The Experts below are selected from a list of 261 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
J. Dor - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
should Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer be offered to all patients with unexplained repeated in vitro fertilization cycle failures
Journal of Ovarian Research, 2014Co-Authors: J. Dor, Jacob Levron, Itai Gat, Gil M Yerushalmi, Masha BrengauzAbstract:Background One of the suggest strategy for patients with repeated implantation failure (RIF) is Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT). However, no data exist regarding to the issue of when and under which circumstances should ZIFT be offered to patients with RIF? We therefore aimed to examine whether repeated implantation failure (RIF) patients characteristics or their previous controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) variables may differentiate between those who will conceive following a ZIFT cycle and those who will not.
-
Should Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer be offered to all patients with unexplained repeated in-vitro fertilization cycle failures?
Journal of ovarian research, 2014Co-Authors: Itai Gat, J. Dor, Jacob Levron, Gil M Yerushalmi, Masha Brengauz, Raoul OrvietoAbstract:One of the suggest strategy for patients with repeated implantation failure (RIF) is Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT). However, no data exist regarding to the issue of when and under which circumstances should ZIFT be offered to patients with RIF? We therefore aimed to examine whether repeated implantation failure (RIF) patients characteristics or their previous controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) variables may differentiate between those who will conceive following a ZIFT cycle and those who will not. Forty seven consecutive women admitted to our IVF unit during a 7 year period, who underwent ZIFT for RIF, were included. Ovarian stimulation characteristics, number of oocytes retrieved and number and quality of Zygotes/embryos Transferred were assessed and compared between the ZIFT cycle and the previous IVF/ICSI cycle and between those who conceived following the ZIFT cycle and those who did not. Twelve clinical pregnancies (clinical pregnancy rate- 25.5%) were recorded following the ZIFT cycle. Those who benefit from ZIFT were young patients (≤31 yrs), who underwent ≤6 cycle attempts, yielding over eight 2PN embryos with low (≤0.4) ratio of number of top-quality embryos to total 2PN embryos. Moreover, in those destined for a ZIFT cycle, only those with >7 2PN embryo should undergo a Transfer of at least five 2PN embryos. Further large prospective studies are needed to identify the specific characteristics of RIF women who may benefit from ZIFT.
-
Should Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer be offered to all patients with unexplained repeated in-vitro fertilization cycle failures?
Journal of Ovarian Research, 2014Co-Authors: Itai Gat, J. Dor, Jacob Levron, Gil M Yerushalmi, Masha Brengauz, Raoul OrvietoAbstract:Background One of the suggest strategy for patients with repeated implantation failure (RIF) is Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT). However, no data exist regarding to the issue of when and under which circumstances should ZIFT be offered to patients with RIF? We therefore aimed to examine whether repeated implantation failure (RIF) patients characteristics or their previous controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) variables may differentiate between those who will conceive following a ZIFT cycle and those who will not. Methods Forty seven consecutive women admitted to our IVF unit during a 7 year period, who underwent ZIFT for RIF, were included. Ovarian stimulation characteristics, number of oocytes retrieved and number and quality of Zygotes/embryos Transferred were assessed and compared between the ZIFT cycle and the previous IVF/ICSI cycle and between those who conceived following the ZIFT cycle and those who did not. Results Twelve clinical pregnancies (clinical pregnancy rate- 25.5%) were recorded following the ZIFT cycle. Those who benefit from ZIFT were young patients (≤31 yrs), who underwent ≤6 cycle attempts, yielding over eight 2PN embryos with low (≤0.4) ratio of number of top-quality embryos to total 2PN embryos. Moreover, in those destined for a ZIFT cycle, only those with >7 2PN embryo should undergo a Transfer of at least five 2PN embryos. Conclusions Further large prospective studies are needed to identify the specific characteristics of RIF women who may benefit from ZIFT.
-
Comparison of Zygote Intrafallopian tube Transfer and transcervical uterine embryo Transfer in patients with repeated implantation failure
European journal of obstetrics gynecology and reproductive biology, 2005Co-Authors: Dilek Aslan, Jacob Levron, Shai E. Elizur, Adrian Shulman, Liat Lerner-geva, David Bider, J. DorAbstract:This study was designed to evaluate the role of Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT) procedure in patients with repeated failure of implantation. A total of 141 ZIFT cycles of 132 women and 145 embryo Transfer (ET) cycles of 97 women in whom five or more embryos were Transferred were included in this study. Transcervical uterine embryo Transfer and ZIFT cycle outcome in patients with five or more previous implantation failure were compared. Embryos were Transferred by laparoscopy into the fallopian tube 24-27 h following oocytes retrieval in the ZIFT group. In the ET group, embryos were Transferred transcervically on the third day following oocytes retrieval. The mean age was 34+/-4.9 and 34.9+/-5.0 years in ZIFT and ET group, respectively. No difference was determined between the two groups regarding the basal FSH, E2 value on the day of HCG injection and the number of oocytes retrieved or fertilized. The implantation rate was 6.5% versus 7.2%, clinical pregnancy rate was 22.7% versus 24.8% and live birth rate was 21.2% versus 16.5% in ZIFT and ET groups, respectively. Implementation of ZIFT procedure in patients with repeated implantation failure is not superior to transcervical uterine embryo Transfer.
-
Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer may improve pregnancy rate in patients with repeated failure of implantation
Fertility and sterility, 1998Co-Authors: David Levran, Shlomo Mashiach, J. Dor, Jacob Levron, Jacob FarhiAbstract:To evaluate the efficacy of Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT) on implantation rates and pregnancy rates (PRs) in patients with repeated failure of implantation in IVF-ET cycles. A case-control study. Criteria for patient selection included male factor or unexplained infertility, normal uterine cavity, and at least three failures of implantation in IVF-ET cycles in which at least three embryos were placed per Transfer. Data on 70 patients who underwent 92 ZIFT cycles are presented. A control group consisted of patients with the same selection criteria who underwent an additional standard IVF-ET cycle during the same time period. Ovulation induction consisted of down-regulation with GnRH analogue followed by ovarian stimulation with FSH and hMG. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection was performed on the oocytes of all patients with male factor infertility. Zygotes were Transferred by laparoscopy into the fallopian tube 24-26 hours after oocyte retrieval. Implantation rates and PRs in the ZIFT and control groups were compared. The PRs and implantation rates were significantly higher in the ZIFT group than in the control group: 34.2% (24/70) and 8.7% (29/333) versus 17.1% (12/70) and 4.4% (13/289), respectively (P = 0.002 and P = 0.04). The cumulative conception rate for two ZIFT cycles was 59.3%. Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer should be considered a beneficial mode of treatment for patients with repeated failure of implantation in IVF and transcervical ET. More prospective randomized studies are needed to support this observation.
David Levran - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer among patients with repeated implantation failure.
International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2012Co-Authors: Ariel Weissman, Eran Horowitz, Amir Ravhon, Hana Nahum, Abraham Golan, David LevranAbstract:Abstract Objective To summarize the experience of a single center with laparoscopic Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT) performed exclusively among patients with high-order repeated implantation failure (RIF) following in vitro fertilization-embryo Transfer (IVF-ET). Methods A retrospective cohort study was performed at the Edith Wolfson Medical Center, a tertiary referral university hospital located in Holon, Israel. A group of 176 patients with 8.15 ± 3.9 previously failed IVF-ET cycles underwent 280 ZIFT procedures between 1995 and 2010. The main outcome measure was the live birth rate per patient treated. Results In all, there were 274 fresh and 6 frozen ZIFT cycles recorded in the study cohort, resulting in 96 clinical pregnancies per attempt (34.3%) and 72 live births (25.7%). The live birth rate per patient was 39.8%. Conclusion The use of ZIFT remains a powerful tool in the clinical management of selected patients with high-order RIF. This procedure should be kept in mind when all other measures fail among patients with at least 1 unobstructed fallopian tube.
-
Prospective evaluation of blastocyst stage Transfer vs. Zygote Intrafallopian tube Transfer in patients with repeated implantation failure
Fertility and sterility, 2002Co-Authors: David Levran, Jacob Farhi, Hana Nahum, Moshe Royburt, Marek Glezerman, Ariel WeissmanAbstract:Abstract Objective: To compare extended culture with blastocyst stage Transfer and Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT) in the management of IVF patients with repeated implantation failure. Design: Prospective, nonrandomized study. Setting: An IVF unit at a university hospital. Patient(s): Sixty-four infertile patients with more than three previous failed IVF-ET attempts. Intervention(s): Patients were allocated to undergo either blastocyst stage Transfer (Group 1; n=32) or ZIFT (Group 2; n=32). Main Outcome Measure(s): Implantation, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rates. Result(s): Patient characteristics and response to stimulation were comparable for both groups. Totals of 84.3% and 97% of the patients underwent blastocyst Transfer and ZIFT, respectively. Significantly more embryos were Transferred through ZIFT (5.5±0.8) as compared with blastocyst Transfer (2.3±1.4), and there were significantly more cycles with embryo cryopreservation in the ZIFT group as compared to the blastocyst Transfer group (15/32 vs. 4/32, respectively). Implantation rate (13.6% vs. 1.4%), clinical pregnancy rate (40.6% vs. 3.1%), and live birth rates (38.7% vs. 0%) were all significantly higher in the ZIFT group as compared to the blastocyst Transfer group, respectively. Conclusion(s): Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer is a powerful clinical tool in the management of patients with RIF. In contrast, blastocyst stage Transfer fails to improve the outcome in this poor-prognosis group. The pathophysiology of RIF should be the subject of intense investigation to allow the introduction of appropriate therapeutic measures earlier in the course of treatment.
-
Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer in patients with tubal factor infertility after repeated failure of implantation with in vitro fertilization–embryo Transfer
Fertility and sterility, 2000Co-Authors: Jacob Farhi, Ariel Weissman, Hana Nahum, David LevranAbstract:Abstract Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT) in terms of implantation and pregnancy rates in patients with tubal factor infertility and repeated implantation failure in IVF-ET cycles. Design: Retrospective analysis of ZIFT cycles. Setting: An IVF unit in a university hospital. Patient(s): Criteria for patient selection for ZIFT included at least four failures of implantation in IVF-ET cycles in which at least 3 embryos were replaced per Transfer and a cause of infertility diagnosed as male, unexplained, or tubal factor with proof of one patient tube. Intervention(s): Four to six Zygotes were Transferred by laparoscopy into the fallopian tube 24–26 hours after oocyte retrieval. Main Outcome Measure(s): Implantation and pregnancy rates were determined in 112 ZIFT cycles performed in 81 patients with repeated failure of implantation. Results were further stratified for patients with tubal factor (n = 15) and patients without tubal factor (n = 66). Result(s): The pregnancy and implantation rates for all ZIFT cycles were 35.1% and 11.1%, respectively. Pregnancy and implantation rates per cycle in patients with tubal factor versus patients without tubal factor were 26.6% versus 37.1% and 9.4% versus 11.4%, respectively. Conclusion(s): ZIFT can be considered as a mode of treatment for patients with repeated failure of implantation in IVF-ET and with tubal factor with proved patency of one tube.
-
Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer may improve pregnancy rate in patients with repeated failure of implantation
Fertility and sterility, 1998Co-Authors: David Levran, Shlomo Mashiach, J. Dor, Jacob Levron, Jacob FarhiAbstract:To evaluate the efficacy of Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT) on implantation rates and pregnancy rates (PRs) in patients with repeated failure of implantation in IVF-ET cycles. A case-control study. Criteria for patient selection included male factor or unexplained infertility, normal uterine cavity, and at least three failures of implantation in IVF-ET cycles in which at least three embryos were placed per Transfer. Data on 70 patients who underwent 92 ZIFT cycles are presented. A control group consisted of patients with the same selection criteria who underwent an additional standard IVF-ET cycle during the same time period. Ovulation induction consisted of down-regulation with GnRH analogue followed by ovarian stimulation with FSH and hMG. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection was performed on the oocytes of all patients with male factor infertility. Zygotes were Transferred by laparoscopy into the fallopian tube 24-26 hours after oocyte retrieval. Implantation rates and PRs in the ZIFT and control groups were compared. The PRs and implantation rates were significantly higher in the ZIFT group than in the control group: 34.2% (24/70) and 8.7% (29/333) versus 17.1% (12/70) and 4.4% (13/289), respectively (P = 0.002 and P = 0.04). The cumulative conception rate for two ZIFT cycles was 59.3%. Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer should be considered a beneficial mode of treatment for patients with repeated failure of implantation in IVF and transcervical ET. More prospective randomized studies are needed to support this observation.
-
Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer may improve pregnancy rate in patients with repeated failure of implantation
Fertility and Sterility, 1998Co-Authors: David Levran, Shlomo Mashiach, J. Dor, Jacob Levron, Jacob FarhiAbstract:Abstract Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT) on implantation rates and pregnancy rates (PRs) in patients with repeated failure of implantation in IVF-ET cycles. Design: A case-control study. Patient(s): Criteria for patient selection included male factor or unexplained infertility, normal uterine cavity, and at least three failures of implantation in IVF-ET cycles in which at least three embryos were placed per Transfer. Data on 70 patients who underwent 92 ZIFT cycles are presented. A control group consisted of patients with the same selection criteria who underwent an additional standard IVF-ET cycle during the same time period. Intervention(s): Ovulation induction consisted of down-regulation with GnRH analogue followed by ovarian stimulation with FSH and hMG. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection was performed on the oocytes of all patients with male factor infertility. Zygotes were Transferred by laparoscopy into the fallopian tube 24–26 hours after oocyte retrieval. Main Outcome Measure(s): Implantation rates and PRs in the ZIFT and control groups were compared. Result(s): The PRs and implantation rates were significantly higher in the ZIFT group than in the control group: 34.2% (24/70) and 8.7% (29/333) versus 17.1% (12/70) and 4.4% (13/289), respectively ( P = 0.002 and P = 0.04). The cumulative conception rate for two ZIFT cycles was 59.3%. Conclusion(s): Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer should be considered a beneficial mode of treatment for patients with repeated failure of implantation in IVF and transcervical ET. More prospective randomized studies are needed to support this observation.
Jacob Farhi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Prospective evaluation of blastocyst stage Transfer vs. Zygote Intrafallopian tube Transfer in patients with repeated implantation failure
Fertility and sterility, 2002Co-Authors: David Levran, Jacob Farhi, Hana Nahum, Moshe Royburt, Marek Glezerman, Ariel WeissmanAbstract:Abstract Objective: To compare extended culture with blastocyst stage Transfer and Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT) in the management of IVF patients with repeated implantation failure. Design: Prospective, nonrandomized study. Setting: An IVF unit at a university hospital. Patient(s): Sixty-four infertile patients with more than three previous failed IVF-ET attempts. Intervention(s): Patients were allocated to undergo either blastocyst stage Transfer (Group 1; n=32) or ZIFT (Group 2; n=32). Main Outcome Measure(s): Implantation, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rates. Result(s): Patient characteristics and response to stimulation were comparable for both groups. Totals of 84.3% and 97% of the patients underwent blastocyst Transfer and ZIFT, respectively. Significantly more embryos were Transferred through ZIFT (5.5±0.8) as compared with blastocyst Transfer (2.3±1.4), and there were significantly more cycles with embryo cryopreservation in the ZIFT group as compared to the blastocyst Transfer group (15/32 vs. 4/32, respectively). Implantation rate (13.6% vs. 1.4%), clinical pregnancy rate (40.6% vs. 3.1%), and live birth rates (38.7% vs. 0%) were all significantly higher in the ZIFT group as compared to the blastocyst Transfer group, respectively. Conclusion(s): Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer is a powerful clinical tool in the management of patients with RIF. In contrast, blastocyst stage Transfer fails to improve the outcome in this poor-prognosis group. The pathophysiology of RIF should be the subject of intense investigation to allow the introduction of appropriate therapeutic measures earlier in the course of treatment.
-
Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer in patients with tubal factor infertility after repeated failure of implantation with in vitro fertilization–embryo Transfer
Fertility and sterility, 2000Co-Authors: Jacob Farhi, Ariel Weissman, Hana Nahum, David LevranAbstract:Abstract Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT) in terms of implantation and pregnancy rates in patients with tubal factor infertility and repeated implantation failure in IVF-ET cycles. Design: Retrospective analysis of ZIFT cycles. Setting: An IVF unit in a university hospital. Patient(s): Criteria for patient selection for ZIFT included at least four failures of implantation in IVF-ET cycles in which at least 3 embryos were replaced per Transfer and a cause of infertility diagnosed as male, unexplained, or tubal factor with proof of one patient tube. Intervention(s): Four to six Zygotes were Transferred by laparoscopy into the fallopian tube 24–26 hours after oocyte retrieval. Main Outcome Measure(s): Implantation and pregnancy rates were determined in 112 ZIFT cycles performed in 81 patients with repeated failure of implantation. Results were further stratified for patients with tubal factor (n = 15) and patients without tubal factor (n = 66). Result(s): The pregnancy and implantation rates for all ZIFT cycles were 35.1% and 11.1%, respectively. Pregnancy and implantation rates per cycle in patients with tubal factor versus patients without tubal factor were 26.6% versus 37.1% and 9.4% versus 11.4%, respectively. Conclusion(s): ZIFT can be considered as a mode of treatment for patients with repeated failure of implantation in IVF-ET and with tubal factor with proved patency of one tube.
-
Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer may improve pregnancy rate in patients with repeated failure of implantation
Fertility and sterility, 1998Co-Authors: David Levran, Shlomo Mashiach, J. Dor, Jacob Levron, Jacob FarhiAbstract:To evaluate the efficacy of Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT) on implantation rates and pregnancy rates (PRs) in patients with repeated failure of implantation in IVF-ET cycles. A case-control study. Criteria for patient selection included male factor or unexplained infertility, normal uterine cavity, and at least three failures of implantation in IVF-ET cycles in which at least three embryos were placed per Transfer. Data on 70 patients who underwent 92 ZIFT cycles are presented. A control group consisted of patients with the same selection criteria who underwent an additional standard IVF-ET cycle during the same time period. Ovulation induction consisted of down-regulation with GnRH analogue followed by ovarian stimulation with FSH and hMG. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection was performed on the oocytes of all patients with male factor infertility. Zygotes were Transferred by laparoscopy into the fallopian tube 24-26 hours after oocyte retrieval. Implantation rates and PRs in the ZIFT and control groups were compared. The PRs and implantation rates were significantly higher in the ZIFT group than in the control group: 34.2% (24/70) and 8.7% (29/333) versus 17.1% (12/70) and 4.4% (13/289), respectively (P = 0.002 and P = 0.04). The cumulative conception rate for two ZIFT cycles was 59.3%. Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer should be considered a beneficial mode of treatment for patients with repeated failure of implantation in IVF and transcervical ET. More prospective randomized studies are needed to support this observation.
-
Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer may improve pregnancy rate in patients with repeated failure of implantation
Fertility and Sterility, 1998Co-Authors: David Levran, Shlomo Mashiach, J. Dor, Jacob Levron, Jacob FarhiAbstract:Abstract Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT) on implantation rates and pregnancy rates (PRs) in patients with repeated failure of implantation in IVF-ET cycles. Design: A case-control study. Patient(s): Criteria for patient selection included male factor or unexplained infertility, normal uterine cavity, and at least three failures of implantation in IVF-ET cycles in which at least three embryos were placed per Transfer. Data on 70 patients who underwent 92 ZIFT cycles are presented. A control group consisted of patients with the same selection criteria who underwent an additional standard IVF-ET cycle during the same time period. Intervention(s): Ovulation induction consisted of down-regulation with GnRH analogue followed by ovarian stimulation with FSH and hMG. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection was performed on the oocytes of all patients with male factor infertility. Zygotes were Transferred by laparoscopy into the fallopian tube 24–26 hours after oocyte retrieval. Main Outcome Measure(s): Implantation rates and PRs in the ZIFT and control groups were compared. Result(s): The PRs and implantation rates were significantly higher in the ZIFT group than in the control group: 34.2% (24/70) and 8.7% (29/333) versus 17.1% (12/70) and 4.4% (13/289), respectively ( P = 0.002 and P = 0.04). The cumulative conception rate for two ZIFT cycles was 59.3%. Conclusion(s): Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer should be considered a beneficial mode of treatment for patients with repeated failure of implantation in IVF and transcervical ET. More prospective randomized studies are needed to support this observation.
Mei L. Wang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a clinical pregnancy after a simple method of zona cutting cryopreservation and Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer
Fertility and Sterility, 1991Co-Authors: Shiuh Y. Chang, Yung K. Soong, Ming Y. Chang, Pei W. Lin, Hwa F. Guu, Mei L. WangAbstract:A 30-year-old nulliparous woman, who was infertile for greater than 3 years, conceived after the procedures of a simple method of zona cutting, cryopreservation, and ZIFT. This case illustrates: (1) acid medium, chymotrypsin, or sucrose are not needed for the procedure of zona cutting; (2) the Zygotes resulting from zona cutting survive through freezing and thawing; and (3) oocyte retrieval can be done concomitant with conservative surgery for endometriosis.
-
A clinical pregnancy after a simple method of zona cutting, cryopreservation, and Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer *
Fertility and sterility, 1991Co-Authors: Shiuh Y. Chang, Yung K. Soong, Ming Y. Chang, Pei W. Lin, Hwa F. Guu, Mei L. WangAbstract:A 30-year-old nulliparous woman, who was infertile for greater than 3 years, conceived after the procedures of a simple method of zona cutting, cryopreservation, and ZIFT. This case illustrates: (1) acid medium, chymotrypsin, or sucrose are not needed for the procedure of zona cutting; (2) the Zygotes resulting from zona cutting survive through freezing and thawing; and (3) oocyte retrieval can be done concomitant with conservative surgery for endometriosis.
Jacob Levron - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
should Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer be offered to all patients with unexplained repeated in vitro fertilization cycle failures
Journal of Ovarian Research, 2014Co-Authors: J. Dor, Jacob Levron, Itai Gat, Gil M Yerushalmi, Masha BrengauzAbstract:Background One of the suggest strategy for patients with repeated implantation failure (RIF) is Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT). However, no data exist regarding to the issue of when and under which circumstances should ZIFT be offered to patients with RIF? We therefore aimed to examine whether repeated implantation failure (RIF) patients characteristics or their previous controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) variables may differentiate between those who will conceive following a ZIFT cycle and those who will not.
-
Should Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer be offered to all patients with unexplained repeated in-vitro fertilization cycle failures?
Journal of ovarian research, 2014Co-Authors: Itai Gat, J. Dor, Jacob Levron, Gil M Yerushalmi, Masha Brengauz, Raoul OrvietoAbstract:One of the suggest strategy for patients with repeated implantation failure (RIF) is Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT). However, no data exist regarding to the issue of when and under which circumstances should ZIFT be offered to patients with RIF? We therefore aimed to examine whether repeated implantation failure (RIF) patients characteristics or their previous controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) variables may differentiate between those who will conceive following a ZIFT cycle and those who will not. Forty seven consecutive women admitted to our IVF unit during a 7 year period, who underwent ZIFT for RIF, were included. Ovarian stimulation characteristics, number of oocytes retrieved and number and quality of Zygotes/embryos Transferred were assessed and compared between the ZIFT cycle and the previous IVF/ICSI cycle and between those who conceived following the ZIFT cycle and those who did not. Twelve clinical pregnancies (clinical pregnancy rate- 25.5%) were recorded following the ZIFT cycle. Those who benefit from ZIFT were young patients (≤31 yrs), who underwent ≤6 cycle attempts, yielding over eight 2PN embryos with low (≤0.4) ratio of number of top-quality embryos to total 2PN embryos. Moreover, in those destined for a ZIFT cycle, only those with >7 2PN embryo should undergo a Transfer of at least five 2PN embryos. Further large prospective studies are needed to identify the specific characteristics of RIF women who may benefit from ZIFT.
-
Should Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer be offered to all patients with unexplained repeated in-vitro fertilization cycle failures?
Journal of Ovarian Research, 2014Co-Authors: Itai Gat, J. Dor, Jacob Levron, Gil M Yerushalmi, Masha Brengauz, Raoul OrvietoAbstract:Background One of the suggest strategy for patients with repeated implantation failure (RIF) is Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT). However, no data exist regarding to the issue of when and under which circumstances should ZIFT be offered to patients with RIF? We therefore aimed to examine whether repeated implantation failure (RIF) patients characteristics or their previous controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) variables may differentiate between those who will conceive following a ZIFT cycle and those who will not. Methods Forty seven consecutive women admitted to our IVF unit during a 7 year period, who underwent ZIFT for RIF, were included. Ovarian stimulation characteristics, number of oocytes retrieved and number and quality of Zygotes/embryos Transferred were assessed and compared between the ZIFT cycle and the previous IVF/ICSI cycle and between those who conceived following the ZIFT cycle and those who did not. Results Twelve clinical pregnancies (clinical pregnancy rate- 25.5%) were recorded following the ZIFT cycle. Those who benefit from ZIFT were young patients (≤31 yrs), who underwent ≤6 cycle attempts, yielding over eight 2PN embryos with low (≤0.4) ratio of number of top-quality embryos to total 2PN embryos. Moreover, in those destined for a ZIFT cycle, only those with >7 2PN embryo should undergo a Transfer of at least five 2PN embryos. Conclusions Further large prospective studies are needed to identify the specific characteristics of RIF women who may benefit from ZIFT.
-
Comparison of Zygote Intrafallopian tube Transfer and transcervical uterine embryo Transfer in patients with repeated implantation failure
European journal of obstetrics gynecology and reproductive biology, 2005Co-Authors: Dilek Aslan, Jacob Levron, Shai E. Elizur, Adrian Shulman, Liat Lerner-geva, David Bider, J. DorAbstract:This study was designed to evaluate the role of Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT) procedure in patients with repeated failure of implantation. A total of 141 ZIFT cycles of 132 women and 145 embryo Transfer (ET) cycles of 97 women in whom five or more embryos were Transferred were included in this study. Transcervical uterine embryo Transfer and ZIFT cycle outcome in patients with five or more previous implantation failure were compared. Embryos were Transferred by laparoscopy into the fallopian tube 24-27 h following oocytes retrieval in the ZIFT group. In the ET group, embryos were Transferred transcervically on the third day following oocytes retrieval. The mean age was 34+/-4.9 and 34.9+/-5.0 years in ZIFT and ET group, respectively. No difference was determined between the two groups regarding the basal FSH, E2 value on the day of HCG injection and the number of oocytes retrieved or fertilized. The implantation rate was 6.5% versus 7.2%, clinical pregnancy rate was 22.7% versus 24.8% and live birth rate was 21.2% versus 16.5% in ZIFT and ET groups, respectively. Implementation of ZIFT procedure in patients with repeated implantation failure is not superior to transcervical uterine embryo Transfer.
-
Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer may improve pregnancy rate in patients with repeated failure of implantation
Fertility and sterility, 1998Co-Authors: David Levran, Shlomo Mashiach, J. Dor, Jacob Levron, Jacob FarhiAbstract:To evaluate the efficacy of Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer (ZIFT) on implantation rates and pregnancy rates (PRs) in patients with repeated failure of implantation in IVF-ET cycles. A case-control study. Criteria for patient selection included male factor or unexplained infertility, normal uterine cavity, and at least three failures of implantation in IVF-ET cycles in which at least three embryos were placed per Transfer. Data on 70 patients who underwent 92 ZIFT cycles are presented. A control group consisted of patients with the same selection criteria who underwent an additional standard IVF-ET cycle during the same time period. Ovulation induction consisted of down-regulation with GnRH analogue followed by ovarian stimulation with FSH and hMG. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection was performed on the oocytes of all patients with male factor infertility. Zygotes were Transferred by laparoscopy into the fallopian tube 24-26 hours after oocyte retrieval. Implantation rates and PRs in the ZIFT and control groups were compared. The PRs and implantation rates were significantly higher in the ZIFT group than in the control group: 34.2% (24/70) and 8.7% (29/333) versus 17.1% (12/70) and 4.4% (13/289), respectively (P = 0.002 and P = 0.04). The cumulative conception rate for two ZIFT cycles was 59.3%. Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer should be considered a beneficial mode of treatment for patients with repeated failure of implantation in IVF and transcervical ET. More prospective randomized studies are needed to support this observation.
