Clinical application of noninvasive chromosomal screening for elective single-blastocyst transfer in frozen-thawed cycles

Background The objective of this study was to explore the clinical application of noninvasive chromosomal screening (NICS) for elective single-blastocyst transfer (eSBT) in frozen-thawed cycles. Methods This study retrospectively analysed the data of 212 frozen-thawed single-blastocyst transfers performed in our centre from January 2019 to July 2019. The frozen embryos were selected based on morphological grades and placed in preincubation for 6 h after warming. Then spent microdroplet culture media of frozen-thawed blastocysts were harvested and subjected to NICS. The clinical outcomes were evaluated and further stratified analysis were performed, especially different fertilization approaches. Results The clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, and live birth rates in the euploidy group were significantly higher than those in the aneuploidy group (56.2% versus 29.4%) but were nonsignificantly different from those in the chaotic abnormal/NA embryos group (56.2% versus 60.4%). Compared with day6 (D6) blastocysts, D5 blastocysts had a nonsignificantly different euploidy rate (40.4% versus 48.1%, P = 0.320) but significantly increased clinical pregnancy (57.7% versus 22.2%, P < 0.001), ongoing pregnancy (48.1% versus 14.8%, P < 0.001), and live birth rates (48.1% versus 13.0%, P < 0.001). The percentage of chaotic abnormal/NA embryos group was significantly higher among D5 embryos than among D6 embryos (30.1% versus 11.1%, P = 0.006). The percentage of aneuploid embryos was higher among the embryos with lower morphological quality(21.5% among ‘good’ embryos versus 34.6% among ‘fair’ embryos versus 46.0% among ‘poor’ embryos, P = 0.013); correspondingly, the overall clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy and live birth rate rates showed similar declines. Conclusions NICS combined with morphological assessment is an effective tool to guide frozen-thawed SBT. The optimal embryo for SBT is a ‘euploid embryo with good morphology’, followed sequentially by a ‘chaotic abnormal/NA embryo with good morphology’, ‘euploid embryo with fair morphology’, and ‘chaotic abnormal/NA embryo with fair morphology’.