Comparative study of intracytoplasmic sperm injection using the traditional holding and the oocyte-holding pipette without aspiration

Abstract

SummaryDespite the high level of standardization of the intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) technique, there are some aspects that deserve special attention and should still be improved. The major drawback of the technique is its invasiveness, as during cytoplasmic aspiration different structures of the oocyte may be lost or damaged. This is partly because the microtools used in ICSI were not specially designed for assisted reproduction but for other medical–biological disciplines. In view of the above caveats, the aim of the study was to compare the results of ICSI with the traditional oocyte-holding pipette and the oocyte-holding pipette without aspiration (PiWA). In total, 155 patients and 1037 oocytes were included in the study. In each ICSI cycle, half of the oocytes were microinjected using a traditional holding pipette and the other half using a PiWA. In result, the PiWA technique produced a significant increase in the fertilization rate: 88.12% (95%CI: 84.62–90.92%); holding pipette: 73.33% (95%CI: 68.72–77.49%). Also, it produced a significant decrease in the embryo degeneration rate compared with the traditional holding pipette [PiWA: 2.07% (95%CI: 1.11–3.8%); holding pipette: 4.51% (95%CI: 3.06–6.59%)]. Pregnancy rate depended on the holding technique used, both in single embryo transfers (n = 59; χ2 = 4.608; P-value = 0.032) and double embryo transfers (n = 156; χ2 = 4.344; P-value = 0.037); with PiWA presenting a significantly higher pregnancy rate than the traditional holding technique. Based on current evidence and the present results, improvements should focus on decreasing the invasiveness of the microinjection itself by minimizing or avoiding aspiration and cytoplasmic disorganization, as is successfully achieved with PiWA.