No evidence that embryo selection by near-infrared spectroscopy in addition to morphology is able to improve live birth rates: Results from an individual patient data meta-analysis

Human Reproduction

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 455-461

  Vergouw, C G ^a   Heymans, M W ^a   Hardarson, T ^b   Sfontouris, I A ^c   Economou, K A ^d   Ahlstrom A ^b   Rogberg, L ^b   Lainas, T G ^c   Sakkas, D ^e   Kieslinger, D C ^a   Kostelijk, E H ^a   Hompes, P G A ^a   Schats, R ^a   Lambalk, C B ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b Carlanderska Hospital   (Sweden)

^c Assisted Reproduction Unit Titani   (Greece)

^d Centre for Human Reproduction   (Greece)

^e BOSTON IVF   (United States)

Author keywords

embryo selection; IPD MA; metabolomic profiling; near infrared spectroscopy

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIRTH RATE; EMBRYO CULTURE; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; LIVE BIRTH; MATERNAL AGE; METABOLOMICS; NEAR INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY; NIDATION; PATIENT CODING; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

EMBRYO SELECTION; IPD MA; METABOLOMIC PROFILING; NEAR-INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY;

BIRTH RATE; CULTURE MEDIA; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMANS; LIVE BIRTH; METABOLOMICS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PREGNANCY RATE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SPECTROSCOPY, NEAR-INFRARED;

EID: 84894271452     PISSN: 02681161     EISSN: 14602350     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/det456     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Ahlström A, Wikland M, Rogberg L, Barnett JS, Tucker M, Hardarson T. Cross-validation and predictive value of near-infrared spectroscopy algorithms for day-5 blastocyst transfer. Reprod Biomed Online 2011; 22:477-484.
2. Baxter Bendus AE, Mayer JF, Shipley SK, Catherino WH. Interobserver and intraobserver variation in day 3 embryo grading. Fert Steril 2006; 86:1608-1615.
3. Botros LL, Sakkas D, Seli E. Metabolomics and its application for non-invasive embryo assessment in IVF. Mol Hum Reprod 2008;14:679-690.
4. Bromer JG, Seli E. Assessment of embryo viability in assisted reproductive technology: shortcomings of current approaches and the emerging role of metabolomics. Curr Opin Obstet Gyneacol 2008;20:234-241.
5. Dutch Cochrane Collaboration. FORMULIER II voor het beoordelen van een RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL (RCT), 2012. http://dcc. cochrane.org/sites/dcc. cochrane.org/files/uploads/RCT.pdf.
6. Gardner DK, Wale PL, Collins R, Lane M. Glucose consumption of single post-compaction human embryos is predictive of embryo sex and live birth outcome. Hum Reprod 2012;26:1981-1986.
7. Hardarson T, Hanson C, Lundin K, Hillensjö T, Nilsson L, Stevic J, Reismer E, Borg K, Wikland M, Bergh C. Preimplantation genetic screening in women of advanced maternal age caused a decrease in clinical pregnancy rate: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2008;23:2806-2812.
8. Hardarson T, Ahlström A, Rogberg L, Botros L, Hillensjö T,Westlander G, Sakkas D, Wikland Ml. Non-invasive metabolomic profiling of day 2 and 5 embryo culture medium: A prospective randomised trial. Hum Reprod 2012;27:89-96.
9. Harper J, Magli MC, Lundin K, Barratt CLR, Brison D. When and how should new technology be introduced into the IVF laboratory? Hum Reprod 2012; 27:303-313.
10. Kirkegaard K, Svane ASP, Hindkjær, Nielsen NC, Ingerslev HJ. Metabolic profiles of spent culture media does not predict pregnancy outcome. Hum Reprod 2013;28(Suppl. 1):123-125.
11. Kjelberg AT, Carlsson P, Bergh C. Randomized single versus double embryo transfer: obstetric and paediatric outcome and a cost-effectiveness analysis. Hum Reprod 2006;21:210-216.
12. Kallen B, Finnstrom O, Lindam A, Nilsson E, Nygren KG, Otterblad OP. Trends in delivery and neonatal outcome after in vitro fertilization in Sweden: data for 25 years. Hum Reprod 2010;25:1026-1034.
13. Kotze D, Kruger TF, Lombard C, Padayachee T, Keskintepe L, Sher G. The effect of the biochemical marker soluble human leukocyte antigen G on pregnancy outcome in assisted reproductive technology- A multi center study. Fert Steril 2013;100:1303-1309.
14. Leese HJ. Metabolism of the preimplantation embryo: 40 years on. Reproduction 2012;143:417-427.
15. Nagy ZP, Sakkas D, Behr B. Non-invasive assessment of embryo viability by metabolomic profiling of culture media ('metabolomics'). Reprod Biomed Online 2008;17:502-507.
16. Nagy ZP, Jones-Colon S, Roos P, Botros L, Greco E, Dasig J, Behr B. Metabolomic assessment of oocyte viability. Reprod Biomed Online 2009; 18:219-225.
17. Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J, Sikkema-Raddatz B, Korevaar JC, Verhoeve HR, Vogel NEA, Arts EGMJ, de Vries JWA, Bossuyt PM et al. In Vitro Fertilization with Preimplantation Genetic Screening. N Engl J Med 2007;357:9-17.
18. Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van der Veen F, Repping S. Preimplantation genetic screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. Hum Reprod Update 2011;17:454-466.
19. Paternot G, Devroe J, Debrock S, D'Hooghe T, Spiessens C. Intra-and inter-observer analysis in the morphological assessment of early-stage embryos. Reprod Biol Endocrin 2009;7:105-110.
20. Scott RT, Seli E, Miller K, Sakkas D, Scott K, Burns DH. Noninvasive metabolomic profiling of human embryo culture media using Raman spectroscopy predicts embryonic reproductive potential: a prospective blinded pilot study. Fert Steril 2008;90:77-83.
21. Seli E, Sakkas D, Scott R, Kwok SC, Rosendhal SM, Burns DH. Noninvasive metabolomic profiling of embryo culture media using Raman and near-infrared spectroscopy correlates with reproductive potential of embryos in women undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fert Steril 2007; 88:1350-1357.
22. Seli E, Vergouw CG, Morita H, Botros LL, Roos P, Lambalk CB, Yamashita N, Kato O, Sakkas D. Noninvasive metabolomic profiling as an adjunct to morphology for noninvasive embryo assessment in women undergoing single embryo transfer. Fert Steril 2010;94:535-542.
23. Seli E, Bruce C, Botros LL, Henson M, Roos P, Judge K, Hardarson T, Ahlström A, Harrison P, Henman Met al. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis of day 5 morphology grading and metabolomics Viability Score on predicting implantation outcome. J Assist Reprod Genet 2011;28:137-144.
24. Sfontouris IA, Lainas GT, Sakkas D, Zorzovilis IZ, Petsas GK, Lainas TG. Non-invasive metabolomic analysis using a commercial NIR instrument for embryo selection. J Hum Reprod Sciences 2013;6:133-139.
25. Staessen C, VerpoestW, Donoso P, Haentjens P, Van der Elst J, Liebaers I, Devroey P. Preimplantation genetic screening does not improve delivery rate in women under the age of 36 following single-embryo transfer. Hum Reprod 2008;23:2818-2825.
26. Stewart LA, ParmarMK. Meta-analysis of the literatureorof individual patient data: is there a difference? Lancet 1993;341:418-422.
27. Van Steirteghem A. What next for assisted reproductive technology? Aplea for an evidence based approach.HumReprod 2010;23:2615-2616.
28. Vergouw CG, Botros LL, Roos P, Lens JW, Schats R, Hompes PGA, Burns DH, Lambalk CB. Metabolomic profiling by near infrared spectroscopy as a tool to assess embryo viability: a novel, non-invasive method for embryo selection. Hum Reprod 2008;23:1499-1504.
29. Vergouw CG, Botros LL, Judge K, Henson M, Roos P, Kostelijk EH, Schats R, Twisk JWR, Hompes PGA, Sakkas D et al. Non-invasive viability assessment of day 4 frozen-thawed human embryos by Near Infrared Spectroscopy. Reprod Biomed Online 2011;23:769-767.
30. Vergouw CG, Kieslinger DC, Kostelijk EH, Botros LL, Schats R, Hompes PGA, Sakkas D, Lambalk CB. Day 3 embryo selection by metabolomic profiling of embryo culture media with near-infrared spectroscopy as an adjunct to morphology: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2012;27:2304-2311.