Search

Objective: To describe the current practice indications, methodology, and outcomes from a real-world experience of intravaginal culture (IVC) using INVOCELL. Design: A descriptive study outlining real-world experience with INVOCELL that addresses patient selection, ovarian stimulation, embryology laboratory practices, and outcomes. Setting: Five fertility centers in Missouri, Texas, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia. Patients: Four hundred sixty-three patients undergoing 526 cycles. Intervention: IVC using INVOCELL. Main Outcome Measures: Cumulative pregnancy rate and live births. Secondary outcomes of interest included percent good quality embryos. Results: IVC with INVOCELL was primarily used in women 0.8 ng/mL. The mean numbers of retrieved oocytes ranged from 9.2 to 16. Mean numbers of oocytes and sperm-injected oocytes loaded per INVOCELL ranged from a mean of 6.4–9.5 with a reported maximum of 34 oocytes loaded into the device. Most (95%) of the embryos were transferred on day 5. The mean blastocyst recovery per oocyte loaded into the device ranged from 19% to 34%; mean cumulative live birth plus ongoing pregnancy rates ranged from 29% to 53% per cycle start and 40% to 61% per transfer. Conclusions: This study of IVC using INVOCELL as an alternative model for infertility treatment confirms its utility as a viable alternative to standard incubator-based in vitro fertilization. The technology is compatible within the current framework of practice patterns and, when appropriately used, results in acceptable blastocyst recovery and live birth rates. Further use of INVOCELL in other clinical situations is warranted.

This study was conducted to determine if expression of the testis-specific phospholipase C Zeta1 (PLCZ1) correlated with low success or fertilization failure after ICSI in patients with normal parameters after standard semen analysis (SA).Couples43 years with one or two failed or low fertilization ICSI cycles. Standard Semen Analysis (SA) was performed to determine sperm parameters in male partners, whereas females were evaluated for antral follicle counts (AFC), day 3 FSH levels and peak Estradiol (E2) levels. The presence of PLCZ1 in sperm was ascertained using Western blotting and Immunofluorescence (IF) analysis. The ability of sperm to initiate changes in the intracellular concentrations of free calcium ([Ca(2+)]i), which is characteristic of mammalian sperm, was performed after injection of human sperm into mouse eggs loaded with the Ca(2+) sensitive dye fura-2 AM.Male partners of couples with failed or low success ICSI fertilization but with normal SA parameters showed low expression levels of PLCZ1 as determined by western blotting and reduced fluorescent signal during IF studies. In addition, fewer of these males' sperm showed PLCZ1 expression and were able to initiate robust [Ca(2+)]i oscillations upon injection into eggs.Our data suggest that in patients with normal SA parameters but with repeated low fertilization or outright failed fertilization results after ICSI, abnormal PLCZ1 function should be considered as the underlying mechanism responsible for the failure of fertilization.

To assess patient experience and convenience of using progesterone vaginal ring (VR) versus vaginal gel for women requiring luteal phase support during in vitro fertilization (IVF).Post hoc analysis of a prospective, randomized, single-blind, multicenter, phase 3 clinical trial.Twenty-two U.S. IVF centers.Women undergoing IVF (N = 1,297).Randomization to weekly VR or daily gel the day after egg retrieval for up to 10 weeks, with fresh embryo transfer IVF per site-specific procedures.Patient satisfaction questionnaire completed at final study visit.In the women who were taking ≥1 dose of either VR (n = 647) or gel (n = 650),97% reported that learning to use the formulation, remembering to take it at the correct time, and using it as prescribed was "easy" or "somewhat easy." More VR than gel users reported noninterference with daily activity (93.3% vs. 74.7%, P.001), sexual comfort (80.3% vs. 67.8%, P.001), and sexual desire (73.8% vs. 61.8%, P.001), as well as not being bothered during sexual intercourse (66.9% vs. 39.2%, P.001). More gel than VR users reported no difficulty with application (97.4% vs. 80.9%, P.001). Among women who had previously used progesterone during IVF, more VR users than gel users preferred their currently assigned treatment to their previous treatment (91.4% vs. 83.0%, P=.03).Weekly progesterone VR and daily progesterone gel were easy to use, with limited impact on quality of life. Overall, the VR appeared to interfere less with daily life, social activities, and sexual activity although the gel was less difficult or stressful to apply.NCT00615251.