Emma Adolfsson1, Sandra Porath1, Anna Nowosad Andershed2. 1. Örebro University Hospital. Department of Laboratory Medicine. Örebro, Sweden. 2. Örebro University Hospital. Fertility Unit, Department of Women Health. Örebro, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To validate a morphokinetic implantation model developed for EmbryoScope on embryos with known outcome, compared to standard morphology in a retrospective single center study. METHODS: Morphokinetic annotation of 768 embryos with known outcome between 2013 -2015; corresponding to 116 D3 fresh embryos, 80 D6 frozen blastocysts, and 572 D5 blastocysts, fresh or frozen. The embryos were ranked by the KIDScore into five classes, KID1-5, and grouped into four classes based on standard morphology. Pregnancy rates, clinical pregnancy rates and live birth rates were compared. Combinations of morphology and morphokinetics were evaluated for implantation rates and live births. RESULTS: Live birth rate increased with increasing KIDScore, from 19% for KID1 to 42% for KID5. Of all live births, KID5 contributed with 71%, KID4 with 20%, KID3 with 4%, KID2 with 4%, and KID1 with 2%. For morphology, the corresponding figure was 43% for Top Quality, 47% for Good Quality, 4% for Poor Quality, and 5% for Slow embryos. For day 3 embryos, KID5 embryos had the highest live birth rates, and contributed to 83% of the live births; whereas the second best morphological class had the highest live birth rate and contributed to most of the live births. For blastocysts, the KIDScore and morphology performed equally well. Combining morphology and morphokinetics indicated stronger predictive power for morphokinetics. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the KIDScore correlates with both implantation and live birth in our clinical setting. Compared to morphology, the KIDScore was superior for day 3 embryos, and equally good for blastocysts at predicting live births.
OBJECTIVE: To validate a morphokinetic implantation model developed for EmbryoScope on embryos with known outcome, compared to standard morphology in a retrospective single center study. METHODS: Morphokinetic annotation of 768 embryos with known outcome between 2013 -2015; corresponding to 116 D3 fresh embryos, 80 D6 frozen blastocysts, and 572 D5 blastocysts, fresh or frozen. The embryos were ranked by the KIDScore into five classes, KID1-5, and grouped into four classes based on standard morphology. Pregnancy rates, clinical pregnancy rates and live birth rates were compared. Combinations of morphology and morphokinetics were evaluated for implantation rates and live births. RESULTS: Live birth rate increased with increasing KIDScore, from 19% for KID1 to 42% for KID5. Of all live births, KID5 contributed with 71%, KID4 with 20%, KID3 with 4%, KID2 with 4%, and KID1 with 2%. For morphology, the corresponding figure was 43% for Top Quality, 47% for Good Quality, 4% for Poor Quality, and 5% for Slow embryos. For day 3 embryos, KID5 embryos had the highest live birth rates, and contributed to 83% of the live births; whereas the second best morphological class had the highest live birth rate and contributed to most of the live births. For blastocysts, the KIDScore and morphology performed equally well. Combining morphology and morphokinetics indicated stronger predictive power for morphokinetics. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the KIDScore correlates with both implantation and live birth in our clinical setting. Compared to morphology, the KIDScore was superior for day 3 embryos, and equally good for blastocysts at predicting live births.
The successful culture, evaluation and selection of embryos often determine the
outcome of infertility treatment. The desire to reduce multiple births by a single
embryo transfer has increased the burden on the clinical embryologist to choose the
embryo with the highest ability to give the patient a healthy baby from a cohort of
embryos. Traditionally, the evaluation and selection of embryos is done using
morphology, often with daily removals and evaluations outside the safer environment
of the incubator. The use of time-lapse incubators in clinical IVF laboratories has
given embryologists access to thousands of multifocal images of each embryo. It
provides a solution to the 'observational dilemma' that the likelihood of selecting
the right embryo increases with the number of observations, but every observation
poses a threat to the embryo as it gets exposed to sub-optimal culture conditions
(Pribenszky ). More information gathered about an embryo's development makes it fair
to assume that more assumptions can be made regarding the embryo's implantation
ability.Time-lapse systems have been in clinical use in nearly a decade. The use of
time-lapse images to annotate cleavage times and patterns is called morphokinetics.
Each event in the development of the embryos can be measured often as hours post
insemination (HPI), and it is referred to as a parameter. Events in embryo
development have been linked to blastulation, implantation and chromosomal content.
