Literature DB >> 27645282

How much have we learned from time-lapse in clinical IVF?

D Castelló1, Y Motato2, N Basile3, J Remohí4, M Espejo-Catena2, M Meseguer1.   

Abstract

Can the time-lapse system (TLS) identify the best embryo for transfer? Although there are several studies that support this hypothesis, more research is required to improve the quality of the current evidence and also to assess live birth rate, miscarriage, stillbirth or clinical pregnancy in order to choose between a TLS or conventional incubation. In addition, although some authors report on effectiveness and safety in the use of TLS monitoring of embryo development in vitro, other authors that have not found relevant differences between the two systems for the culture and subsequence embryo selection. On the other hand, TLS has emerged as a novel technology and has been introduced into clinical practice in many laboratories to perform embryo morphology evaluation and study developmental kinetics in ART. However, most studies only assess blastocyst formation or implantation rate as the primary end-point and additional data are required, for example, about live birth, monozygotic twinning rates and health problems. Furthermore, the features of populations studies are varied; for example, female and male age, seminal characteristics and female factor. The embryo culture conditions and culture medium used also vary. For this review, a search of PubMed was conducted to retrieve relevant studies regarding use of TLS in embryo incubation and selection, and compare them with standard embryo culture and evaluation.
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ART; embryo assessment; embryo development; morphokinetic parameters; non-invasive markers; time-lapse system

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27645282     DOI: 10.1093/molehr/gaw056

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Hum Reprod        ISSN: 1360-9947            Impact factor:   4.025


  5 in total

1.  Could monopronucleated ICSI zygotes be considered for transfer? Analysis through time-lapse monitoring and PGS.

Authors:  S Mateo; F Vidal; M Parriego; I Rodríguez; V Montalvo; A Veiga; M Boada
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-05-11       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 2.  Review of computer vision application in in vitro fertilization: the application of deep learning-based computer vision technology in the world of IVF.

Authors:  Claudio Michael Louis; Alva Erwin; Nining Handayani; Arie A Polim; Arief Boediono; Ivan Sini
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-04-03       Impact factor: 3.357

3.  Prediction of blastocyst development and implantation potential in utero based on the third cleavage and compaction times in mouse pre-implantation embryos.

Authors:  Jihyun Kim; Seok Hyun Kim; Jin Hyun Jun
Journal:  J Reprod Dev       Date:  2016-12-16       Impact factor: 2.214

4.  Clinical outcomes for Day 3 double cleavage-stage embryo transfers versus Day 5 or 6 single blastocyst transfer in frozen-thawed cycles: a retrospective comparative analysis.

Authors:  Jinpeng Rao; Feng Qiu; Shen Tian; Ya Yu; Ying Zhang; Zheng Gu; Yiting Cai; Fan Jin; Min Jin
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 1.671

5.  Transient Sperm Starvation Improves the Outcome of Assisted Reproductive Technologies.

Authors:  Felipe A Navarrete; Luis Aguila; David Martin-Hidalgo; Darya A Tourzani; Guillermina M Luque; Goli Ardestani; Francisco A Garcia-Vazquez; Lonny R Levin; Jochen Buck; Alberto Darszon; Mariano G Buffone; Jesse Mager; Rafael A Fissore; Ana M Salicioni; María G Gervasi; Pablo E Visconti
Journal:  Front Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2019-11-05
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.