Reply to Seven-day Blastocyst Question

Forum Index » Infertility Support and Discussion

Reply to "Seven-day Blastocyst Question"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous]I have a blast frozen on Day 7 and would love to know the answer to OP's question.  OP, I'm not sure prior posters understand what you are asking.

Here's my totally unproven, unscientific theory, which is making me a bit nervous about transferring my day 7 blast:  By the time a super-slow growing embryo (meaning one that makes blast on day 7) is ready to implant in a natural cycle, hormonal changes might have already caused the lining to deteriorate.  Thus, when natural selection is left to do its thing, very few day 7 blasts would turn into babies due to a lack of synchrony between the timing of implantation and endometrial receptivity.  A frozen transfer in which a day 7 blast is transferred on day 5 can overcome this asynchrony, but what does that mean for post-natal outcomes?  Do slow-growing embryos turn into kids with sub-optimal health or intellectual capacity?  Is it good to mess with natural selection in this way?

I doubt anyone has researched this.  In fact, I've never seen any research that attempted to associate in vitro development rate (reflected in when the embryo made blast) with pediatric health outcomes (incidence of birth defects and genetic and metabolic problems).  I do recall reading a study once that found a correlation between in vitro development rate and gender.  Males are disproportionately represented in blasts that develop most quickly, i.e. blasts graded 4 or 5 on day 5.  But no one has ever suggested that gender separates day 5 blasts from day 6 blasts, or day 6 from day 7.

I do recall my RE once saying that poor quality blasts don't make poor quality babies, they make no babies.  Also, mitochondria inherited solely from the mother must power division of an embryo until implantation is complete; that's partly why the eggs of older women don't implant as often (mitochondrial energy in the eggs diminishes with age).  So maybe once the embryo is fully implanted, the sub-optimal mitochondrial energy that made for slow in vitro growth becomes a non-factor, such that day 7 embryos turn into kids that are no less healthy than kids born of day 5 embryos.

P.S., I have no science background--just curiosity--so this is all pure conjecture.  Would love to know if anyone has every studied this.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics