1922-1924
CrossRef21
F. Guerif, M. Lemseffer, J. Leger, R. Bidault, V. Cadoret, C. Chavez, O. Gasnier, M.H. Saussereau, D. Royere. (2010) Does early morphology provide additional selection power to blastocyst selection for transfer?. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 21:4, 510-519
CrossRef22
Lionel Dessolle, Dalila Allaoua, Thomas Fréour, Claudine Le Vaillant, Henri-Jean Philippe, Miguel Jean, Paul Barrière. (2010) Monozygotic triplet pregnancies after single blastocyst transfer: two cases and literature review. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 21:3, 283-289
CrossRef23
Nobuo Sugawara, Hideyuki Fukuchi, Machiko Maeda, Rie Komaba, Yasuhisa Araki. (2010) Sex-discordant twins despite single embryo transfer: a report of two cases. Reproductive Medicine and Biology 9:3, 169-172
CrossRef24
Patricia Fauque, Pierre Jouannet, Céline Davy, Juliette Guibert, Vivian Viallon, Sylvie Epelboin, Jean-Marie Kunstmann, Catherine Patrat. (2010) Cumulative results including obstetrical and neonatal outcome of fresh and frozen-thawed cycles in elective single versus double fresh embryo transfers. Fertility and Sterility 94:3, 927-935
CrossRef25
E.G. Papanikolaou, C. Bourgain, H. Fatemi, W. Verpoest, N.P. Polyzos, A. De Brabanter, E. Kolibianakis, B. Tarlatzis, P. Devroey, H. Tournaye. (2010) Endometrial advancement after triggering with recombinant or urinary HCG: a randomized controlled pilot study. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 21:1, 50-55
CrossRef26
Y. A. Wang, M. Chapman, M. Costello, E. A. Sullivan. (2010) Better perinatal outcomes following transfer of fresh blastocysts and blastocysts cultured from thawed cleavage embryos: a population-based study. Human Reproduction 25:6, 1536-1542
CrossRef27
Wataru Sato, Jun Fukuda, Kyoko Kanamori, Kazuhiro Kawamura, Jin Kumagai, Hideya Kodama, Toshinobu Tanaka. (2010) Evaluation of possible criteria for elective single embryo transfer. Reproductive Medicine and Biology 9:2, 107-113
CrossRef28
Christine M. Mullin, M. Elizabeth Fino, Sheeva Talebian, Lewis C. Krey, Frederick Licciardi, Jamie A. Grifo. (2010) Comparison of pregnancy outcomes in elective single blastocyst transfer versus double blastocyst transfer stratified by age. Fertility and Sterility 93:6, 1837-1843
CrossRef29
Natalie Porat, Lynn M. Boehnlein, Matthew A. Barker, Peter Kovacs, Steven R. Lindheim. (2010) Blastocyst embryo transfer is the primary determinant for improved outcomes in oocyte donation cycles. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research 36:2, 357-363
CrossRef30
L. Dessolle, T. Freour, P. Barriere, E. Darai, C. Ravel, M. Jean, C. Coutant. (2010) A cycle-based model to predict blastocyst transfer cancellation. Human Reproduction 25:3, 598-604
CrossRef31
Marie-Hélène Massicotte, Fabienne Langlois, Jean-Patrice Baillargeon. (2010) Current procedures for managing polycystic ovary syndrome. Expert Review of Obstetrics & Gynecology 5:1, 77-91
CrossRef32
Robert J. Stillman, Kevin S. Richter, Nicole K. Banks, James R. Graham. (2009) Elective single embryo transfer: A 6-year progressive implementation of 784 single blastocyst transfers and the influence of payment method on patient choice. Fertility and Sterility 92:6, 1895-1906
CrossRef33
John M. Csokmay, Micah J. Hill, Frank V. Cioppettini, Kathleen A. Miller, Richard T. Scott, John L. Frattarelli. (2009) Live birth sex ratios are not influenced by blastocyst-stage embryo transfer. Fertility and Sterility 92:3, 913-917
CrossRef34
Martha Agnes Hentemann, Siri Briskemyr, Kjell Bertheussen. (2009) Blastocyst transfer and gender: IVF versus ICSI. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 26:8, 433-436
CrossRef35
Fabrice Guerif, Malak Lemseffer, Milène Blanchard, Dominique Royere. (2009) Top quality embryos at day 2: a prerequisite for single blastocyst transfer? An observational cohort study in women under 36. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 26:8, 443-449
CrossRef36
Suliman Al-Fifi, Ali Al-Binali, Mesfer Al-Shahrani, Hajra Shafiq, Mohamad Bahar, Mona Almushait, Lukanle Sobandi, Mamdoh Eskandar. (2009) Congenital anomalies and other perinatal outcomes in ICSI vs. naturally conceived pregnancies: a comparative study. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 26:7, 377-381
CrossRef37
T. Strowitzki, A. Germeyer. (2009) Zukünftige Entwicklungen der Reproduktionsmedizin. Der Gynäkologe 42:7, 516-521
CrossRef38
Martine Vercammen, An Verloes, Patrick Haentjens, Hilde Van de Velde. (2009) Can soluble human leucocyte antigen-G predict successful pregnancy in assisted reproductive technology?. Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology 21:3, 285-290
CrossRef39
A. Teranishi, A. Kuwata, T. Fumino, H. Hamai, M. Shigeta. (2009) A theoretical model for single blastocyst transfer. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 26:6, 327-334
CrossRef40
Hind A. Beydoun, Laurel Stadtmauer, Yueqin Zhao, Helena Russell, David O. Matson, Sergio Oehninger. (2009) Impact of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome on Selected Indicators of In Vitro Fertilization and Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Treatment Success. Journal of Women's Health 18:5, 717-723
CrossRef41
Zabeena Pandian, Siladitya Bhattacharya, Ozkan Ozturk, Gamal Serour, Allan Templeton, Zabeena Pandian. 2009. Number of embryos for transfer following in-vitro fertilisation or intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection. .
CrossRef42
Daniel Bodri, Juan José Guillén, Katja Schwenn, Sara Casadesus, Ricard Vidal, Oriol Coll. (2009) Poor outcome in oocyte donation after elective transfer of a single cleavage-stage embryo in Turner syndrome patients. Fertility and Sterility 91:4, 1489-1492
CrossRef43
Christopher W. Lipari, Jairo E. Garcia, Yulian Zhao, Kimberly Thrift, Dhananjay Vaidya, Annabelle Rodriguez. (2009) Nitric oxide metabolite production in the human preimplantation embryo and successful blastocyst formation. Fertility and Sterility 91:4, 1316-1318
CrossRef44
Evangelos G. Papanikolaou, Efstratios M. Kolibianakis, Cristina Pozzobon, Parikshit Tank, Herman Tournaye, Claire Bourgain, Andre Van Steirteghem, Paul Devroey. (2009) Progesterone rise on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin administration impairs pregnancy outcome in day 3 single-embryo transfer, while has no effect on day 5 single blastocyst transfer. Fertility and Sterility 91:3, 949-952
CrossRef45
F. Guerif, M. Lemseffer, R. Bidault, O. Gasnier, M.H. Saussereau, V. Cadoret, C. Jamet, D. Royere. (2009) Single Day 2 embryo versus blastocyst-stage transfer: a prospective study integrating fresh and frozen embryo transfers. Human Reproduction 24:5, 1051-1058
CrossRef46
Esther B Baart, Nick S Macklon, Bart JCM Fauser. (2009) Ovarian stimulation and embryo quality. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 18, S45-S50
CrossRef47
Travis W McCoy, Steven T Nakajima, Henry CL Bohler. (2009) Age and a single day-14 β-HCG can predict ongoing pregnancy following IVF. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 19:1, 114-120
CrossRef48
Kazuo YAMAGATA, Rinako SUETSUGU, Teruhiko WAKAYAMA. (2009) Long-Term, Six-Dimensional Live-Cell Imaging for the Mouse Preimplantation Embryo That Does Not Affect Full-Term Development. Journal of Reproduction and Development 55:3, 343-350
CrossRef49
Judy E. Stern, Marlene B. Goldman, Harry Hatasaka, Todd A. MacKenzie, Catherine Racowsky, Eric S. Surrey. (2009) Optimizing the number of blastocyst stage embryos to transfer on day 5 or 6 in women 38 years of age and older: a Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology database study. Fertility and Sterility 91:1, 157-166
CrossRef50
Anick De Vos and, André Van Steirteghem. 2009. Gamete and Embryo Manipulation. , 759-776.
CrossRef51
Mark D. Hornstein, Catherine Racowsky. 2009. Assisted Reproduction. , 725-757.
CrossRef52
M. Meintjes, S. J. Chantilis, D. C. Ward, J. D. Douglas, A. J. Rodriguez, A. R. Guerami, D. M. Bookout, B. D. Barnett, J. D. Madden. (2008) A randomized controlled study of human serum albumin and serum substitute supplement as protein supplements for IVF culture and the effect on live birth rates. Human Reproduction 24:4, 782-789
CrossRef53
Human M Fatemi, Bart Fauser, Paul Devroey, Nick S Macklon. 2008. The luteal phase. , 297-308.
CrossRef54
(2008) Blastocyst culture and transfer in clinical-assisted reproduction. Fertility and Sterility 90:5, S174-S177
CrossRef55
2008. Emerging technologies. , 379-387.
CrossRef56
2008. Assisted conception. , 289-329.
CrossRef57
C. Staessen, W. Verpoest, P. Donoso, P. Haentjens, J. Van der Elst, I. Liebaers, P. Devroey. (2008) Preimplantation genetic screening does not improve delivery rate in women under the age of 36 following single-embryo transfer. Human Reproduction 23:12, 2818-2825
CrossRef58
W. Verpoest, B.C. Fauser, E. Papanikolaou, C. Staessen, L. Van Landuyt, P. Donoso, H. Tournaye, I. Liebaers, P. Devroey. (2008) Chromosomal aneuploidy in embryos conceived with unstimulated cycle IVF. Human Reproduction 23:10, 2369-2371
CrossRef59
Ioannis Kosmas, Jossiane Van der Elst, Paul Devroey, Herman Tournaye. (2008) Elective single embryo transfer. The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist 10:3, 163-169
CrossRef60
Aaron K. Styer, Diane L. Wright, Anne M. Wolkovich, Christine Veiga, Thomas L. Toth. (2008) Single-blastocyst transfer decreases twin gestation without affecting pregnancy outcome. Fertility and Sterility 89:6, 1702-1708
CrossRef61
N. Sakugawa, T. Miyamoto, H. Sato, M. Ishikawa, M. Horikawa, H. Hayashi, M. Ishikawa, K. Sengoku. (2008) Isolation of the human ePAB and ePABP2 cDNAs and analysis of the expression patterns. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 25:5, 215-221
CrossRef62
(2008) Consensus on infertility treatment related to polycystic ovary syndrome. Fertility and Sterility 89:3, 505-522
CrossRef63
Dirk Bassler, Victor M. Montori, Matthias Briel, Paul Glasziou, Gordon Guyatt. (2008) Early stopping of randomized clinical trials for overt efficacy is problematic. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 61:3, 241-246
CrossRef64
Y Khalaf, T El-Toukhy, A Coomarasamy, A Kamal, V Bolton, P Braude. (2008) Selective single blastocyst transfer reduces the multiple pregnancy rate and increases pregnancy rates: a pre- and postintervention study. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 115:3, 385-390
CrossRef65
Bruce S. Shapiro, Said T. Daneshmand, Forest C. Garner, Martha Aguirre, Richard Ross. (2008) Contrasting patterns in in vitro fertilization pregnancy rates among fresh autologous, fresh oocyte donor, and cryopreserved cycles with the use of day 5 or day 6 blastocysts may reflect differences in embryo-endometrium synchrony. Fertility and Sterility 89:1, 20-26
CrossRef66
Ariel Weissman, Galia Biran, Hana Nahum, Marek Glezerman, David Levran. (2008) Blastocyst culture and transfer: lessons from an unselected, difficult IVF population. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 17:2, 220-228
CrossRef67
Pierre Vanderzwalmen, Antje Hiemer, Paul Rubner, Magnus Bach, Anton Neyer, Astrid Stecher, Petr Uher, Martin Zintz, Bernard Lejeune, Sabine Vanderzwalmen, Guy Cassuto, Nicolas H Zech. (2008) Blastocyst development after sperm selection at high magnification is associated with size and number of nuclear vacuoles. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 17:5, 617-627
CrossRef68
Sharon E. Moayeri, Rene B. Allen, Wendy R. Brewster, Moon H. Kim, Manuel Porto, Lawrence B. Werlin. (2008) Day-3 embryo morphology predicts euploidy among older subjects. Fertility and Sterility 89:1, 118-123
CrossRef69
Lynn B. Davis, Ruth B. Lathi, Lynn M. Westphal, Amin A. Milki. (2008) Elective single blastocyst transfer in women older than 35. Fertility and Sterility 89:1, 230-231
CrossRef70
Christophe Blockeel, Valerie Schutyser, Anick De Vos, Willem Verpoest, Michel De Vos, Catherine Staessen, Patrick Haentjens, Josiane Van der Elst, Paul Devroey. (2008) Prospectively randomized controlled trial of PGS in IVF/ICSI patients with poor implantation. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 17:6, 848-854
CrossRef71
Yong Gan, Zhen Chen. (2008) A study of the zona piercing process in piezodriven intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Journal of Applied Physics 104:4, 044702
CrossRef72
W. Urdl, R. Felberbaum, W. Küpker. (2007) Problem der Mehrlingsschwangerschaft nach assistierter Reproduktion. Gynäkologische Endokrinologie 5:4, 212-218
CrossRef73
Debbie Blake, Cindy Farquhar, Neil Johnson, Michelle Proctor, Debbie Blake. 2007. Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. .
