BACKGROUND: Non-invasive and routine developmental markers are available to select the most viable embryo; however their respective values in terms of blastocyst development potential remain difficult to distinguish. METHODS: During this prospective study, the sequential growth of 4042 embryos individually cultured from day 1 to day 5/6 was recorded. Pronuclear morphology on day 1, and early cleavage, cell number and fragmentation rate on day 2 were evaluated for each zygote. Additionally, blastocyst transfers were analysed with regard to their implantation ability and early embryo development parameters. RESULTS: Once adjusted to each other, each of the four parameters remained related to blastocyst development. Early cleavage and cell number on day 2 were the most powerful parameters to predict the development of a good morphology blastocyst at day 5. Moreover, whereas transfers of a good morphology blastocyst were associated with high implantation and live birth rates, parameters of early development were not helpful in predicting their implantation ability. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of all four parameters allowed the prediction of blastocyst development with an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.688, which represents a fairly low prediction of embryo viability. Such results indicate that it is necessary to search for additional criteria, including the ability of the blastocyst to develop.
BACKGROUND: Non-invasive and routine developmental markers are available to select the most viable embryo; however their respective values in terms of blastocyst development potential remain difficult to distinguish. METHODS: During this prospective study, the sequential growth of 4042 embryos individually cultured from day 1 to day 5/6 was recorded. Pronuclear morphology on day 1, and early cleavage, cell number and fragmentation rate on day 2 were evaluated for each zygote. Additionally, blastocyst transfers were analysed with regard to their implantation ability and early embryo development parameters. RESULTS: Once adjusted to each other, each of the four parameters remained related to blastocyst development. Early cleavage and cell number on day 2 were the most powerful parameters to predict the development of a good morphology blastocyst at day 5. Moreover, whereas transfers of a good morphology blastocyst were associated with high implantation and live birth rates, parameters of early development were not helpful in predicting their implantation ability. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of all four parameters allowed the prediction of blastocyst development with an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.688, which represents a fairly low prediction of embryo viability. Such results indicate that it is necessary to search for additional criteria, including the ability of the blastocyst to develop.
Authors: Anton Neyer; Martin Zintz; Astrid Stecher; Magnus Bach; Barbara Wirleitner; Nicolas H Zech; Pierre Vanderzwalmen Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2015-08-19 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: T Adriaenssens; I Van Vaerenbergh; W Coucke; I Segers; G Verheyen; E Anckaert; M De Vos; J Smitz Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2019-01-09 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: C Scarica; D Cimadomo; L Dovere; A Giancani; M Stoppa; A Capalbo; F M Ubaldi; L Rienzi; R Canipari Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 3.412