Download PDF
Semin Reprod Med 2021; 39(01/02): 027-033
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1730421
Review Article

Endometrial Receptivity Testing and Therapy in Assisted Reproductive Treatment

Lukasz Tadeusz Polanski
1   Division of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Department of Reproductive Medicine, Peterborough City Hospital, Peterborough, United Kingdom
,
Miriam Baumgarten
2   Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, United Kingdom
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Assisted reproductive treatment (ART) gave numerous couples the chance to have their biological child. Improvement in laboratory and culture conditions allows for selection of embryos with the best developmental potential, although replacement of these top-quality embryos does not, however, guarantee reproductive success. Endometrial receptivity is essential for pregnancy establishment and may be the limiting factor for the observed pregnancy rates with ART. Multiple modalities have been in use to assess endometrial receptivity, with ultrasound assessment of the endometrial morphology most commonly used due to its noninvasive nature and availability. Utilization of various “omics” increases our understanding of endometrial receptivity and selectivity; however, significantly more work is required to develop clinically relevant and validated tests of endometrial receptivity and treatments which could improve a suboptimal endometrial milieu. Current evidence for and against use of various tests of endometrial receptivity in women undergoing ART is presented in this article.

Keywords

endometrial receptivity - pregnancy rates - assisted reproductive treatment


Publication History

Article published online:
14 August 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Macklon NS, Brosens JJ. The human endometrium as a sensor of embryo quality. Biol Reprod 2014; 91 (04) 98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Haouzi D, Dechaud H, Assou S, De Vos J, Hamamah S. Insights into human endometrial receptivity from transcriptomic and proteomic data. Reprod Biomed Online 2012; 24 (01) 23-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Rogers PA, Milne BJ, Trounson AO. A model to show human uterine receptivity and embryo viability following ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf 1986; 3 (02) 93-98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Gellersen B, Brosens JJ. Cyclic decidualization of the human endometrium in reproductive health and failure. Endocr Rev 2014; 35 (06) 851-905
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Lucas ES, Dyer NP, Murakami K. et al. Loss of endometrial plasticity in recurrent pregnancy loss. Stem Cells 2016; 34 (02) 346-356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Salker MS, Nautiyal J, Steel JH. et al. Disordered IL-33/ST2 activation in decidualizing stromal cells prolongs uterine receptivity in women with recurrent pregnancy loss. PLoS One 2012; 7 (12) e52252
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gellersen B, Brosens IA, Brosens JJ. Decidualization of the human endometrium: mechanisms, functions, and clinical perspectives. Semin Reprod Med 2007; 25 (06) 445-453
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Brighton PJ, Maruyama Y, Fishwick K. et al. Clearance of senescent decidual cells by uterine natural killer cells in cycling human endometrium. eLife 2017; 6: 6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Evans J, Salamonsen LA, Winship A. et al. Fertile ground: human endometrial programming and lessons in health and disease. Nat Rev Endocrinol 2016; 12 (11) 654-667
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Brosens JJ, Salker MS, Teklenburg G. et al. Uterine selection of human embryos at implantation. Sci Rep 2014; 4: 3894
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Teklenburg G, Salker M, Molokhia M. et al. Natural selection of human embryos: decidualizing endometrial stromal cells serve as sensors of embryo quality upon implantation. PLoS One 2010; 5 (04) e10258
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Weimar CHE, Kavelaars A, Brosens JJ. et al. Endometrial stromal cells of women with recurrent miscarriage fail to discriminate between high- and low-quality human embryos. PLoS One 2012; 7 (07) e41424
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Schwenke M, Knöfler M, Velicky P. et al. Control of human endometrial stromal cell motility by PDGF-BB, HB-EGF and trophoblast-secreted factors. PLoS One 2013; 8 (01) e54336
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Craciunas L, Gallos I, Chu J. et al. Conventional and modern markers of endometrial receptivity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2019; 25 (02) 202-223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Liu KE, Hartman M, Hartman A. Management of thin endometrium in assisted reproduction: a clinical practice guideline from the Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society. Reprod Biomed Online 2019; 39 (01) 49-62
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Liu KE, Hartman M, Hartman A, Luo ZC, Mahutte N. The impact of a thin endometrial lining on fresh and frozen-thaw IVF outcomes: an analysis of over 40 000 embryo transfers. Hum Reprod 2018; 33 (10) 1883-1888
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Kunicki M, Łukaszuk K, Liss J, Skowrońska P, Szczyptańska J. Granulocyte colony stimulating factor treatment of resistant thin endometrium in women with frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer. Syst Biol Reprod Med 2017; 63 (01) 49-57
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Aboulghar M, Al-Inany HG, Aboulghar M. et al. Three dimensional endometrial volume versus endometrial thickness measurement in prediction of IVF/ICSI outcome. Middle East Fertil Soc J 2005; 10 (01) 63-67
