Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics logoLink to Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
. 2003 Aug;20(8):332–342. doi: 10.1023/A:1024865725713

Assisted Hatching—A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Hassan N Sallam 1,2, Sameh S Sadek 1, Abdel Fattah Agameya 1,2
PMCID: PMC3455281  PMID: 12948097

Abstract

Purpose: To conduct a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on assisted hatching.

Methods: One hundred sixty-five studies were retrieved from the literature, but only 13 of them fitted our selection criteria. The meta-analysis was conducted using the RevMan software with the Peto-modified Mantel–Haenszel method.

Results: Assisted hatching increases the pregnancy [OR (±95% CI) = 2.51 (1.91–3.29)], implantation [OR (±95% CI) = 2.38 (1.87–3.03)], and ongoing pregnancy rates [OR (±95% CI) = 2.65 (1.85–3.79)] significantly in poor prognosis patients undergoing IVF or ICSI. For patients with repeated IVF failures, the OR (±95% CI) were 2.84 (1.99–4.06) for pregnancy, 2.53 (1.85–3.47) for implantation, and 3.51 (2.12–5.82) for ongoing pregnancy rates, in favor of assisted hatching.

Conclusions: Assisted hatching increases the pregnancy, implantation, and ongoing pregnancy rates significantly in patients with a poor prognosis undergoing IVF or ICSI, particularly those with repeated failures.

Keywords: Assisted hatching, intracytoplasmic sperm injection, in vitro fertilization, meta-analysis, randomized trials

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (117.4 KB).

References

  • 1.Edwards RG. Clinical approaches to increasing uterine receptivity during human implantation. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:60–66. doi: 10.1093/humrep/10.suppl_2.60. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Tucker MJ, Luecke NM, Wiker SR, Wright G. Chemical removal of the outside of the zona pellucida of day 3 human embryos has no impact on implantation rate. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1993;10:187–191. doi: 10.1007/BF01239219. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Antinori S, Panci C, Selman HA, Caffa B, Dani G, Versaci C. Zona thinning with the use of laser: A new approach to assisted hatching in humans. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:590–594. doi: 10.1093/humrep/11.3.590. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Cohen J, Alikani M, Trowbridge J, Rosenwaks Z. Implantation enhancement by selective assisted hatching using zona drilling of human embryos with poor prognosis. Hum Reprod. 1992;7:685–691. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137720. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Stein A, Rufas O, Amit S, Avrech O, Pinkas H, Ovadia J, Fisch B. Assisted hatching by partial zona dissection of human pre-embryos in patients with recurrent implantation failure after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 1995;63:838–841. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)57490-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Hellebaut S, De Sutter P, Dozortsev D, Onghena A, Qian C, Dhont M. Does assisted hatching improve implantation rates after in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection in all patients? A prospective randomized study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1996;13:19–22. doi: 10.1007/BF02068864. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Tucker MJ, Morton PC, Wright G, Ingargiola PE, Sweitzer CL, Elsner CW, Mitchell-Leef DE, Massey JB. Enhancement of outcome from intracytoplasmic sperm injection: Does co-culture or assisted hatching improve implantation rates? Hum Reprod. 1996;11:2434–2437. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019131. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Antinori S, Selman HA, Caffa B, Panci C, Dani GL, Versaci C. Zona opening of human embryos using a non-contact UV laser for assisted hatching in patients with poor prognosis of pregnancy. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:2488–2492. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019145. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Chao KH, Chen SU, Chen HF, Wu MY, Yang YS, Ho HN. Assisted hatching increases the implantation and pregnancy rate of in vitro fertilization (IVF)-embryo transfer (ET), but not that of IVF-tubal ET in patients with repeated IVF failures. Fertil Steril. 1997;67:904–908. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(97)81404-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Hurst BS, Tucker KE, Awoniyi CA, Schlaff WD. Assisted hatching does not enhance IVF success in good-prognosis patients. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1998;15(2):62–64. doi: 10.1007/BF02766826. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Magli MC, Gianaroli L, Ferraretti AP, Fortini D, Aicardi G, Montanaro N. Rescue of implantation potential in embryos with poor prognosis by assisted zona hatching. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:1331–1335. doi: 10.1093/humrep/13.5.1331. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Lanzendorf SE, Nehchiri F, Mayer JF, Oehninger S, Muasher SJ. A prospective, randomized, double-blind study for the evaluation of assisted hatching in patients with advanced maternal age. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:409–413. doi: 10.1093/humrep/13.2.409. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Nakayama T, Fujiwara H, Yamada S, Tastumi K, Honda T, Fujii S. Clinical application of a new assisted hatching method using a piezo-micromanipulator for morphologically low-quality embryos in poor-prognosis infertile patients. Fertil Steril. 1999;71:1014–1018. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(99)00131-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Mansour RT, Rhodes CA, Aboulghar MA, Serour GI, Kamal A. Transfer of zona-free embryos improves outcome in poor prognosis patients: A prospective randomized controlled study. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:1061–1064. doi: 10.1093/humrep/15.5.1061. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Cohen J, Elsner C, Kort H, Malter H, Massey J, Mayer MP, Wiemer K. Impairment of the hatching process following IVF in the human and improvement of implantation by assisting hatching using micromanipulation. Hum Reprod. 1990;5:7–13. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Alikani M, Noyes N, Cohen J, Rosenwaks Z. Monozygotic twinning in the human is associated with the zona pellucida architecture. Hum Reprod. 1994;9:1318–1321. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a138701. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Schachter M, Raziel A, Friedler S, Strassburger D, Bern O. Ron-E1 R: Monozygotic twinning after assisted reproductive techniques: A phenomenon independent of micromanipulation. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:1264–1269. doi: 10.1093/humrep/16.6.1264. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Hsieh YY, Huang CC, Cheng TC, Chang CC, Tsai HD, Lee MS. Laser-assisted hatching of embryos is better than the chemical method for enhancing the pregnancy rate in women with advanced age. Fertil Steril. 2002;78:179–182. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(02)03172-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Depypere HT, McLaughlin KJ, Seamark RF, Warnes GM, Matthews CD. Comparison of zona cutting and zona drilling as techniques for assisted fertilization in the mouse. J Reprod Fertil. 1988;84:205–211. doi: 10.1530/jrf.0.0840205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Balaban B, Urman B, Alatas C, Mercan R, Mumcu A, Isiklar A. A comparison of four different techniques of assisted hatching. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:1239–1243. doi: 10.1093/humrep/17.5.1239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics are provided here courtesy of Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

RESOURCES