Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study aimed to explore the effects of low-concentration (0.6 ng/mL) granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) supplementation on human embryo quality and pregnancy outcomes in patients with fresh transfer cycles. The data were retrospectively collected from 719 hyperstimulation cycles of 631 patients divided into two groups: GM-CSF supplementation (0.6 ng/mL, n = 399) and control (n = 320). The embryo quality and pregnancy outcomes were compared. GM-CSF addition significantly increased the available embryo rate (52.0 vs. 48.1%, p < .05). In patients >38 years, it significantly enhanced cleavage (99.4 vs. 97.8%, p < .05) and blastocyst formation (45.7 vs. 34.9%, p < .05) rates but not pregnancy outcomes, including clinical pregnancy (power = 0.160) and implantation (power = 0.204) rates. The lack of a statistically significant difference could be related to low study power. These results suggest that low-concentration GM-CSF addition contributes to embryo quality improvement, especially in patients >38 years.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known on this subject? Granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) has a beneficial effect on the development of human embryos in assisted reproductive technology.What do the results of this study add? Adding 0.6 ng/mL GM-CSF significantly increased the available embryo rate. In patients over 38 years of age, it statistically significantly enhanced the cleavage rate (99.4 vs. 97.8%, p < .05) and blastocyst formation rate (45.7 vs. 34.9%, p < .05).What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? GM-CSF benefits embryos with poorer development potential and a randomised clinical trial with a larger sample size should be performed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chu et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: