Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is intracytoplasmic sperm (ICSI) better than traditional in vitro fertilization (IVF): confirmation of higher blastocyst rates per oocyte using a split insemination design

  • Assisted Reproduction Technologies
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To explore the effects of traditional vs. intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) insemination method on the outcome of high-quality blastocyst development in a split sibling oocyte cohort.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed 62 ICSI/IVF split cycles. Sibling oocytes were randomly assigned to ICSI or IVF insemination. Two hundred thirty-four ICSI-only cycles and 152 IVF-only cycles were also analyzed for comparison. Blastocysts were graded by Gardner’s embryo grading and were considered a high-quality blastocyst if 3BB or better (Gardner 1999).

Results

In the ICSI/IVF split group, (1) ICSI oocytes had a higher fertilization rate per oocyte allocated (73% vs 62%, p < 0.001), (2) more high-quality day 2 embryos (69% vs 55%, p < 0.005), (3) ICSI oocytes had a lower blastulation rate per 2PN (46% vs 54%, p < 0.05), but a higher blastulation rate when calculated per oocyte allocated (40% vs 32%, p < 0.05). The ICSI-only group had a lower fertilization rate (65% vs 70%, p < 0.001) but more high-quality day 2 embryos in comparison to the IVF-only group (68% vs 64%, p < .05). The total high-quality blastulation rate was higher for the IVF-only group per 2PN (49% vs 43%, p < 0.05) and per oocyte retrieved (34% vs 28%, p < 0.05).

Conclusions

This distinctive IVF/ICSI sibling oocyte split design demonstrated a higher-quality blastulation rate in the IVF group compared to the ICSI group when calculated per 2PN, but not per oocyte allocated to each insemination procedure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Boulet SL, Mehta A, Kissin DM, Warner L, Kawwass JF, Jamieson DJ. Trends in use of and reproductive outcomes associated with intracytoplasmic sperm injection. JAMA. 2015;313(3):255–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Dieke AC, Mehta A, Kissin DM, Nangia AK, Warner L, Boulet SL. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection use in states with and without insurance coverage mandates for infertility treatment, United States, 2000-2015. Fertil Steril. 2018;109(4):691–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Belva F, Henriet S, Liebaers I, Van Steirteghem A, Celestin-Westreich S, Bonduelle M. Medical outcome of 8-year-old singleton ICSI children (born >or=32 weeks' gestation) and a spontaneously conceived comparison group. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(2):506–15.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Davies MJ, Moore VM, Willson KJ, Van Essen P, Priest K, Scott H, et al. Reproductive technologies and the risk of birth defects. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(19):1803–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Mazzilli R, Cimadomo D, Vaiarelli A, Capalbo A, Dovere L, Alviggi E, et al. Effect of the male factor on the clinical outcome of intracytoplasmic sperm injection combined with preimplantation aneuploidy testing: observational longitudinal cohort study of 1,219 consecutive cycles. Fertil Steril. 2017;108(6):961–72.e3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Griffiths TA, Murdoch AP, Herbert M. Embryonic development in vitro is compromised by the ICSI procedure. Hum Reprod. 2000;15(7):1592–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Yoeli R, Orvieto R, Ashkenazi J, Shelef M, Ben-Rafael Z, Bar-Hava I. Comparison of embryo quality between intracytoplasmic sperm injection and in vitro fertilization in sibling oocytes. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2008;25(1):23–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Komsky-Elbaz A, Raziel A, Friedler S, Strassburger D, Kasterstein E, Komarovsky D, et al. Conventional IVF versus ICSI in sibling oocytes from couples with endometriosis and normozoospermic semen. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013;30(2):251–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Khamsi F, Yavas Y, Roberge S, Wong JC, Lacanna IC, Endman M. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection increased fertilization and good-quality embryo formation in patients with non-male factor indications for in vitro fertilization: a prospective randomized study. Fertil Steril. 2001;75(2):342–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gardner DKaS, W.B., editor. In vitro culture of human blastocysts. In: Jansen, R. and Mortimer, D., Eds., Towards Reproductive Certainty: Infertility and Genetics Beyond 1999: The Plenary Proceedings of the 11th World Congress on In Vitro Fertilization and Human Reproductive Genetics. 11th World Congress on In Vitro Fertilization and Human Reproductive Genetics. 1999, Parthenon Press.

  11. Wang C, Feng G, Zhang B, Shu J, Zhou H, Gan X, et al. Influence of the insemination method on the outcomes of elective blastocyst culture. Clin Exp Reprod Med. 2017;44(2):85–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Rubino P, Viganò P, Luddi A, Piomboni P. The ICSI procedure from past to future: a systematic review of the more controversial aspects. Hum Reprod Update. 2016;22(2):194–227.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Van Landuyt L, De Vos A, Joris H, Verheyen G, Devroey P, Van Steirteghem A. Blastocyst formation in in vitro fertilization versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles: influence of the fertilization procedure. Fertil Steril. 2005;83(5):1397–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Motoishi M, Goto K, Tomita K, Ookutsu S, Nakanishi Y. Examination of the safety of intracytoplasmic injection procedures by using bovine zygotes. Hum Reprod. 1996;11(3):618–20.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hewitson L, Dominko T, Takahashi D, Martinovich C, Ramalho-Santos J, Sutovsky P, et al. Unique checkpoints during the first cell cycle of fertilization after intracytoplasmic sperm injection in rhesus monkeys. Nat Med. 1999;5(4):431–3.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Van Der Westerlaken LA, Helmerhorst FM, Hermans J, Naaktgeboren N. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection: position of the polar body affects pregnancy rate. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(10):2565–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Blake M, Garrisi J, Tomkin G, Cohen J. Sperm deposition site during ICSI affects fertilization and development. Fertil Steril. 2000;73(1):31–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Miller JE, Smith TT. The effect of intracytoplasmic sperm injection and semen parameters on blastocyst development in vitro. Hum Reprod. 2001;16(5):918–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Staessen C, Camus M, Clasen K, De Vos A, Van Steirteghem A. Conventional in-vitro fertilization versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection in sibling oocytes from couples with tubal infertility and normozoospermic semen. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(10):2474–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Verheyen G, Tournaye H, Staessen C, De Vos A, Vandervorst M, Van Steirteghem A. Controlled comparison of conventional in-vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection in patients with asthenozoospermia. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(9):2313–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Nagy ZP, Janssenswillen C, Janssens R, De Vos A, Staessen C, Van de Velde H, et al. Timing of oocyte activation, pronucleus formation and cleavage in humans after intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) with testicular spermatozoa and after ICSI or in-vitro fertilization on sibling oocytes with ejaculated spermatozoa. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(6):1606–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Women & Infants Hospital, 90 plain street, Providence, RI, 02905, USA

    May-Tal Sauerbrun-Cutler, Chloe Shen, Richard Hackett & Shunping Wang

  2. Division of Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Women & Infants Hospital, 90 Plain Street, Providence, RI, 02905, USA

    Phinnara Has

  3. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stanford Medical School, 1195 W Fremont Ave, Sunnyvale, CA, 94087, USA

    Ruben Alvero

  4. The Fertility Institute of New Orleans, 4770 S I-10 Service Rd W Ste 201, Metairie, LA, 94087, USA

    Warren J. Huber III

  5. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, LSUHSC School of Medicine, New Orleans, CA, 94087, USA

    Warren J. Huber III

Authors
  1. May-Tal Sauerbrun-Cutler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Warren J. Huber III
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Phinnara Has
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chloe Shen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Richard Hackett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ruben Alvero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Shunping Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to May-Tal Sauerbrun-Cutler.

Ethics declarations

Declarations of interest

None

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sauerbrun-Cutler, MT., Huber, W.J., Has, P. et al. Is intracytoplasmic sperm (ICSI) better than traditional in vitro fertilization (IVF): confirmation of higher blastocyst rates per oocyte using a split insemination design. J Assist Reprod Genet 37, 1661–1667 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-020-01819-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-020-01819-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation