{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,2,1]],"date-time":"2026-02-01T02:22:40Z","timestamp":1769912560139,"version":"3.49.0"},"reference-count":16,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,9]],"date-time":"2020-07-09T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1594252800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,9]],"date-time":"2020-07-09T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1594252800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Reprod. Sci."],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,1]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:p>Accurate knowledge of the live birth rate for cleavage stage embryos is essential to determine an appropriate number of embryos to transfer at once. Results from previous studies lack details needed for practical use. This is a mathematical analysis and model building study of day 3 cleavage stage embryo transfers. A total of 996 embryos were transferred in 274 fresh and 83 frozen embryo transfers. Embryo morphology was divided into 4 groups based on number of cells and fragmentation percentage. Each embryo transfer was modeled as an equation equating the sum of the live birth rates of the transferred embryos to the number of live births that resulted. The least squares solution to the system of embryo transfer equations was determined using linear algebra. This analysis was repeated for ages 35 to 42\u00a0years old at oocyte retrieval. The best fit live birth rates per embryo in the age group centered on 35\u00a0years old were 29%, 13%, 10%, and 9% for embryos in the 8-cell with \u2264\u20095% fragmentation, 8-cell with &gt;\u20095% fragmentation, 9\u201312 cell, and 6\u20137 cell groups, respectively. Cleavage stage embryos with fewer than 6 cells on day 3 had very low best fit live birth rates close to 0% at age 39\u00a0years and were excluded from the primary analysis to prevent overfitting. These live birth rates can be used with a simple embryo transfer model to predict rates of single and multiple gestation prior to a planned cleavage stage embryo transfer.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1007\/s43032-020-00249-9","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,9]],"date-time":"2020-07-09T19:07:46Z","timestamp":1594321666000},"page":"43-51","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":11,"title":["Effect of Age and Morphology on Live Birth Rate After Cleavage Stage Embryo Transfer"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"28","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-8910-7434","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Michael","family":"Awadalla","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-4199-2355","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Nicole","family":"Vestal","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-7910-9655","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Lynda","family":"McGinnis","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-6290-9450","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Ali","family":"Ahmady","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,9]]},"reference":[{"key":"249_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"901","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2017.02.107","volume":"107","author":"A Penzias","year":"2017","unstructured":"Penzias A, Bendikson K, Butts S, Coutifaris C, Fossum G, Falcone T, et al. Guidance on the limits to the number of embryos to transfer: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2017;107:901\u20133. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2017.02.107.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"key":"249_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2761","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2011.02.008","volume":"95","author":"M Vernon","year":"2011","unstructured":"Vernon M, Stern JE, Ball GD, Wininger D, Mayer J, Racowsky C. Utility of the national embryo morphology data collection by the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technologies (SART): correlation between day-3 morphology grade and live-birth outcome. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:2761\u20133. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2011.02.008.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"key":"249_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1338","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2014.07.1242","volume":"102","author":"B Luke","year":"2014","unstructured":"Luke B, Brown MB, Stern JE, Jindal SK, Racowsky C, Ball GD. Using the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome System morphological measures to predict live birth after assisted reproductive technology. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:1338\u201344. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2014.07.1242.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"key":"249_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"437","DOI":"10.1007\/s10815-010-9443-2","volume":"27","author":"C Racowsky","year":"2010","unstructured":"Racowsky C, Vernon M, Mayer J, Ball GD, Behr B, Pomeroy KO, et al. Standardization of grading embryo morphology. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2010;27:437\u20139. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10815-010-9443-2.","journal-title":"J Assist Reprod Genet"},{"key":"249_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1985","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2011.02.009","volume":"95","author":"C Racowsky","year":"2011","unstructured":"Racowsky C, Stern JE, Gibbons WE, Behr B, Pomeroy KO, Biggers JD. National collection of embryo morphology data into Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcomes Reporting System: associations among day 3 cell number, fragmentation and blastomere asymmetry, and live birth rate. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:1985\u20139. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2011.02.009.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"key":"249_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"825","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2011.11.048","volume":"97","author":"S Pfeifer","year":"2012","unstructured":"Pfeifer S, Fritz M, McClure D, Adamson D, Barnhart K, Catherino W, et al. Multiple gestation associated with infertility therapy: an American Society for Reproductive Medicine Practice Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:825\u201334. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2011.11.048.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"key":"249_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1621","DOI":"10.1007\/s10815-014-0346-5","volume":"31","author":"ML L\u00f3pez Regalado","year":"2014","unstructured":"L\u00f3pez Regalado ML, Clavero A, Gonzalvo MC, Serrano M, Mart\u00ednez L, Mozas J, et al. Cumulative live birth rate after two single frozen embryo transfers (eSFET) versus a double frozen embryo transfer (DFET) with cleavage stage embryos: a retrospective cohort study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014;31:1621\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10815-014-0346-5.","journal-title":"J Assist Reprod Genet"},{"key":"249_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2392","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa041032","volume":"351","author":"A Thurin","year":"2004","unstructured":"Thurin A, Hausken J, Hillensj\u00f6 T, Jablonowska B, Pinborg A, Strandell A, et al. Elective single-embryo transfer versus double-embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2392\u2013402. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1056\/NEJMoa041032.","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"key":"249_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1626","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2014.09.015","volume":"102","author":"V Gunnala","year":"2014","unstructured":"Gunnala V, Reichman DE, Meyer L, Davis OK, Rosenwaks Z. Beyond the American Society for Reproductive Medicine transfer guidelines: how many cleavage-stage embryos are safe to transfer in women \u226543 years old? Fertil Steril. 2014;102:1626\u20131632.e1. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2014.09.015.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"key":"249_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2345","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/14.9.2345","volume":"14","author":"E Van Royen","year":"1999","unstructured":"Van Royen E, Mangelschots K, De Neubourg D, Valkenburg M, Van De Meerssche MV, Ryckaert G, et al. Characterization of a top quality embryo, a step towards single-embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:2345\u20139. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/humrep\/14.9.2345.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod"},{"key":"249_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"c6945","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.c6945","volume":"342","author":"DJ McLernon","year":"2011","unstructured":"McLernon DJ, Harrild K, Bergh C, Davies MJ, De Neubourg D, Dumoulin JCM, et al. Clinical effectiveness of elective single versus double embryo transfer: meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;342:c6945. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.c6945.","journal-title":"BMJ."},{"key":"249_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"835","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2011.11.050","volume":"97","author":"S Pfeifer","year":"2012","unstructured":"Pfeifer S, Fritz M, McClure R, Adamson G, Barnhart K, Catherino W, et al. Elective single-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:835\u201342. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2011.11.050.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"key":"249_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Awadalla MS. MATLAB code for effect of age and morphology on live birth rate after cleavage stage embryo transfer. Mendeley Data. 2020;V1. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.17632\/22mk652zzj.1.","DOI":"10.17632\/22mk652zzj.1"},{"key":"249_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"468","DOI":"10.1016\/S0015-0282(16)46933-5","volume":"39","author":"AL Speirs","year":"1983","unstructured":"Speirs AL, Lopata A, Gronow MJ, Kellow GN, Johnston WI. Analysis of the benefits and risks of multiple embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 1983;39:468\u201371. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/S0015-0282(16)46933-5.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"key":"249_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"782","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2004.10.028","volume":"83","author":"SP Torsky","year":"2005","unstructured":"Torsky SP, Amato P, Cisneros PL, Sangi-Haghpeykar H, Trukhacheva EV, Carson SA. Algorithm to predict assisted reproductive technology pregnancy outcome reveals minimal embryo synergy. Fertil Steril. 2005;83:782\u20134. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2004.10.028.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"key":"249_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"548","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/del403","volume":"22","author":"J Holte","year":"2007","unstructured":"Holte J, Berglund L, Milton K, Garello C, Gennarelli G, Revelli A, et al. Construction of an evidence-based integrated morphology cleavage embryo score for implantation potential of embryos scored and transferred on day 2 after oocyte retrieval. Hum Reprod. 2007;22:548\u201357. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/humrep\/del403.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod"}],"container-title":["Reproductive Sciences"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s43032-020-00249-9.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s43032-020-00249-9\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s43032-020-00249-9.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,7,8]],"date-time":"2021-07-08T23:14:52Z","timestamp":1625786092000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s43032-020-00249-9"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,9]]},"references-count":16,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,1]]}},"alternative-id":["249"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s43032-020-00249-9","relation":{},"ISSN":["1933-7191","1933-7205"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1933-7191","type":"print"},{"value":"1933-7205","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,9]]},"assertion":[{"value":"18 April 2020","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"10 June 2020","order":2,"name":"revised","label":"Revised","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"30 June 2020","order":3,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"9 July 2020","order":4,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Compliance with Ethical Standards"}},{"value":"The authors declare that they have no competing interests.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Conflict of Interest"}},{"value":"This study was approved by the University of Southern California IRB through exempt review.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethics Approval"}},{"value":"The MATLAB code used for the data analysis in this manuscript is being provided through Mendeley Data and can be accessed through the link in the reference\u00a0[].","order":4,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Code Availability"}}]}}