Blastocyst vs cleavage-stage embryo transfer: systematic review and meta-analysis of reproductive outcomes

Blastocyst transfer in assisted reproduction techniques could be advantageous because the timing of exposure of the embryo to the uterine environment is more analogous to a natural cycle and permits embryo self-selection after activation of the embryonic genome on day 3. Conversely, the in-vitro environment is likely to be inferior to that in vivo, and in-vitro culture beyond embryonic genomic activation could potentially harm the embryo. Our objective was to identify, appraise and summarize the available evidence comparing the effectiveness of blastocyst vs cleavage-stage embryo transfer.

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the transfer of blastocysts (days 5-6) with the transfer of cleavage-stage embryos (days 2-3) in women undergoing in-vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. The last electronic searches were run on 1 August 2016. Abstracts and studies with a mean difference between the two study groups of > 0.5 for the number of embryos transferred were excluded.

We screened 1187 records and assessed 33 potentially eligible studies. Twelve studies were included, comprising a total of 1200 women undergoing blastocyst transfer and 1218 undergoing cleavage-stage embryo transfer. We observed low-quality evidence of no significant difference of blastocyst transfer on live birth/ongoing pregnancy (relative risk (RR), 1.11 (95% CI, 0.92-1.35), 10 RCTs, 1940 women, I²  = 54%), clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.10 (95% CI, 0.93-1.31), 12 RCTs, 2418 women, I²  = 64%), cumulative pregnancy (RR, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.67-1.16), four RCTs, 524 women, I²  = 63%) and miscarriage (RR, 1.08 (95% CI, 0.74-1.56), 10 RCTs, 763 pregnancies, I²  = 0%). There was moderate-quality evidence of a decrease in the number of women with surplus embryos after the blastocyst-stage embryo transfer (RR, 0.78 (95% CI, 0.66-0.91)). Overall, the quality of the evidence was limited by the quality of the included studies and by unexplained inconsistency across studies.

Current evidence shows no superiority of blastocyst compared with cleavage-stage embryo transfer in clinical practice. As the quality of the evidence for the primary outcomes is low, additional well-designed RCTs are still needed before robust conclusions can be drawn. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.