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.

BACKGROUND This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of endometrial receptivity analysis (ERA)-guided personalized embryo transfer (pET) with conventional frozen embryo transfer (FET) in 281 Chinese women with recurrent implantation failure (RIF). MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 281 eligible patients with RIF were recruited and assigned to ERA (ERA followed by pET) and FET groups. The clinical pregnancy outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS There were no significant differences between the ERA and FET groups in terms of endometrial thickness on the day of embryo transfer, mean attempts of assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment, anti-Mullerian hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone, or antral follicle count in the fresh cycle (P>0.05). The ERA test identified 35% of samples as receptive and 65% as nonreceptive, and comparable pregnancy outcomes were observed between receptive and nonreceptive patients (P>0.05). Higher pregnancy and implantation rates were found in the ERA group than in the FET group (P<0.01), while no significant differences were detected between the 2 groups in terms of miscarriage rates (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS In this study of Chinese women with RIF undergoing in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer, ERA-guided pET resulted in a significant improvement in pregnancy and implantation rates when compared with FET.