(Wong ;
Meseguer ;
2012; Azzarello ; Cruz ; 2013; Dal Canto ; Rubio ; Chamayou ; Campbell ; Liu ; Hlinka ).By combining several parameters, algorithms, selection or de-selection models have
been developed. These models are often developed from relatively small data sets,
and/or clinical/chain specific data sets. Since morphokinetics is influenced by a
number of external factors, the optimal time range for a high quality embryo may
differ from clinic to clinic (Wale & Gardner,
2010; 2016; Ciray ; Dal Canto ; Kirkegaard ; Muñoz ; 2013).Meseguer
published a hierarchical model. First, a morphological screening excludes arrested
or degenerated embryos, giving them an embryo score F. Secondly, embryos possessing
exclusion criteria are given an embryo score E (uneven blastomere size at the two
cell stage, multinucleation at the four cell stage, or abrupt division from 1 to 3
or more cells). Then, the morphokinetic absolute parameter t5, and the relative
parameters s2 (t4-t3) and cc2 (t3-t2) are used to rank the remaining embryos. In
total, ten embryo classes are created, which correlates with implantation ability.
They later validated the model in a multicenter setting within the same IVF concern
(Meseguer ;
Rubio ).
However, three external validations have failed to repeat the findings (Best ; Yalçinkaya ; Fréour ). In a retrospective analysis prior to this study, we investigated
the potential of the Meseguer model in our clinic. Due to the inclusion of
morphological parameters with higher subjectivity and lower intra-observer
agreement, we failed to reproduce the predictive power of this selection model
(Adolfsson & Nowosad, submitted manuscript).Conaghan
published a computer-automated blastocyst prediction model, named the Eeva™
Test. The model uses two early cleavage intervals; t3-t2, ideal period 9.33-11.45
HPI, and t4-t3, ideal period 0-0.73 HPI. Embryos inside the ideal periods have a
high likelihood of forming a clinically usable blastocyst, and embryos outside the
ideal periods have a low likelihood. Kirkegaard
externally validated this model in a
retrospective study with implantation as endpoint. Implantation rates were higher in
the high ranked embryo subpopulation compared to the whole cohort. However, 50.6% of
the embryos that implanted were ranked as unusable, and a strict usage of the model
would have resulted in discarding of those embryos. The authors proposed the strict
time frames as a likely explanation for the low model specificity, when applied to
another clinic. Adamson tested the same model in combination with morphology in a
prospective concurrent-controlled study. The test group had embryo transfer based on
both morphology and time-lapse data using the Eeva™ model, whereas the
control group had embryo selection and transfer solely based on morphology.
Implantation and clinical pregnancy rates were significantly higher in the test
group.In 2014, an updated version of the Eeva™ model was released, adding a third
category of embryos using the same time-lapse parameters (VerMilyea ). The model was
validated by the developers in a multicenter retrospective study, with higher
implantation rates in the High and Medium groups, compared to the Low group.
External validation in the form of a prospective two-center pilot study failed to
improve the outcome when combining morphology and Eeva™ model (Kieslinger ).In 2015, the Meseguer team published a version of their model (Basile ), where the s2 parameter
was removed, and the embryos were ranked into four categories based on t2-t3
interval, t3 and t5 ranges. The model was validated on a different subgroup of
patients and the embryo ranks showed to correlate to implantation rates. They also
correlated the same model to chromosomal content (Basile ). Liu published a deselection model in
2016, combining morphological features on day 2 with morphokinetic parameters (t8,
s2, t5 in relation to tPNf). Their model ranked embryos from A+F with corresponding
decreasing implantation rates. Milewski ranked the embryos into four categories based on
t2 to t5, as well as intervals between these time points. In their publication, the
embryo classes were correlated to blastulation as primary endpoint to our knowledge,
these models have not been externally validated yet.With the aim of introducing time-lapse as an embryo evaluation tool, we decided to
validate the Embryo Scope's built-in algorithm named KIDScore D3 Basic. The KIDScore
claims to be universal and applicable to all clinics. The model was constructed
using a selection of 3275 transferred day-3 embryos with known implantation data
(KID), of which ~800 implanted and ~250 yielded live births. The time-lapse data was
gathered from a large database from 24 clinics, including both IVF and ICSI
treatments, with embryo culture in both reduced and ambient oxygen levels (Petersen ). It is
an avoidance model, which utilizes tPNf, t2, t3, t4, t5 and t8 to rank embryos into
five morphokinetic classes: 1-5. The score from 1-5 is a relative measure of the
embryo's implantation potential. In a first step, embryos with too fast initial
development (t3-tPNf <11.48 HPI) are excluded as KID1. Next, embryos with too
slow initial development (t3 ≥42.91 HPI) are excluded as KID2. An equation is
added (t5-t3/t5-t2), which describes irregularities in the division pattern between
the two-cell stage and the five-cell stage. This equation is used twice, first
deselection embryos with an index <0.3408 as KID3, and then deselection embryos
with an index of ≥ 0.5781 as KID4. In the last step, embryos which did not
reach the eight-cell stage before 66 HPI are deselected as KID4. Hence, there are
two types of embryos in KID4. All other embryos, i.e. embryos which have passed all
avoidance criteria are ranked as KID5. See Figure
1 for examples of KID1-5 embryos. In their publication, describing the
development of the algorithm, an implantation predictability of AUC 0.650 and a
blastulation predictive power of AUC 0.745 when applied to day-3 embryos is
reported. It is designed to keep many embryos in the highest ranks by a conservative
approach, in contrast to a selection model with a narrower time range, with fewer
embryos in the highest ranks.
Figure 1
Examples of KID1 to KID 5 embryos from Örebro Fertility Clinic,
with corresponding bar showing time-lapse annotation. KID1 embryos have
a too fast start up to three cells. KID2 embryos have too slow initial
development. KID3 embryos have irregular divisions with increasing
development speed between the two and five-cell stages. KID4 embryos
also have irregular divisions but with decreasing development speed
between the two and five-cell stages, or, have not reached eight cells
prior to 66 hours post insemination. KID5 embryos have passed all
avoidance criteria. The perfect embryo should spend as little time as
possible in yellow zones representing uneven cell numbers, and develop
in a timely manner from one cell to two cells, from two cells to four
cells, and so on. These embryos show that morphology is separate from
morphokinetics. In each KID class, there are embryos with the potential
to develop into clinically usable blastocysts that appear to be of high
quality to the embryologist using standard morphology as embryo
evaluation tool.
Examples of KID1 to KID 5 embryos from Örebro Fertility Clinic,
with corresponding bar showing time-lapse annotation. KID1 embryos have
a too fast start up to three cells. KID2 embryos have too slow initial
development. KID3 embryos have irregular divisions with increasing
development speed between the two and five-cell stages. KID4 embryos
also have irregular divisions but with decreasing development speed
between the two and five-cell stages, or, have not reached eight cells
prior to 66 hours post insemination. KID5 embryos have passed all
avoidance criteria. The perfect embryo should spend as little time as
possible in yellow zones representing uneven cell numbers, and develop
in a timely manner from one cell to two cells, from two cells to four
cells, and so on. These embryos show that morphology is separate from
morphokinetics. In each KID class, there are embryos with the potential
to develop into clinically usable blastocysts that appear to be of high
quality to the embryologist using standard morphology as embryo
evaluation tool.In their publication, they compared the KIDScore to several other models for the
endpoints: blastulation and blastocyst quality. As a reference, they used the
morphological scoring system proposed by ASRM/ESHRE (Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine & ESHRE Special Interest Group of
Embryology, 2011). Only the KIDScore and the Liu's model surpassed the
predictive power of morphology. However, their endpoint was subordinate to the
strongest endpoint in IVF, i.e. the live birth rate. The use of time-lapse for all
patients since 2012, in combination with single embryo transfer and rigid patient
follow up, has provided us with a large database of embryos with morphokinetics,
morphology and known implantation data. Prior to changing the embryo selection tool
from morphology to morphokinetics, validation needs to take place to ensure quality
control, high discrimination, objectively, and equal or better performance. The aim
of this study was to validate the KIDScore in a clinical setting with an unselected
population, in comparison to standard morphology scoring, with the primary endpoint
of live births.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Assisted reproduction treatment
We carried out this retrospective study on all patients between 2013 and 2015, at
the Fertility Unit at Örebro University Hospital, Sweden. The clinic is a
100% time-lapse-clinic, culturing all embryos in EmbryoScope since 2012. All our
subjects signed a written informed content. The local ethics committee
(Regionala etikprövningsnämnden Uppsala, ethical approval
Ö44-14) approved the study. Our only exclusion criteria was the patient's
lack of consent.All patients had controlled ovarian stimulation with either antagonist or agonist
protocol. We adjusted the starting dose to female age, ovarian reserve and
outcome of any previous cycles. When at least 3 follicles reached 18 mm,
triggering was performed using recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin. Oocytes
were retrieved 36 hours after triggering. The oocytes were fertilized by
standard gamete co-incubation (referred to as IVF) or ICSI. IVF oocytes were
cultured overnight in a standard incubator (+37ºC, 6% CO2)
before cumulus cells were removed and all oocytes placed in the EmbryoScope.
