22 March 2022 : Clinical Research
Comparison of the Effectiveness of Endometrial Receptivity Analysis (ERA) to Guide Personalized Embryo Transfer with Conventional Frozen Embryo Transfer in 281 Chinese Women with Recurrent Implantation Failure
Yan Jia1BCDEF, Yulin Sha12BF, Zhu Qiu1BCD, Yanhua Guo1CE, Aixiang Tan1EF, Yan Huang1EF, Ying Zhong1EF, Yajun Dong1ADF, Hongxia Ye1ADG*DOI: 10.12659/MSM.935634
Med Sci Monit 2022; 28:e935634
Table 5 Comparison of the clinical outcomes in patients in the endometrial receptivity analysis (ERA) and conventional frozen embryo transfer (FET) groups who transferred a single embryo.
| Clinical outcome | ERA group (n=140) | FET group (n=141) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| High-quality embryos transferred per patient, | 0.35±0.09 | 0.73±0.14 | >0.05 |
| Biochemical pregnancy rate, (%) | 32/62 (51.61%) | 20/59 (33.9%) | <0.05 |
| Clinical pregnancy rate, (%) | 22/62 (35.48%) | 14/59 (23.73%) | >0.05 |
| Implantation rate, (%) | 22/62 (35.48%) | 14/59 (23.73%) | >0.05 |
| Ectopic pregnancy rate, (%) | 0/32 (0) | 0/20 (0) | – |
| Biochemical miscarriage rate, (%) | 10/32 (31.25%) | 6/20 (30%) | >0.05 |
| Clinical miscarriage rate, (%) | 3/32 (9.38) | 7/20 (35%) | >0.05 |
| Cumulative high-quality embryos transferred per patient, | 0.44±0.11 | 0.39±0.14 | >0.05 |
| Cumulative biochemical pregnancy rate, (%) | 38/63 (60.32%) | 25/54 (46.3%) | >0.05 |
| Cumulative clinical pregnancy rate, (%) | 28/63 (57.14%) | 21/54 (38.89%) | >0.05 |
| Cumulative implantation rate, (%) | 28/63 (57.14%) | 21/54 (38.89%) | >0.05 |
| Cumulative ectopic pregnancy rate, (%) | 0/38 (0) | 0/25 (0) | – |
| Cumulative biochemical miscarriage rate, (%) | 10/38 (26.32%) | 4/25 (16%) | >0.05 |
| Cumulative clinical miscarriage rate, (%) | 5/38 (13.16%) | 6/25 (24%) | >0.05 |