Journal of South Asian Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Register      Login

VOLUME 16 , ISSUE 3 ( May-June, 2024 ) > List of Articles

CASE REPORT

Endometrial Receptivity Array—A Promising Remedy for Women Afflicted with Recurrent Implantation Failure: A Case Report

Shrutika S Khapre, Deepti Shrivastava, Mangesh D Hivre

Keywords : Case report, Endometrial receptivity array, In vitro fertilization, Personalized embryo transfer, Recurrent implantation failure, Window of implantation

Citation Information : Khapre SS, Shrivastava D, Hivre MD. Endometrial Receptivity Array—A Promising Remedy for Women Afflicted with Recurrent Implantation Failure: A Case Report. J South Asian Feder Obs Gynae 2024; 16 (3):309-312.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10006-2410

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 29-04-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim and background: An endometrial receptivity array (ERA) is a test for assessing the endometrium's gene expression profile concerning receptivity for embryo implantation. The primary significance of the ERA test is its ability to objectively assess the window of implantation (WOI), thereby facilitating the development of the personalized embryo transfer (pET) concept. Case description: A patient, aged 38 years, married for 16 years, a case of secondary infertility, had three unsuccessful attempts of intrauterine insemination and six unsuccessful attempts of In vitro fertilization (IVF). Given her history of recurrent implantation failures (RIF), she underwent the ERA test. The ERA indicated a pre-receptive result. She conceived in the very first attempt of ERA-guided pET. The patient delivered a female child at 34 weeks by a lower segment cesarean section. Conclusion: The ERA test accurately and sensitively identifies endometrial gene expressions, enabling the decision of the most suitable time for embryo transfer. Clinical significance: In vitro fertilization success rates could rise if the endometrial factor were personalized using an objective and reproducible diagnostic method like ERA in RIF patients.


PDF Share
  1. Scott Jr RT, Upham KM, Forman EJ, et al. Blastocyst biopsy with comprehensive chromosome screening and fresh embryo transfer significantly increases in vitro fertilization implantation and delivery rates: A randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril 2013;100(3):697–703. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.04.035.
  2. Franasiak JM, Forman EJ, Hong KH, et al. The nature of aneuploidy with increasing age of the female partner: A review of 15,169 consecutive trophectoderm biopsies evaluated with comprehensive chromosomal screening. Fertil Steril 2014;101(3):656–663. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.11.004.
  3. Mikwar M, MacFarlane AJ, Marchetti F. Mechanisms of oocyte aneuploidy associated with advanced maternal age. Mutat Res Rev Mutat Res 2020;785:108320. DOI: 10.1016/j.mrrev.2020.108320.
  4. Cimadomo D, Capalbo A, Dovere L, et al. Leave the past behind: Women's reproductive history shows no association with blastocysts’ euploidy and limited association with live birth rates after euploid embryo transfers. Human Reproduction 2021;36(4):929–940. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deab014.
  5. Ruiz-Alonso M, Blesa D, Simón C. The genomics of the human endometrium. Biochim Biophys Acta 2012;1822(12):1931–1942. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbadis.2012.05.004.
  6. Rincon A, Clemente-Ciscar M, Gomez E, et al. What is the real length of the window of implantation (WOI) in humans? In Human Reproduction 2018 Jul 1 Great Clarendon St, Oxford OX2 6DP, England: Oxford University Press; Vol. 33, pp. 360–360.
  7. Mahajan N. Endometrial receptivity array: Clinical application. J Hum Reprod Sci 2015;8(3):121. DOI: 10.4103/0974-1208.165153.
  8. 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(3):818–824. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.05.004.
  9. Teh WT, McBain J, Rogers P. What is the contribution of embryo-endometrial asynchrony to implantation failure? J Assist Reprod Genet 2016;33:1419–1430. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-016-0773-6.
  10. Sebastian-Leon P, Garrido N, Remohí J, et al. Asynchronous and pathological windows of implantation: Two causes of recurrent implantation failure. Hum Reprod 2018;33(4):626–635. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dey023.
  11. 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(1):50–60. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.04.063.
  12. Garrido-Gómez T, Ruiz-Alonso M, Blesa D, et al. Profiling the gene signature of endometrial receptivity: Clinical results. Fertil Steril 2013;99(4):1078–1085. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.12.005.
  13. Ruiz-Alonso M, Galindo N, Pellicer A, et al. What a difference two days make: “personalized” embryo transfer (pET) paradigm: A case report and pilot study. Hum Reprod 2014;29(6):1244–1247. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deu070.
  14. Ota T, Funabiki M, Tada Y, et al. The reproductive outcomes for the infertile patients with recurrent implantation failures may be improved by endometrial receptivity array test. J Med Cases 2019;10(5):138–140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14740/jmc3282.
  15. Kaur S, Naidu P. Why results of endometrial receptivity assay testing should not be discounted in recurrent implantation failure? Onco Fertil J 2019;2(1):46. DOI: 10.4103/tofj.tofj_9_19.
  16. Simón C, Gómez C, Cabanillas S, et al. A 5-year multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing personalized, frozen and fresh blastocyst transfer in IVF. Reprod Biomed Online 2020;41(3):402–415. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.06.002.
  17. Jia Y, Sha Y, Qiu Z, et al. 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. Med Sci Monit: Int Med J Exp Clin Res 2022;28:e935634. DOI: 10.12659/MSM.935634.
  18. Amin Sr J, Patel R, JayeshAmin G, et al. Personalized embryo transfer outcomes in recurrent implantation failure patients following endometrial receptivity array with pre-implantation genetic testing. Cureus 2022;14(6):e26248. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.26248.
  19. Riestenberg C, Kroener L, Quinn M, et al. Routine endometrial receptivity array in first embryo transfer cycles does not improve live birth rate. Fertil Steril 2021;115(4):1001–1006. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.09.140.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.