ICSI oocytes were placed in EmbryoScope (+37ºC, 6% CO2, 5%
O2) directly after microinjection. Embryos were cultured in
sequential media, with half media change done in the afternoon of days 2 and
4.Transfer of a single fresh embryo was done on either day 3 or day 5, depending on
medical history, day of oocyte pick-up and number of available embryos.
Selection of embryo for transfer was done solely on morphologic criteria, using
the time-lapse images instead of traditional microscopy. We used the Gardner
Schoolcraft criteria (Gardner ) to score blastocysts at approximately 116
HPI. Local laboratory criteria based on number of blastomeres, degree of
fragmentation and evenness of blastomeres was used for cleavage stage embryos at
approximately 68 HPI. Surplus embryos were cultured to blastocyst stage and
vitrified when reaching clinical usage criteria (grade 3BB or better). If
patient returned for a frozen thaw replacement cycle, the best available embryo
was thawed approximately 2 hours prior to transfer. Survival and re-expansion of
collapsed blastocysts was done prior to frozen single embryo transfer, and only
embryos with full survival and at least 80% re-expansion were transferred. All
frozen-thaw cycles was done unstimulated.A home urine pregnancy test was taken 16 days after embryo transfer. If pregnant,
an early vaginal ultrasound was performed in week 6 of gestation to confirm
viable pregnancy and number of sacs and fetuses. Outcome of treatment (live-born
baby) was obtained from all participating patients through follow-up
questionnaires and/or phone calls.
KID Score Evaluation
Time-lapse annotation was performed in retrospect on all embryos transferred
fresh/frozen between 2013-2015. 768 transferred embryos were included (IVF
n=342, ICSI n=426). The cohort consisted of 116 D3 fresh transferred embryos, 80
D6 vitrified/warmed transferred embryos, and 572 D5 blastocysts (287 fresh and
287 frozen). The following parameters were annotated for each embryos; tPNa as
the time of appearance of pronuclei, tPNf as the time of fading of pronuclei.
t2, t3, t4, t5, t6, t7, t8, t9+ was defined as the times for the corresponding
number of cells. tM was defined as the first frame of the morula stage, tSB as
the first frame with presence of blastocoel, tB as the first frame of a fully
formed blastocyst, tEB as the first frame showing expansion of the zona
pellucida with enlargement in size. The 'Compare and Select' feature in
EmbryoViewer software (Vitrolife, Denmark) with KIDScore D3 Basic was used to
rank embryos into KID 1-5.
Statistics
For statistical purposes, the embryos were categorized into morphological classes
based on their grade. The blastocysts were classified as belonging to the Top
Quality Embryo (TQE) Group; blastocysts with an A for ICM and/or TD, to the Good
Quality Embryo (GQE) Group; blastocysts with B for both ICM and TD, to the Poor
Quality Embryo (PQE) Group; blastocysts with a C for ICM and/or TD, or Slow;
embryos with an expansion grade of 0, 1 or 2 (pre-blastocyst stage embryos).
Day-3 embryos were categorized into three classes based on their morphological
evaluation. Day-3 embryos with exactly 8 cells, less than 20% fragmentation and
even blastomeres were classified as TQE. Day-3 embryos with 6-10 blastomeres or
with more than 20% fragmentation, or uneven cells were classified as GQE. Day-3
embryos with less than 6 cells, or more than 10 cells, and/or <50%
fragmentation were classified as PQE.Pregnancy rate (PR) was calculated as the percentage of transfers leading to a
rise in beta-HCG. Clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) was calculated as percentage of
transfers leading to intrauterine gestational sacs with fetal heartbeat observed
by transvaginal ultrasonography. Live birth rate (LBR) was calculated as the
percentage of live born babies. PR, CPR, LBR were calculated and compared for
each morphokinetic score and for each morphological score, with significance
testing using fishers exact t-test.
RESULTS
The transfer of 768 embryos resulted in 380 positive pregnancy tests (PR 49.5%), 299
ongoing pregnancies as detected by early ultrasound (CPR 38.9%) and 283 live births
(LBR 36.8%). There was no significant difference in outcome between IVF and ICSI
(LBR for ICSI 37.8%, for IVF 36.1%). Blastocyst transfers resulted in higher LBR
compared to cleavage stage embryos, and transferring D5 blastocysts resulted in
higher LBR compared to transferring D6 blastocysts. See Table 1 for details.
