{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,18]],"date-time":"2026-08-18T02:36:40Z","timestamp":1787020600168,"version":"build-2736575974"},"reference-count":29,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,2,13]],"date-time":"2024-02-13T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1707782400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,2,13]],"date-time":"2024-02-13T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1707782400000},"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 Biol Endocrinol"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) represents a vague clinical condition with an unclear diagnostic challenge that lacks solid scientific underpinning. Although euploid embryos have demonstrated consistent implantation capabilities across various age groups, a unanimous agreement regarding the advantages of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) in managing RIF is absent. The ongoing discussion about whether chromosomal aneuploidy in embryos significantly contributes to recurrent implantation failure remains unsettled. Despite active discussions in recent times, a universally accepted characterization of recurrent implantation failure remains elusive. We aimed in this study to measure the reproductive performance of vitrified-warmed euploid embryos transferred to the uterus in successive cycles.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      This observational cohort study included women (\n                      <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u2009387) with an anatomically normal uterus who underwent oocyte retrieval for PGT-A treatment with at least one biopsied blastocyst, between January 2017 and December 2021 at a university-affiliated public fertility center. The procedures involved in this study included ICSI, blastocyst culture, trophectoderm biopsy and comprehensive 24-chromosome analysis of preimplantation embryos using Next Generation Sequencing (NGS). Women, who failed a vitrified-warmed euploid embryo transfer, had successive blastocyst transfer cycles (FET) for a total of three using remaining cryopreserved euploid blastocysts from the same oocyte retrieval cycle. The primary endpoints were sustained implantation rate (SIR) and live birth rate (LBR) per vitrified-warmed single euploid embryo. The secondary endpoints were mean euploidy rate (m-ER) per cohort of biopsied blastocysts from each patient, as well as pregnancy and miscarriage rates.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      The mean age of the patient population was 33.4 years (95% CI 32.8\u201333.9). A total of 1,641 embryos derived from the first oocyte retrieval cycle were biopsied and screened. We found no associations between the m-ER and the number of previous failed IVF cycles among different ranges of maternal age at oocyte retrieval (\n                      <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.45). Pairwise comparisons showed a significant decrease in the sustained implantation rate (44.7% vs. 30%;\n                      <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.01) and the livebirth rate per single euploid blastocyst (37.1% vs. 25%;\n                      <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.02) between the 1st and 3rd FET. The cumulative SIR and LBR after up to three successive single embryo transfers were 77.1% and 68.8%, respectively. We found that the live birth rate of the first vitrified-warmed euploid blastocyst transferred decreased significantly with the increasing number of previously failed IVF attempts by categories (45.3% vs. 35.8% vs. 27.6%;\n                      <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.04). A comparable decrease in sustained implantation rate was also observed but did not reach statistical significance (50% vs. 44.2 vs. 37.9%;\n                      <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u2009NS). Using a logistic regression model, we confirmed the presence of a negative association between the number of previous IVF failed attempts and the live birth rate per embryo transfer cycle (OR\u2009=\u20090.76; 95% CI 0.62\u20130.94;\n                      <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.01).\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>These findings are vital for enhancing patient counseling and refining management strategies for individuals facing recurrent implantation failure. By tailoring interventions based on age and ovarian reserve, healthcare professionals can offer more personalized guidance, potentially improving the overall success rates and patient experiences in fertility treatments.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Trial registration number<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>N\/A.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1186\/s12958-024-01192-z","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,2,13]],"date-time":"2024-02-13T01:02:18Z","timestamp":1707786138000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":5,"title":["The reproductive potential of vitrified-warmed euploid embryos declines following repeated uterine transfers"],"prefix":"10.1186","volume":"22","author":[{"given":"A.","family":"Almohammadi","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"F.","family":"Choucair","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"L.","family":"El Taha","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"H.","family":"Burjaq","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"M.","family":"Albader","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"A. B.","family":"Cavanillas","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-9543-042X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Johnny T.","family":"Awwad","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,2,13]]},"reference":[{"issue":"5","key":"1192_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1021","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2012.02.029","volume":"97","author":"M Das","year":"2012","unstructured":"Das M, Holzer HE. Recurrent implantation failure: gamete and embryo factors. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(5):1021\u20137.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"issue":"1","key":"1192_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"9","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2017.05.028","volume":"108","author":"N Macklon","year":"2017","unstructured":"Macklon N. Recurrent implantation failure is a pathology with a specific transcriptomic signature. Fertil Steril. 2017;108(1):9\u201314.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"issue":"4","key":"1192_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"409","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rbmo.2013.12.006","volume":"28","author":"LT Polanski","year":"2014","unstructured":"Polanski LT, Baumgarten MN, Quenby S, Brosens J, Campbell BK, Raine-Fenning NJ. What exactly do we mean by \u2018recurrent implantation failure\u2019? A systematic review and opinion. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;28(4):409\u201323.","journal-title":"Reprod Biomed Online"},{"key":"1192_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"284","DOI":"10.1007\/s10815-007-9147-4","volume":"24","author":"J Rinehart","year":"2007","unstructured":"Rinehart J. Recurrent implantation failure: definition. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2007;24:284\u20137.","journal-title":"J Assist Reprod Genet"},{"issue":"5","key":"1192_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1039","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2012.03.010","volume":"97","author":"A Simon","year":"2012","unstructured":"Simon A, Laufer N. Repeated implantation failure: clinical approach. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(5):1039\u201343.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"issue":"2","key":"1192_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"202","DOI":"10.1093\/humupd\/dmy044","volume":"25","author":"L Craciunas","year":"2019","unstructured":"Craciunas L, Gallos I, Chu J, Bourne T, Quenby S, Brosens JJ, et al. Conventional and modern markers of endometrial receptivity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2019;25(2):202\u201323.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod Update"},{"key":"1192_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Cornelisse S, Zagers M, Kostova E, Fleischer K, van Wely M, Mastenbroek S. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (abnormal number of chromosomes) in in vitro fertilisation. Cochrane Database Syst Reviews. 2020(9).","DOI":"10.1002\/14651858.CD005291.pub3"},{"issue":"9","key":"1192_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2215","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/dev148","volume":"30","author":"JDF Habbema","year":"2015","unstructured":"Habbema JDF, Eijkemans MJ, Leridon H, te Velde ER. Realizing a desired family size: when should couples start? Hum Reprod. 2015;30(9):2215\u201321.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod"},{"issue":"1","key":"1192_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"32","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rbmo.2017.09.012","volume":"36","author":"E Somigliana","year":"2018","unstructured":"Somigliana E, Vigano P, Busnelli A, Paffoni A, Vegetti W, Vercellini P. Repeated implantation failure at the crossroad between statistics, clinics and over-diagnosis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2018;36(1):32\u20138.","journal-title":"Reprod Biomed Online"},{"issue":"2","key":"1192_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"305","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/deaa317","volume":"36","author":"D Cimadomo","year":"2021","unstructured":"Cimadomo D, Craciunas L, Vermeulen N, Vomstein K, Toth B. Definition, diagnostic and therapeutic options in recurrent implantation failure: an international survey of clinicians and embryologists. Hum Reprod. 2021;36(2):305\u201317.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod"},{"issue":"1","key":"1192_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1747","DOI":"10.1038\/s41598-021-81439-6","volume":"11","author":"A Busnelli","year":"2021","unstructured":"Busnelli A, Somigliana E, Cirillo F, Baggiani A, Levi-Setti PE. Efficacy of therapies and interventions for repeated embryo implantation failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):1747.","journal-title":"Sci Rep"},{"issue":"4","key":"1192_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"873","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2016.02.018","volume":"105","author":"C Fox","year":"2016","unstructured":"Fox C, Morin S, Jeong J-W, Scott RT Jr, Lessey BA. Local and systemic factors and implantation: what is the evidence? Fertil Steril. 2016;105(4):873\u201384.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"issue":"1","key":"1192_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"45","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2020.07.002","volume":"115","author":"P Pirtea","year":"2021","unstructured":"Pirtea P, De Ziegler D, Tao X, Sun L, Zhan Y, Ayoubi JM, et al. Rate of true recurrent implantation failure is low: results of three successive frozen euploid single embryo transfers. Fertil Steril. 2021;115(1):45\u201353.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"issue":"6","key":"1192_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1071","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2019.07.1346","volume":"112","author":"S Munn\u00e9","year":"2019","unstructured":"Munn\u00e9 S, Kaplan B, Frattarelli JL, Child T, Nakhuda G, Shamma FN, et al. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy versus morphology as selection criteria for single frozen-thawed embryo transfer in good-prognosis patients: a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Fertil Steril. 2019;112(6):1071\u20139. e7.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"issue":"4","key":"1192_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"870","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2012.01.104","volume":"97","author":"RT Scott Jr","year":"2012","unstructured":"Scott RT Jr, Ferry K, Su J, Tao X, Scott K, Treff NR. Comprehensive chromosome screening is highly predictive of the reproductive potential of human embryos: a prospective, blinded, nonselection study. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(4):870\u20135.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"issue":"12","key":"1192_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2340","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/dez229","volume":"34","author":"T Sato","year":"2019","unstructured":"Sato T, Sugiura-Ogasawara M, Ozawa F, Yamamoto T, Kato T, Kurahashi H, et al. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: a comparison of live birth rates in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss due to embryonic aneuploidy or recurrent implantation failure. Hum Reprod. 2019;34(12):2340\u20138.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod"},{"issue":"sup1","key":"1192_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"17","DOI":"10.1080\/09513590.2021.2006466","volume":"37","author":"V Fodina","year":"2021","unstructured":"Fodina V, Dudorova A, Erenpreiss J. Evaluation of embryo aneuploidy (PGT-A) and endometrial receptivity (ERA) testing in patients with recurrent implantation failure in ICSI cycles. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2021;37(sup1):17\u201320.","journal-title":"Gynecol Endocrinol"},{"key":"1192_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1923","DOI":"10.1007\/s43032-021-00519-0","volume":"28","author":"J Tong","year":"2021","unstructured":"Tong J, Niu Y, Wan A, Zhang T. Next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) of trophectoderm biopsy for recurrent implantation failure (RIF) patients: a retrospective study. Reproductive Sci. 2021;28:1923\u20139.","journal-title":"Reproductive Sci"},{"key":"1192_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1021","DOI":"10.1007\/s10815-021-02077-5","volume":"38","author":"G Coticchio","year":"2021","unstructured":"Coticchio G, Behr B, Campbell A, Meseguer M, Morbeck DE, Pisaturo V, et al. Fertility technologies and how to optimize laboratory performance to support the shortening of time to birth of a healthy singleton: a Delphi consensus. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021;38:1021\u201343.","journal-title":"J Assist Reprod Genet"},{"issue":"9","key":"1192_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1851","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/deu173","volume":"29","author":"D McLernon","year":"2014","unstructured":"McLernon D, Te Velde E, Steyerberg E, Mol B, Bhattacharya S. Clinical prediction models to inform individualized decision-making in subfertile couples: a stratified medicine approach. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(9):1851\u20138.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod"},{"key":"1192_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"McLernon DJ, Steyerberg EW, Te Velde ER, Lee AJ, Bhattacharya S. Predicting the chances of a live birth after one or more complete cycles of in vitro fertilisation: population based study of linked cycle data from 113 873 women. BMJ. 2016;355.","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.i5735"},{"issue":"26","key":"1192_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2483","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1110238","volume":"366","author":"B Luke","year":"2012","unstructured":"Luke B, Brown MB, Wantman E, Lederman A, Gibbons W, Schattman GL, et al. Cumulative birth rates with linked assisted reproductive technology cycles. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(26):2483\u201391.","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"4","key":"1192_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"929","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/deab014","volume":"36","author":"D Cimadomo","year":"2021","unstructured":"Cimadomo D, Capalbo A, Dovere L, Tacconi L, Soscia D, Giancani A, et al. Leave the past behind: women\u2019s reproductive history shows no association with blastocysts\u2019 euploidy and limited association with live birth rates after euploid embryo transfers. Hum Reprod. 2021;36(4):929\u201340.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod"},{"issue":"10","key":"1192_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2541","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/dep193","volume":"24","author":"M Koler","year":"2009","unstructured":"Koler M, Achache H, Tsafrir A, Smith Y, Revel A, Reich R. Disrupted gene pattern in patients with repeated in vitro fertilization (IVF) failure. Hum Reprod. 2009;24(10):2541\u20138.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod"},{"issue":"6","key":"1192_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1244","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/deu070","volume":"29","author":"M Ruiz-Alonso","year":"2014","unstructured":"Ruiz-Alonso M, Galindo N, Pellicer A, Sim\u00f3n C. What a difference two days make:personalized embryo transfer (pET) paradigm: a case report and pilot study. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(6):1244\u20137.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod"},{"issue":"6","key":"1192_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e0157696","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0157696","volume":"11","author":"Y Choi","year":"2016","unstructured":"Choi Y, Kim H-R, Lim EJ, Park M, Yoon JA, Kim YS, et al. Integrative analyses of uterine transcriptome and microRNAome reveal compromised LIF-STAT3 signaling and progesterone response in the endometrium of patients with recurrent\/repeated implantation failure (RIF). PLoS ONE. 2016;11(6):e0157696.","journal-title":"PLoS ONE"},{"issue":"1","key":"1192_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"19411","DOI":"10.1038\/srep19411","volume":"6","author":"YE Koot","year":"2016","unstructured":"Koot YE, Van Hooff SR, Boomsma CM, Van Leenen D, Groot Koerkamp MJ, Goddijn M, et al. An endometrial gene expression signature accurately predicts recurrent implantation failure after IVF. Sci Rep. 2016;6(1):19411.","journal-title":"Sci Rep"},{"issue":"3","key":"1192_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"534","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2015.05.022","volume":"104","author":"A Diez-Juan","year":"2015","unstructured":"Diez-Juan A, Rubio C, Marin C, Martinez S, Al-Asmar N, Riboldi M, et al. Mitochondrial DNA content as a viability score in human euploid embryos: less is better. Fertil Steril. 2015;104(3):534\u201341. e1.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"issue":"1","key":"1192_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e0227619","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0227619","volume":"15","author":"FK Boynukalin","year":"2020","unstructured":"Boynukalin FK, Gultomruk M, Cavkaytar S, Turgut E, Findikli N, Serdarogullari M, et al. Parameters impacting the live birth rate per transfer after frozen single euploid blastocyst transfer. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(1):e0227619.","journal-title":"PLoS ONE"}],"container-title":["Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12958-024-01192-z.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1186\/s12958-024-01192-z\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12958-024-01192-z.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,2,17]],"date-time":"2024-02-17T09:05:41Z","timestamp":1708160741000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/rbej.biomedcentral.com\/articles\/10.1186\/s12958-024-01192-z"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,2,13]]},"references-count":29,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,12]]}},"alternative-id":["1192"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12958-024-01192-z","relation":{},"ISSN":["1477-7827"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1477-7827","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2024,2,13]]},"assertion":[{"value":"17 December 2023","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"4 February 2024","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"13 February 2024","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"Institutional review board (IRB) approval was obtained from Hamad Medical Corporation Hospitals for this study (MRC-01-22-181).","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethics approval and consent to participate"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Consent for publication"}},{"value":"The authors declare that they have no competing interests.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Competing interests"}}],"article-number":"23"}}