Assessment of human embryos by time-lapse videography: A comparison of quantitative and qualitative measures between two independent laboratories

Reproductive Biology

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 210-216

  Liu, Yanhe ^a,b   Copeland, Christopher ^c   Stevens, Adam ^c   Feenan, Katie ^a   Chapple, Vincent ^a   Myssonski, Kim ^c   Roberts, Peter ^b   Matson, Phillip ^a,b  

^a Joondalup Hospital   (Australia)

^b EDITH COWAN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^c Canberra Fertility Centre   (Australia)

Author keywords

Embryo grading; Qualitative measures; Quantitative measures; Reproducibility; Time lapse

Indexed keywords

ADULT; BLASTOCYST; CYTOLOGY; EMBRYO CULTURE; EMBRYO DEVELOPMENT; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; HUMAN; LABORATORY; NIDATION; OBSERVER VARIATION; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY RATE; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS; TIME LAPSE IMAGING;

ADULT; BLASTOCYST; EMBRYO CULTURE TECHNIQUES; EMBRYO IMPLANTATION; EMBRYO TRANSFER; EMBRYONIC DEVELOPMENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; LABORATORIES; OBSERVER VARIATION; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY RATE; TIME-LAPSE IMAGING;

EID: 84949671243     PISSN: 1642431X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.repbio.2015.09.001     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Conaghan J., Chen A.A., Willman S.P., Ivani K., Chenette P.E., Boostanfar R., et al. Improving embryo selection using a computer-automated time-lapse image analysis test plus day 3 morphology: results from a prospective multicenter trial. Fertil Steril 2013, 100. 412-419.e5.
2. Rubio I., Galan A., Larreategui Z., Ayerdi F., Bellver J., Herrero J., et al. Clinical validation of embryo culture and selection by morphokinetic analysis: a randomized, controlled trial of the EmbryoScope. Fertil Steril 2014, 102. 1287-1294.e5.
3. VerMilyea M.D., Tan L., Anthony J.T., Conaghan J., Ivani K., Gvakharia M., et al. Computer-automated time-lapse analysis results correlate with embryo implantation and clinical pregnancy: a blinded, multi-centre study. Reprod BioMed Online 2014, 29:729-736.
4. Gardner D.K., Meseguer M., Rubio C., Treff N.R. Diagnosis of human preimplantation embryo viability. Hum Reprod Update 2015, 21:727-747.
5. Kirkegaard K., Agerholm I.E., Ingerslev H.J. Time-lapse monitoring as a tool for clinical embryo assessment. Hum Reprod 2012, 27:1277-1285.
6. Wong C.C., Loewke K.E., Bossert N.L., Behr B., De Jonge C.J., Baer T.M., et al. Non-invasive imaging of human embryos before embryonic genome activation predicts development to the blastocyst stage. Nat Biotechnol 2010, 28:1115-1121.
7. Hlinka D., Kalatova B., Uhrinova I., Dolinska S., Rutarova J., Rezacova J., et al. Time-lapse cleavage rating predicts human embryo viability. Physiol Res 2012, 61:513-525.
8. Liu Y., Chapple V., Feenan K., Roberts P., Matson P. Clinical significance of intercellular contact at the four-cell stage of human embryos, and the use of abnormal cleavage patterns to identify embryos with low implantation potential: a time-lapse study. Fertil Steril 2015, 103. 1485-1491.e1.
9. Liu Y., Chapple V., Roberts P., Matson P. Prevalence, consequence, and significance of reverse cleavage by human embryos viewed with the use of the Embryoscope time-lapse video system. Fertil Steril 2014, 102:1295-1356.
10. Rubio I., Kuhlmann R., Agerholm I., Kirk J., Herrero J., Escriba M.J., et al. Limited implantation success of direct-cleaved human zygotes: a time-lapse study. Fertil Steril 2012, 98:1458-1463.
11. Athayde Wirka K., Chen A.A., Conaghan J., Ivani K., Gvakharia M., Behr B., et al. Atypical embryo phenotypes identified by time-lapse microscopy: high prevalence and association with embryo development. Fertil Steril 2014, 101. 1637-1648.e1-5.
12. Park H., Bergh C., Selleskog U., Thurin-Kjellberg A., Lundin K. No benefit of culturing embryos in a closed system compared with a conventional incubator in terms of number of good quality embryos: results from an RCT. Hum Reprod 2015, 30:268-275.
13. Meseguer M., Rubio I., Cruz M., Basile N., Marcos J., Requena A. Embryo incubation and selection in a time-lapse monitoring system improves pregnancy outcome compared with a standard incubator: a retrospective cohort study. Fertil Steril 2012, 98. 1481-1489.e10.
14. Kirkegaard K., Ahlstrom A., Ingerslev H.J., Hardarson T. Choosing the best embryo by time lapse versus standard morphology. Fertil Steril 2015, 103:323-332.
15. Kaser D.J., Racowsky C. Clinical outcomes following selection of human preimplantation embryos with time-lapse monitoring: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update 2014, 20:617-631.
16. Polanski L.T., Coelho Neto M.A., Nastri C.O., Navarro P.A., Ferriani R.A., Raine-Fenning N., et al. Time-lapse embryo imaging for improving reproductive outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014, 44:394-401.
17. Basile N., Vime P., Florensa M., Aparicio Ruiz B., Garcia Velasco J.A., Remohi J., et al. The use of morphokinetics as a predictor of implantation: a multicentric study to define and validate an algorithm for embryo selection. Hum Reprod 2015, 30:276-283.
18. Meseguer M., Herrero J., Tejera A., Hilligsoe K.M., Ramsing N.B., Remohi J. The use of morphokinetics as a predictor of embryo implantation. Hum Reprod 2011, 26:2658-2671.
19. Best L., Campbell A., Duffy S., Montgomery S., Fishel S. Does one model fit all? Testing a published embryo selection algorithm on independent timelapse data. Hum Reprod 2013, 28(Suppl. 1):i87-i90.
20. Freour T., Le Fleuter N., Lammers J., Splingart C., Reignier A., Barriere P. External validation of a time-lapse prediction model. Fertil Steril 2015, 103:917-922.
21. Yalcinkaya E., Ergin E.G., Caliskan E., Oztel Z., Ozay A., Ozornek H. Reproducibility of a time-lapse embryo selection model based on morphokinetic data in a sequential culture media setting. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc 2014, 15:156-160.
22. Matson P.L. Clinical value of tests for assessing male infertility. Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol 1997, 11:641-654.
23. Sundvall L., Ingerslev H.J., Breth Knudsen U., Kirkegaard K. Inter- and intra-observer variability of time-lapse annotations. Hum Reprod 2013, 28:3215-3221.
24. Gryshchenko M.G., Pravdyuk A.I., Parashchyuk V.Y. Analysis of factors influencing morphokinetic characteristics of embryos in ART cycles. Gynecol Endocrinol 2014, 30(Suppl. 1):6-8.
25. Munoz M., Cruz M., Humaidan P., Garrido N., Perez-Cano I., Meseguer M. The type of GnRH analogue used during controlled ovarian stimulation influences early embryo developmental kinetics: a time-lapse study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2013, 168:167-172.
26. Munoz M., Cruz M., Humaidan P., Garrido N., Perez-Cano I., Meseguer M. Dose of recombinant FSH and oestradiol concentration on day of HCG affect embryo development kinetics. Reprod BioMed Online 2012, 25:382-389.
27. Freour T., Dessolle L., Lammers J., Lattes S., Barriere P. Comparison of embryo morphokinetics after in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection in smoking and nonsmoking women. Fertil Steril 2013, 99:1944-1950.
28. Wissing M.L., Bjerge M.R., Olesen A.I.G., Hoest T., Mikkelsen A.L. Impact of PCOS on early embryo cleavage kinetics. Reprod BioMed Online 2014, 28:508-514.
29. Wdowiak A., Bakalczuk S., Bakalczuk G. The effect of sperm DNA fragmentation on the dynamics of the embryonic development in intracytoplasmatic sperm injection. Reprod Biol 2015, 15:94-100.
30. Kirkegaard K., Hindkjaer J.J., Ingerslev H.J. Effect of oxygen concentration on human embryo development evaluated by time-lapse monitoring. Fertil Steril 2013, 99. 738-744.e4.
31. Ciray H.N., Aksoy T., Goktas C., Ozturk B., Bahceci M. Time-lapse evaluation of human embryo development in single versus sequential culture media - a sibling oocyte study. J Assist Reprod Genet 2012, 29:891-900.
32. Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine, Embryology ESIGo The Istanbul consensus workshop on embryo assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting. Hum Reprod 2011, 26:1270-1283.
33. Ciray H.N., Campbell A., Agerholm I.E., Aguilar J., Chamayou S., Esbert M., et al. Proposed guidelines on the nomenclature and annotation of dynamic human embryo monitoring by a time-lapse user group. Hum Reprod 2014, 29:2650-2660.
34. Liu Y., Chapple V., Feenan K., Roberts P., Matson P. Time-lapse videography of human embryos: using pronuclear fading rather than insemination in IVF and ICSI cycles removes inconsistencies in time to reach early cleavage milestones. Reprod Biol 2015, 15:122-125.
35. Cruz M., Garrido N., Gadea B., Munoz M., Perez-Cano I., Meseguer M. Oocyte insemination techniques are related to alterations of embryo developmental timing in an oocyte donation model. Reprod BioMed Online 2013, 27:367-375.
36. Herrero J., Tejera A., Albert C., Vidal C., de los Santos M.J., Meseguer M. A time to look back: analysis of morphokinetic characteristics of human embryo development. Fertil Steril 2013, 100. 1602-1609.e1-4.
37. Arce J.C., Ziebe S., Lundin K., Janssens R., Helmgaard L., Sorensen P. Interobserver agreement and intraobserver reproducibility of embryo quality assessments. Hum Reprod 2006, 21:2141-2148.
38. Paternot G., Devroe J., Debrock S., D'Hooghe T.M., Spiessens C. Intra- and inter-observer analysis in the morphological assessment of early-stage embryos. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2009, 7:105.