CrossRef74
Andrea Weghofer, Santiago Munne, Serena Chen, David Barad, Norbert Gleicher. (2007) Lack of association between polycystic ovary syndrome and embryonic aneuploidy. Fertility and Sterility 88:4, 900-905
CrossRef75
Christine C Skiadas, Catherine Racowsky. 2007. Development rate, cumulative scoring, and embryonic viability. , 101-122.
CrossRef76
Carol M Warner. 2007. Immunological aspects of embryo development. , 155-168.
CrossRef77
David K Gardner, John Stevens, Courtney B Sheehan, William B Schoolcraft. 2007. Analysis of blastocyst morphology. , 79-88.
CrossRef78
Siladitya Bhattacharya. (2007) Assisted conception and multiple pregnancies: methods of reducing multiples from assisted reproduction. Expert Review of Obstetrics & Gynecology 2:5, 541-544
CrossRef79
Jonathan Van Blerkom, Susan W Trout. 2007. Oocyte selection in contemporary clinical IVF: do follicular markers of oocyte competence exist?. , 301-324.
CrossRef80
Eric S Surrey. (2007) Elective single embryo transfer: a North American perspective. Expert Review of Obstetrics & Gynecology 2:4, 399-401
CrossRef81
Nicolas H. Zech, Bernard Lejeune, Francoise Puissant, Sabine Vanderzwalmen, Herbert Zech, Pierre Vanderzwalmen. (2007) Prospective evaluation of the optimal time for selecting a single embryo for transfer: day 3 versus day 5. Fertility and Sterility 88:1, 244-246
CrossRef82
Bulent Urman, Kayhan Yakin, Baris Ata, Basak Balaban. (2007) How can we improve current blastocyst grading systems?. Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology 19:3, 273-278
CrossRef83
Laura A Schieve. (2007) Multiple-gestation pregnancies after assisted reproductive technology treatment: population trends and future directions. Women's Health 3:3, 301-307
CrossRef84
Staffan Nilsson, Urban Waldenström, Ann-Britt Engström, Dan Hellberg. (2007) Single blastocyst transfer after ICSI from ejaculate spermatozoa, percutaneous epididymal sperm aspiration (PESA) or testicular sperm extraction (TESE). Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 24:5, 167-171
CrossRef85
Jeffrey D. Fisch, Levent Keskintepe, Michael Ginsburg, Mark Adamowicz, Geoffrey Sher. (2007) Graduated Embryo Score and soluble human leukocyte antigen-G expression improve assisted reproductive technology outcomes and suggest a basis for elective single-embryo transfer. Fertility and Sterility 87:4, 757-763
CrossRef86
Elizabeth J Howland, C R Kennedy. (2007) How old is too old for fertility treatment?. Women's Health 3:2, 155-161
CrossRef87
M.F.G. Verberg, N.S. Macklon, E.M.E.W. Heijnen, B.C.J.M. Fauser. (2007) ART: iatrogenic multiple pregnancy?. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology 21:1, 129-143
CrossRef88
Patricio Donoso, Paul Devroey. (2007) PGD for aneuploidy screening: an expensive hoax?. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology 21:1, 157-168
CrossRef89
Michelle Lane, David K. Gardner. (2007) Embryo culture medium: which is the best?. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology 21:1, 83-100
CrossRef90
Neil Johnson, Debbie Blake, Cindy Farquhar. (2007) Blastocyst or cleavage-stage embryo transfer?. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology 21:1, 21-40
CrossRef91
Van Voorhis, Bradley J., . (2007) In Vitro Fertilization. New England Journal of Medicine 356:4, 379-386
Full Text92
Viveca Söderström-Anttila, Sirpa Vilska. (2007) Five years of single embryo transfer with anonymous and non-anonymous oocyte donation. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 15:4, 428-433
CrossRef93
Christina Bergh. (2007) How to promote singletons. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 15, 22-27
CrossRef94
R. Barnes. (2007) In Vitro Fertilization with Single Blastocyst-Stage versus Single Cleavage-Stage Embryos. Yearbook of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health 2007, 171-172
CrossRef95
Y. Ville. (2006) Chorionicity and mode of fertilization: a long-standing misconception. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 28:5, 635-636
CrossRef96
Schieve, Laura A., . (2006) The Promise of Single-Embryo Transfer. New England Journal of Medicine 354:11, 1190-1193
Full Text97
Dominique Le Lannou, Jean-François Griveau, Marie-Christine Laurent, Annie Gueho, Elisabeth Veron, Karine Morcel. (2006) Contribution of embryo cryopreservation to elective single embryo transfer in IVF–ICSI. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 13:3, 368-375
CrossRef98
Zabeena Pandian, Siladitya Bhattacharya, Ozkan Ozturk, Gamal Serour, Allan Templeton, Zabeena Pandian. 2004. Number of embryos for transfer following in-vitro fertilisation or intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection. .
CrossRef