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Chung CH, Wong AW, Chan CP. et al. The changing pattern of uterine contractions before and after fresh embryo transfer and its relation to clinical outcome. Reprod Biomed Online 2017; 34 (03) 240-247
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Noyes RW, Hertig AT, Rock J. Dating the endometrial biopsy. Fertil Steril 1950; 1: 3-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Klentzeris LD, Li TC, Dockery P, Cooke ID. The endometrial biopsy as a predictive factor of pregnancy rate in women with unexplained infertility. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1992; 45 (02) 119-124
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Pantos K, Nikas G, Makrakis E, Stavrou D, Karantzis P, Grammatis M. Clinical value of endometrial pinopodes detection in artificial donation cycles. Reprod Biomed Online 2004; 9 (01) 86-90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Lessey BA. Assessment of endometrial receptivity. Fertil Steril 2011; 96 (03) 522-529
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 HFEA. Treatment add-ons. 2020 [cited 21.12.2020]. Accessed April 30, 2021 at: https://www.hfea.gov.uk/treatments/treatment-add-ons/
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Díaz-Gimeno P, Horcajadas JA, Martínez-Conejero JA. et al. A genomic diagnostic tool for human endometrial receptivity based on the transcriptomic signature. Fertil Steril 2011; 95 (01) 50-60 , 60.e1–60.e15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Díaz-Gimeno P, Ruiz-Alonso M, Blesa D. et al. The accuracy and reproducibility of the endometrial receptivity array is superior to histology as a diagnostic method for endometrial receptivity. Fertil Steril 2013; 99 (02) 508-517
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Ruiz-Alonso M, Blesa D, Díaz-Gimeno P. et al. The endometrial receptivity array for diagnosis and personalized embryo transfer as a treatment for patients with repeated implantation failure. Fertil Steril 2013; 100 (03) 818-824
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Mahajan N. Endometrial receptivity array: clinical application. J Hum Reprod Sci 2015; 8 (03) 121-129
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Simón C, Gómez C, Cabanillas S. et al; ERA-RCT Study Consortium Group. A 5-year multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing personalized, frozen and fresh blastocyst transfer in IVF. Reprod Biomed Online 2020; 41 (03) 402-415
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Barash A, Dekel N, Fieldust S, Segal I, Schechtman E, Granot I. Local injury to the endometrium doubles the incidence of successful pregnancies in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2003; 79 (06) 1317-1322
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Lensen S, Osavlyuk D, Armstrong S. et al. A randomized trial of endometrial scratching before in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med 2019; 380 (04) 325-334
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Shkoporov AN, Clooney AG, Sutton TDS. et al. The human gut virome is highly diverse, stable, and individual specific. Cell Host Microbe 2019; 26 (04) 527-541.e5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Liu Y, Chen X, Huang J. et al. Comparison of the prevalence of chronic endometritis as determined by means of different diagnostic methods in women with and without reproductive failure. Fertil Steril 2018; 109 (05) 832-839
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Yoshizawa T, Handa Y, Uematsu Y. et al. Mice lacking the vitamin D receptor exhibit impaired bone formation, uterine hypoplasia and growth retardation after weaning. Nat Genet 1997; 16 (04) 391-396
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Du H, Daftary GS, Lalwani SI, Taylor HS. Direct regulation of HOXA10 by 1,25-(OH)2D3 in human myelomonocytic cells and human endometrial stromal cells. Mol Endocrinol 2005; 19 (09) 2222-2233
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Viganò P, Lattuada D, Mangioni S. et al. Cycling and early pregnant endometrium as a site of regulated expression of the vitamin D system. J Mol Endocrinol 2006; 36 (03) 415-424
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Cermisoni GC, Alteri A, Corti L. et al. Vitamin D and endometrium: a systematic review of a neglected area of research. Int J Mol Sci 2018; 19 (08) E2320
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Bosch E, Valencia I, Escudero E. et al. Premature luteinization during gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles and its relationship with in vitro fertilization outcome. Fertil Steril 2003; 80 (06) 1444-1449
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Lawrenz B, Fatemi HM. Effect of progesterone elevation in follicular phase of IVF-cycles on the endometrial receptivity. Reprod Biomed Online 2017; 34 (04) 422-428
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Venetis CA, Kolibianakis EM, Bosdou JK, Tarlatzis BC. Progesterone elevation and probability of pregnancy after IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis of over 60 000 cycles. Hum Reprod Update 2013; 19 (05) 433-457
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Liu L, Huang J, Li TC. et al. The effect of elevated progesterone levels before oocyte retrieval in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF treatment on the genomic profile of peri-implantation endometrium. J Reprod Immunol 2017; 121: 17-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Huang B, Ren X, Wu L. et al. Elevated progesterone levels on the day of oocyte maturation may affect top quality embryo IVF cycles. PLoS One 2016; 11 (01) e0145895
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Esteves SC, Khastgir G, Shah J. et al. Association between progesterone elevation on the day of human chronic gonadotropin trigger and pregnancy outcomes after fresh embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2018; 9: 201
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar