Embryo quality, blastocyst and ongoing pregnancy rates in oocyte donation patients whose embryos were monitored by time-lapse imaging

Abstract

Thus we concluded that time-lapse monitoring in the EmbryoScope does not impair embryo quality while allowing for morphological, spatial and temporal analysis of embryo development.

A randomized clinical trial comparing embryo culture in a conventional incubator with a time-lapse incubator

“…We therefore believe the embryos in the two groups to be comparable and our results to be valid and applicable in other settings. The higher rate of blastocyst development reported in the study by Cruz et al [5] (54.8 % in the timelapse incubator and 50.6 % in the standard incubator) compared to our study (24.9 % in the time-lapse incubator and 23.2 % in the standard incubator) supports the assumption that the oocytes in the two studies were not of comparable quality. An additional contributing factor to the observed discrepancy in blastocyst rates was, that oocytes were allocated to the two types of incubators after confirmed fertilization in the study by Cruz et al [5], in contrast to our study, where randomization was done before confirmed fertilization.…”

“…The higher rate of blastocyst development reported in the study by Cruz et al [5] (54.8 % in the timelapse incubator and 50.6 % in the standard incubator) compared to our study (24.9 % in the time-lapse incubator and 23.2 % in the standard incubator) supports the assumption that the oocytes in the two studies were not of comparable quality. An additional contributing factor to the observed discrepancy in blastocyst rates was, that oocytes were allocated to the two types of incubators after confirmed fertilization in the study by Cruz et al [5], in contrast to our study, where randomization was done before confirmed fertilization. Cruz et al [5] consequently calculated blastocyst rates on the basis of a smaller population with higher chance of blastocyst development, which obviously results in higher blastocyst rates.…”

“…Most reports have been supplementary observations in descriptive studies investigating different aspects of development. A recent study, which compared culture in a time-lapse incubator to a conventional incubator by assessing embryo quality, blastocyst and ongoing pregnancy rates in embryos stemming from fresh donated oocytes, showed no difference between the two types of incubators [5]. However, the study was not randomized and, as pointed out by the authors, donated oocytes from fertile women, who are relatively young, may not be representative of oocytes from an infertile population.…”

“…Before introducing timelapse monitoring in a clinical setting, the safety of the instrument must therefore be properly documented. Comparisons have been made between embryos, both mouse and human, cultured in conventional incubators and time-lapse instruments, without reports of any adverse effects on development or implantation rate [5,15,18,24,26,32,41]. However, none of the previous studies were conducted as randomized clinical trials and the included human embryos derived from oocyte donor cycles [5] may not be representative of embryos from infertile couples.…”

Is the presence of a non-cleaved embryo on day 3 associated with poorer quality of the remaining embryos in the cohort?

“…Evaluation of embryos in vitro has undergone a dramatic change in the past few years with the introduction of time-lapse imaging. This novel technique enables acquisition of dynamic images of embryo development [6,10,[28][29][30]. It has been proposed that the information acquired regarding the kinetics of embryo cleavage, either with or without use of standard static embryo morphology grading, will greatly improve successful selection of the most viable embryo for transfer.…”