Table 1
Embryos included in the study. The cohort consisted of cleavage-stage
embryos, transferred fresh on day 3 of development, and blastocysts, either
day-5 or day-6, transferred fresh or vitrified/warmed. Pregnancy rates (PR),
clinical pregnancy rates (CPR) and live birth rates (LBR) are expressed in
percentages (%) and in absolute numbers (n). LBR for day 3 embryos were
lower compared to blastocysts (p=0.034) and D6 transfers
lower than D5 transfers (p=0.04)
Day of transfer
Type
Embryos (n)
PR % (n)
CPR % (n)
LBR % (n)
D3
Fresh
116
31.0 (36)
28.4 (33)
25.0 (29)
D5
Fresh
287
55.7 (160)
44.9 (129)
43.2 (124)
D5
Frozen
285
54.4 (155)
38.9 (111)
36.5 (104)
D6
Frozen
80
35.0 (28)
32.5 (26)
32.5 (26)
Total
768
49.5 (380)
38.9 (299)
36.8 (283)
Embryos included in the study. The cohort consisted of cleavage-stage
embryos, transferred fresh on day 3 of development, and blastocysts, either
day-5 or day-6, transferred fresh or vitrified/warmed. Pregnancy rates (PR),
clinical pregnancy rates (CPR) and live birth rates (LBR) are expressed in
percentages (%) and in absolute numbers (n). LBR for day 3 embryos were
lower compared to blastocysts (p=0.034) and D6 transfers
lower than D5 transfers (p=0.04)
Embryo evaluation using the KIDScore
The algorithm used to score all embryos was accessed through the EmbryoScope
software (Figure 2). Ranking all embryos
using KIDScore resulted in an uneven distribution into five classes. The
majority of embryos belonged to KID5 (62%), followed by KID4 (22%), KID3 (4%),
KID2 (7%) and KID1 (5%).
Figure 2
The hierarchical model with five splits used to generate the KIDScore
D3 Basic, adapted from Petersen
. Number of inputted
embryos, distribution of embryos into KIDScore classes, and
corresponding live birth rates (LBR) are shown in the figure. The
embryos are ranked based on i) initial cleavage speed up to three
cells, ii) t3 time point, ,iii and iiii) irregular cell divisions
from 2 cells to 5 cells as described by the (t5-t3)/(t5-t2)
equation, and iiiii) on reaching eight cells before 66 hours post
insemination (HPI). KID4 embryos are composed of two types of
embryos: those that have irregular divisions and those that do not
reach eight cells prior to 66 HPI.
The hierarchical model with five splits used to generate the KIDScore
D3 Basic, adapted from Petersen
. Number of inputted
embryos, distribution of embryos into KIDScore classes, and
corresponding live birth rates (LBR) are shown in the figure. The
embryos are ranked based on i) initial cleavage speed up to three
cells, ii) t3 time point, ,iii and iiii) irregular cell divisions
from 2 cells to 5 cells as described by the (t5-t3)/(t5-t2)
equation, and iiiii) on reaching eight cells before 66 hours post
insemination (HPI). KID4 embryos are composed of two types of
embryos: those that have irregular divisions and those that do not
reach eight cells prior to 66 HPI.Looking at all embryos, the LBR increased from 18.9% for KID1, 17.9% for KID2,
32.3% for KID3, 33.3% for KID4 to 42.0% for KID5. The distribution of the
KIDScore classes on transferred embryos, positive pregnancy tests, ongoing
pregnancies and live births show a prevalence of KID5 embryos in all categories.
Of all live births, 71% originated from a KID5 embryo, 20% from KID4, and only
9% from the remaining KID1-2-3. See Figures
3 and 4 for details.
Figure 3
Correlation between KIDScore and outcome, all embryos included.
Highest live birth rate (LBR) was found with KID5, followed by KID4,
KID3, and then similar values for KID1 and KID2. Pregnancy rates
(PR) and clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) show the same pattern. A
regression curve with correlation coefficient is presented for LBR.
Figure 4
Distribution of the KIDScore - all embryos included. The figure shows
the percentage of each KIDScore class on different categories
(number of transfers, number of positive pregnancy tests, number of
ongoing pregnancies, and number of live births).
Correlation between KIDScore and outcome, all embryos included.
Highest live birth rate (LBR) was found with KID5, followed by KID4,
KID3, and then similar values for KID1 and KID2. Pregnancy rates
(PR) and clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) show the same pattern. A
regression curve with correlation coefficient is presented for LBR.Distribution of the KIDScore - all embryos included. The figure shows
the percentage of each KIDScore class on different categories
(number of transfers, number of positive pregnancy tests, number of
ongoing pregnancies, and number of live births).When splitting embryos based on day of transfer, the distribution of embryos into
KIDScore classes, and their corresponding PR, CPR and LBR showed similar
patterns as for all embryos combined. For blastocysts, LBR increased from 21.2%
for KID1 to 43.8% for KID5. For cleavage-stage embryos, LBR increased from 0%
for KID1-2, to 33.3% for KID5. Of all live births after day-3 transfers, KID5
embryos accounted for 83%. See Table
2.
Table 2
Morphokinetics and outcome, as well as the KIDScore contribution, split
by day of transfer. Day-5 and day-6 blastocysts are grouped together.
For each KIDScore, the data is presented as PR, CPR and LBR (in bold).
For each category, the contribution of each KIDScore class is presented
as percentage (in italics)
DAY 3 EMBRYOS
BLASTOCYSTS
CLASS
N
C (%)
PR
C (%)
CPR
C (%)
LBR
C (%)
n
C (%)
PR
C (%)
CPR
C (%)
LBR
C (%)
KID1
4
3.4
25.0
2.8
25.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
33
5.1
30.3
2.9
21.2
2.6
21.2
2.8
KID2
11
9.5
9.1
2.8
9.1
3.0
0.0
0.0
45
6.9
33.3
4.4
22.2
3.8
22.2
3.9
KID3
7
6.0
28.6
5.6
28.6
6.1
14.3
3.4
24
3.7
45.8
3.2
37.5
3.4
33.3
3.1
KID4
22
19.0
22.7
13.9
22.7
15.2
18.2
13.8
146
22.4
54.1
23.0
37.7
20.7
35.6
20.5
KID5
72
62.1
37.5
75.0
33.3
72.7
33.3
82.8
404
62.0
56.7
66.6
45.8
69.5
43.8
69.7
N = number of embryos in each KIDScore class, PR = pregnancy rate,
CPR = clinical pregnancy rate, LBR = live birth rate, C =
contribution.
Morphokinetics and outcome, as well as the KIDScore contribution, split
by day of transfer. Day-5 and day-6 blastocysts are grouped together.
For each KIDScore, the data is presented as PR, CPR and LBR (in bold).
For each category, the contribution of each KIDScore class is presented
as percentage (in italics)N = number of embryos in each KIDScore class, PR = pregnancy rate,
CPR = clinical pregnancy rate, LBR = live birth rate, C =
contribution.
Evaluation of embryos using morphology
The blastocysts were categorized into four classes- TQE, GQE, PQE and Slow-,
whereas cleavage-stage embryos were categorized into only three classes - TQE,
GQE, PQE. The embryo distribution was uneven, with TQE accounting for 37% of the
total embryos, GQE for 50%, PQE for 5% and Slow 8%, respectively. Looking at all
embryos, LBR decreased from 43% for TQE, 35% for GQE, 33% for PQE, and 25% for
Slow. Due to the distribution of embryos, the majority of live born babies are
attributed to the second highest category 'GQE' (47%) followed by TQE (43%) and
only 4% from PQE and 5% from Slow embryos. See Figures 5 and 6.
Figure 5
Correlation between morphological classes and outcome, for all
embryos included in the study. The LBR increases from 25% for PQE,
to 43% for TQE. PQE = poor quality embryos, GQE = good quality
embryos, TQE = top quality embryos, PR = pregnancy rate, CPR =
clinical pregnancy rate, LBR = live birth rate. A regression curve
with correlation coefficient is presented for LBR.
Figure 6
Distribution of morphological classes, all embryos included in the
study. The figure shows the percentage of each morphological class
on each category (number of transfers, number of positive pregnancy
tests, number of ongoing pregnancies, and number of live births).
Surprisingly, the majority of embryos are ranked as second highest
class GQE, not in the best class, with very few embryos in the
poorest categories. PQE = poor quality embryo, GQE = good quality
embryo, TQE = top quality embryo.
Correlation between morphological classes and outcome, for all
embryos included in the study. The LBR increases from 25% for PQE,
to 43% for TQE. PQE = poor quality embryos, GQE = good quality
embryos, TQE = top quality embryos, PR = pregnancy rate, CPR =
clinical pregnancy rate, LBR = live birth rate. A regression curve
with correlation coefficient is presented for LBR.Distribution of morphological classes, all embryos included in the
study. The figure shows the percentage of each morphological class
on each category (number of transfers, number of positive pregnancy
tests, number of ongoing pregnancies, and number of live births).
