Progress in Evaluation of Endometrial Receptivity

doi:10.12280/gjszjk.20200535

Abstract

Abstract:

Embryo implantation is a complicated and sophisticated process, which is mainly regulated by embryo, endometrium and the interaction between the two. With the development of embryo laboratory technology, the embryo quality and embryo selection system have been improved significantly. However, the evaluation system and standard of endometrial receptivity have not been clarified yet. In recent years, the accurate assessment of endometrial receptivity has become a focus with the proposal of personalized embryo transfer (pET). More and more researches were focused on how to assess endometrial receptivity, from the initial ultrasound and pinopodes examination to various molecular markers, and to endometrial receptivity array, endometrial receptivity profile and proteomics, lipidomics and other indicators. The author hereby reviews various indicators for evaluating endometrial receptivity. It is helpful for the future work and study, such as individualized embryo transfer, so as to improve clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate.

Key words: Embryo implantation, Proteomics, Endometrial receptivity, Endometrial receptivity array, Personalized embryo transfer

XIE Yu-xin, WANG Jing-ying, YANG Chao, JIANG Ting, CHEN Xiao-xu, LU Ying-li. Progress in Evaluation of Endometrial Receptivity[J]. Journal of International Reproductive Health/Family Planning, 2021, 40(3): 231-236.