Surprisingly, the majority of embryos are ranked as second highest
class GQE, not in the best class, with very few embryos in the
poorest categories. PQE = poor quality embryo, GQE = good quality
embryo, TQE = top quality embryo.When splitting the embryos based on day of transfer, a different pattern is found
for cleavage-stage embryos. Of the 116 day-3 embryos, 61% were assigned as GQE,
29% as TQE and 10% as PQE. LBR was 18% for PQE, and 32% for both TQE and GQE,
i.e. morphology could not identify embryos with the highest ability to result in
live birth from day-3 morphological data. The skewed distribution with the vast
majority of embryos assigned as GQE resulted in 66% of live births from day-3
transfers originating from the second-best morphology class, more than double
that of TQE (28%). For blastocysts, LBR was similar for PQE and GQE, and
significantly higher in TQE (p=0.039). However, due to the
distribution with more embryos assigned to GQE, the contributions of TQE and GQE
on live births were identical (45.3%). See Table
3.
Table 3
Morphology and outcome, as well as distribution of embryos, split by day
of transfer. Day-5 and day-6 blastocysts are grouped together. For each
morphological class, the data is presented as PR, CPR and LBR (in bold).
For each category, the contribution of each KIDScore class is presented
as percentage (in italics)
Day 3 embryos
Blastocysts
CLASS
n
C (%)
PR
C (%)
CPR
C (%)
LBR
C (%)
n
C (%)
PR
C (%)
CPR
C (%)
LBR
C (%)
Slow
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
61
9.4
9.4
6.1
24.6
5.7
24.6
5.9
PQE
11
9.5
18.2
5.6
18.2
6.1
18.2
6.9
25
3.8
3.8
3.2
40.0
3.8
36.0
3.5
GQE
71
61.2
32.4
63.9
31.0
66.7
26.8
65.5
31
48.0
48.0
48.3
38.3
45.3
36.7
45.3
TQE
34
29.3
32.4
30.6
26.5
27.3
23.5
27.6
23
38.8
38.8
42.4
47.8
45.7
45.5
45.3
n = number of embryos in each KIDScore class, PR = pregnancy rate,
CPR = clinical pregnancy rate, LBR = live birth rate. PQE = poor
quality embryo, GQE = good quality embryo, TQE = top quality embryo,
C = contribution.
Morphology and outcome, as well as distribution of embryos, split by day
of transfer. Day-5 and day-6 blastocysts are grouped together. For each
morphological class, the data is presented as PR, CPR and LBR (in bold).
For each category, the contribution of each KIDScore class is presented
as percentage (in italics)n = number of embryos in each KIDScore class, PR = pregnancy rate,
CPR = clinical pregnancy rate, LBR = live birth rate. PQE = poor
quality embryo, GQE = good quality embryo, TQE = top quality embryo,
C = contribution.
DISCUSSION
The KIDScore is an implantation model designed for EmbryoScope, to aid in the
selection of viable embryos. The model is developed on data sets from many clinics,
and therefore supposedly applicable to any clinic. This is, to our knowledge, the
first study to externally validate this model, and our results support the ability
of the KIDScore to identify high performing embryos.In their original study, Petersen further validate the KIDScore on its power to
predict blastocyst formation. They applied the algorithm on ~11,000 normally
fertilized embryos and found an association between the KIDScore and the proportion
of blastocysts, as well as the quality of formed blastocysts. Although not intended
as a blastocyst prediction model, the authors state that it can be used as such.
Therefore, we applied the KIDScore to 656 normally fertilized oocytes between
January and April of 2015 with the endpoint of clinically usable blastocyst, i.e.
grade 3BB or better, on day 5 of development. Correlation was found between usable
blastocyst development and the KIDScore. The blastocyst formation rate was 66% for
KID5, 36% for KID4, 21% for KID3, 21% for KID2 and 23% for KID1. Because
blastulation is a prerequisite for implantation, this finding is not surprising for
an implantation model. It adds a feature that could help the clinical embryologist
when deciding, on day 3, whether to continue to culture or transfer at that stage,
since all information needed to score the embryos is available after 66 hours of
culture.In the original paper, the algorithm was designed for day-3 transfers only. They
reported implantation rates of 36% for KID5, 23% for KID4, and 11% for KID 1-2-3
combined. Our corresponding numbers are 33%, 23% and 18%. Hence, we reproduced the
implantation selection ability of KIDScore for day-3 embryos. We also included
blastocysts with the same results; increasing implantation rates for high KIDScores.