References 43

[1]	Coughlan C, Ledger W, Wang Q, et al. Recurrent implantation failure: definition and management[J]. Reprod Biomed Online, 2014,28(1):14-38. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.08.011. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.08.011 URL
[2]	Bergh PA, Navot D. The impact of embryonic development and endometrial maturity on the timing of implantation[J]. Fertil Steril, 1992,58(3):537-542. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)55259-5. URL pmid: 1521649
[3]	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[J]. Fertil Steril, 2014, 101(3):656-663.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.11.004. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.11.004 URL
[4]	Ahmadi F, Akhbari F, Zamani M, et al. Value of Endometrial Echopattern at HCG Administration Day in Predicting IVF Outcome[J]. Arch Iran Med, 2017,20(2):101-104.
[5]	Tong R, Zhou Y, He Q, et al. Analysis of the guidance value of 3D ultrasound in evaluating endometrial receptivity for frozen-thawed embryo transfer in patients with repeated implantation failure[J]. Ann Transl Med, 2020,8(15):944. doi: 10.21037/atm-20-5463. doi: 10.21037/atm URL
[6]	Yang W, Zhang T, Li Z, et al. Combined analysis of endometrial thickness and pattern in predicting clinical outcomes of frozen embryo transfer cycles with morphological good-quality blastocyst: A retrospective cohort study[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2018,97(2):e9577. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000009577. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000009577 URL
[7]	Oluborode B, Burks H, Craig LB, et al. Does the ultrasound appearance of the endometrium during treatment with assisted reproductive technologies influence pregnancy outcomes?[J]. Hum Fertil (Camb), 2020: 1-10. doi: 10.1080/14647273.2020.1757766.
[8]	Craciunas L, Gallos I, Chu J, et al. Conventional and modern markers of endometrial receptivity: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Hum Reprod Update, 2019,25(2):202-223. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmy044. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmy044 URL
[9]	Zhang T, Li Z, Ren X, et al. Endometrial thickness as a predictor of the reproductive outcomes in fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles: A retrospective cohort study of 1512 IVF cycles with morphologically good-quality blastocyst[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2018,97(4):e9689. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000009689. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000009689 URL
[10]	Elsokkary M, Eldin AB, Abdelhafez M, et al. The reproducibility of the novel utilization of five-dimensional ultrasound and power Doppler in the prediction of endometrial receptivity in intracytoplasmic sperm-injected women: a pilot prospective clinical study[J]. Arch Gynecol Obstet, 2019,299(2):551-558. doi: 10.1007/s00404-018-5001-4. doi: 10.1007/s00404-018-5001-4 URL
[11]	Liu KE, Hartman M, Hartman A, et al. The impact of a thin endometrial lining on fresh and frozen-thaw IVF outcomes: an analysis of over 40 000 embryo transfers[J]. Hum Reprod, 2018,33(10):1883-1888. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dey281. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dey281 URL
[12]	Kuijsters N, Methorst WG, Kortenhorst M, et al. Uterine peristalsis and fertility: current knowledge and future perspectives: a review and meta-analysis[J]. Reprod Biomed Online, 2017,35(1):50-71. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.03.019. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.03.019 URL
[13]	梁晓燕. 辅助生殖临床技术实践与提高[M]. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2018: 183-186.
[14]	Silva Martins R, Helio Oliani A, Vaz Oliani D, et al. Subendometrial resistence and pulsatility index assessment of endometrial receptivity in assisted reproductive technology cycles[J]. Reprod Biol Endocrinol, 2019,17(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s12958-019-0507-6. doi: 10.1186/s12958-019-0507-6 URL
[15]	Rizov M, Andreeva P, Dimova I. Molecular regulation and role of angiogenesis in reproduction[J]. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol, 2017,56(2):127-132. doi: 10.1016/j.tjog.2016.06.019. doi: 10.1016/j.tjog.2016.06.019 URL
[16]	Maged AM, Kamel AM, Abu-Hamila F, et al. The measurement of endometrial volume and sub-endometrial vascularity to replace the traditional endometrial thickness as predictors of in-vitro fertilization success[J]. Gynecol Endocrinol, 2019,35(11):949-954. doi: 10.1080/09513590.2019.1604660. doi: 10.1080/09513590.2019.1604660 URL
[17]	Jin XY, Zhao LJ, Luo DH, et al. Pinopode score around the time of implantation is predictive of successful implantation following frozen embryo transfer in hormone replacement cycles[J]. Hum Reprod, 2017,32(12):2394-2403. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dex312. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dex312 URL
[18]	Qiong Z, Jie H, Yonggang W, et al. Clinical validation of pinopode as a marker of endometrial receptivity: a randomized controlled trial[J]. Fertil Steril, 2017, 108(3):513-517.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.07.006. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.07.006 URL
[19]	Díaz-Gimeno P, Horcajadas JA, Martínez-Conejero JA, et al. A genomic diagnostic tool for human endometrial receptivity based on the transcriptomic signature[J]. Fertil Steril, 2011, 95(1):50-60, 60.e1-15. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.04.063.
[20]	Simón C, Gómez C, Cabanillas S, et al. A 5-year multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing personalized, frozen and fresh blastocyst transfer in IVF[J]. Reprod Biomed Online, 2020,41(3):402-415. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.06.002. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.06.002 URL
[21]	Enciso M, Carrascosa JP, Sarasa J, et al. Development of a new comprehensive and reliable endometrial receptivity map (ER Map/ER Grade) based on RT-qPCR gene expression analysis[J]. Hum Reprod, 2018,33(2):220-228. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dex370. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dex370 URL
[22]	Szczepańska M, Wirstlein P, Luczak M, et al. Expression of HOXA-10 and HOXA-11 in the endometria of women with idiopathic infertility[J]. Folia Histochem Cytobiol, 2011,49(1):111-118. doi: 10.5603/fhc.2011.0016. doi: 10.5603/FHC.2011.0016 URL
[23]	Matsuzaki S, Canis M, Darcha C, et al. HOXA-10 expression in the mid-secretory endometrium of infertile patients with either endometriosis, uterine fibromas or unexplained infertility[J]. Hum Reprod, 2009,24(12):3180-3187. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dep306. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dep306 URL
[24]	Cheng J, Rosario G, Cohen TV, et al. Tissue-Specific Ablation of the LIF Receptor in the Murine Uterine Epithelium Results in Implantation Failure[J]. Endocrinology, 2017,158(6):1916-1928. doi: 10.1210/en.2017-00103. doi: 10.1210/en.2017-00103 URL
[25]	Margioula-Siarkou C, Prapas Y, Petousis S, et al. LIF and LIF-R expression in the endometrium of fertile and infertile women: A prospective observational case-control study[J]. Mol Med Rep, 2016,13(6):4721-4728. doi: 10.3892/mmr.2016.5142. doi: 10.3892/mmr.2016.5142 URL pmid: 27082016
[26]	Margioula-Siarkou C, Prapas Y, Petousis S, et al. LIF endometrial expression is impaired in women with unexplained infertility while LIF-R expression in all infertility sub-groups[J]. Cytokine, 2017,96:166-172. doi: 10.1016/j.cyto.2017.04.009. doi: S1043-4666(17)30094-7 URL pmid: 28432985
[27]	Wang L, Lv S, Mao W, et al. Assessment of endometrial receptivity during implantation window in women with unexplained infertility[J]. Gynecol Endocrinol, 2020,36(10):917-921. doi: 10.1080/09513590.2020.1727433. doi: 10.1080/09513590.2020.1727433 URL
[28]	Chen Q, Ni Y, Han M, et al. Integrin-linked kinase improves uterine receptivity formation by activating Wnt/β-catenin signaling and up-regulating MMP-3/9 expression[J]. Am J Transl Res, 2020,12(6):3011-3022.
[29]	Zheng CC, Hu HF, Hong P, et al. Significance of integrin-linked kinase (ILK) in tumorigenesis and its potential implication as a biomarker and therapeutic target for human cancer[J]. Am J Cancer Res, 2019,9(1):186-197.
[30]	Vidigal JA, Ventura A. The biological functions of miRNAs: lessons from in vivo studies[J]. Trends Cell Biol, 2015,25(3):137-147. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2014.11.004. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2014.11.004 URL
[31]	Lee HA, Ahn EH, Jang HG, et al. Association Between miR-605A>G, miR-608G>C, miR-631I>D, miR-938C>T, and miR-1302-3C>T Polymorphisms and Risk of Recurrent Implantation Failure[J]. Reprod Sci, 2019,26(4):469-475. doi: 10.1177/1933719118773413. doi: 10.1177/1933719118773413 URL
[32]	Balaguer N, Moreno I, Herrero M, et al. MicroRNA-30d deficiency during preconception affects endometrial receptivity by decreasing implantation rates and impairing fetal growth[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2019, 221(1):46.e1-46.e16. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.02.047. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.02.047 URL
[33]	Riyanti A, Febri RR, Zakirah SC, et al. Suppressing HOXA-10 Gene Expression by MicroRNA 135b During the Window of Implantation in Infertile Women[J]. J Reprod Infertil, 2020,21(3):217-221. pmid: 32685419
[34]	Giacomini E, Makieva S, Murdica V, et al. Extracellular vesicles as a potential diagnostic tool in assisted reproduction[J]. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol, 2020,32(3):179-184. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0000000000000621. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0000000000000621 URL
[35]	Simon C, Greening DW, Bolumar D, et al. Extracellular Vesicles in Human Reproduction in Health and Disease[J]. Endocr Rev, 2018,39(3):292-332. doi: 10.1210/er.2017-00229. doi: 10.1210/er.2017-00229 URL
[36]	Greening DW, Nguyen HP, Elgass K, et al. Human Endometrial Exosomes Contain Hormone-Specific Cargo Modulating Trophoblast Adhesive Capacity: Insights into Endometrial-Embryo Interactions[J]. Biol Reprod, 2016,94(2):38. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod.115.134890.
[37]	Altmäe S, Koel M, Võsa U, et al. Meta-signature of human endometrial receptivity: a meta-analysis and validation study of transcriptomic biomarkers[J]. Sci Rep, 2017,7(1):10077. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-10098-3. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-10098-3 URL
[38]	Kasvandik S, Saarma M, Kaart T, et al. Uterine Fluid Proteins for Minimally Invasive Assessment of Endometrial Receptivity[J]. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 2020, 105(1):dgz019. doi: 10.1210/clinem/dgz019.
[39]	Chan C, Virtanen C, Winegarden NA, et al. Discovery of biomarkers of endometrial receptivity through a minimally invasive approach: a validation study with implications for assisted reproduction[J]. Fertil Steril, 2013,100(3):810-817. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.04.047. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.04.047 URL
[40]	Gross RW. The evolution of lipidomics through space and time[J]. Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Cell Biol Lipids, 2017,1862(8):731-739. doi: 10.1016/j.bbalip.2017.04.006. doi: 10.1016/j.bbalip.2017.04.006 URL
[41]	Sordelli MS, Beltrame JS, Cella M, et al. Interaction between lysophosphatidic acid, prostaglandins and the endocannabinoid system during the window of implantation in the rat uterus[J]. PLoS One, 2012,7(9):e46059. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0046059. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0046059 URL
[42]	Vilella F, Ramirez L, Berlanga O, et al. PGE2 and PGF2α concentrations in human endometrial fluid as biomarkers for embryonic implantation[J]. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 2013,98(10):4123-4132. doi: 10.1210/jc.2013-2205. doi: 10.1210/jc.2013-2205 URL
[43]	Braga D, Borges E Jr, Godoy AT, et al. Lipidomic profile as a noninvasive tool to predict endometrial receptivity[J]. Mol Reprod Dev, 2019,86(2):145-155. doi: 10.1002/mrd.23088. doi: 10.1002/mrd.v86.2 URL