We therefore show that the KIDScore predicts implantation for blastocysts in our
clinical setting.Besides validating the KIDScore as an implantation model, we used the strongest
endpoint in IVF; live births. Applied to the whole cohort, KID5 embryos had a 2.2
fold likelihood of resulting in a live birth compared to KID1. For both cleavage
stage embryos and blastocysts, the KIDScore functioned as a live birth predictor in
our study.In comparison to morphokinetics, our present embryo evaluation method had a poor
correlation to both implantation and live birth on day 3. Embryos ranked as top
quality based on morphology had a lower LBR compared to embryos ranked as good
quality. This highlights the complexity and difficulty of scoring embryos on day 3,
with rapid changes in appearance, formation and re-absorption of fragments. With
morphokinetic, selection models in general, and with the KIDScore specifically, only
a few objective parameters are used to rank the embryos (tPNf, t2, t3, t5, and t8).
Prior to this validation, we performed a comparison between morphology and
morphokinetics in terms of inter-observer and intra-observer agreement. For
morphokinetics, all investigated parameters had a high agreement rate between
observers and between repeated measurements. When evaluating an embryo, the outcome
is independent of which embryologist annotates and when. All parameters included in
the KIDScore model had an 'almost perfect agreement' except t8, which had 'strong
agreement'. The notion that the objectivity and reproducibility of morphokinetics
adds value to the more subjective method of morphology, especially on day 3, is
strengthened from the findings from Adamson
by selecting embryos evaluated by
morphokinetics together with morphology, in comparison to morphology alone, they
were able to improve pregnancy rates. Embryos ranked as high quality based on
time-lapse had higher implantation rates (45% compared to 20%).In contrast, morphological evaluation was capable of identifying blastocysts with
high LBR. The embryos ranked as top quality had the highest LBR - 45.5%, but because
GQE was the most common score, both TQE and GQE contributed equally to live births -
45%. Using morphokinetics, the highest KID5 score had a LBR of 44% but contributed
with 70% of the live births, due to more embryos contained in the highest category.
This is a feature of the KIDScore and a feature of deselection models in general. It
reduces the risk of scoring an embryo with a fair chance of resulting in a
successful outcome as poor.Although a high morphokinetic score often accompanies a high morphological score, it
is not always the case. Embryos with irregular division patterns, like direct
cleavage, can develop into morphologically excellent blastocysts. However, their
implantation ability is substantially reduced (Rubio
; Zaninovic ). Given that, we only transfer
one embryo at a time, avoiding these embryos that are tempting to the eye but
unlikely to give the patient a healthy baby, will save costs and shortens the time
to pregnancy. Indeed, looking at the top quality embryos shows that KID5 is the most
frequent score, but all morphokinetic classes are represented. LBR is reduced from
45% if it is a TQE/ KID5, to 17%, if it is a TQE/KID1. On the contrary, for a
KID5-embryo, the LBR will not drop equally low when reducing morphological classes
(KID5/TQE 45%, KID5/GQE 41%, KID5/PQE 40%, and KID5/Slow 34%). Thus, morphokinetics
appears to have a bigger impact on LBR in this study.There are limitations to this study. First, despite including almost 800 embryos, the
uneven distribution of embryos makes some categories small, hence limiting
statistical power. The study was retrospective and presumably, the best available
embryo in each IVF cycle was selected on basis of morphology. Grouping embryos based
on morphological features was necessary to reduce the number of categories, but it
might mask important correlations between embryo quality and ability.Overall, our study shows that the KIDScore in our settings is capable of selecting
embryos with the highest ability to give the infertilepatient a live birth,
regardless of type of embryo or length of culture. For cleavage-stage embryos, the
KIDScore was significantly better of predicting live births. For blastocysts, the
strongest use of KIDScore might be in combination with morphology. Blastocysts
scored as 'clinically usable', i.e. Grade 3BB or better, had higher chances to
result in live birth if being KID5 (Figure 7).
A proposed way of working could be to culture embryos to day 3 and perform KIDScore
annotation for all embryos that are not clearly arrested or degenerated. If several
embryos receive high KIDScore rates, the culture can be prolonged with the
reassurance of high likelihood of reaching blastocyst stage as clinically useful
blastocysts. On day 5, the KIDScore can be used to choose the embryo with the
highest ability to result in a live birth among the cohort of blastocysts deemed as
clinically usable by the laboratory standard operating procedure.
Figure 7
Correlation between clinically usable blastocysts, i.e. Grade 3BB or
better (Gardner Schoolcraft criteria) and outcome. Highest LBR is found
for KID5 blastocysts, a 2.6 increase compared to KID1. PR = pregnancy
rate, CPR = clinical pregnancy rate, LBR = live birth rate. Regression
curve with correlation coefficient is presented for LBR
Correlation between clinically usable blastocysts, i.e. Grade 3BB or
better (Gardner Schoolcraft criteria) and outcome. Highest LBR is found
for KID5 blastocysts, a 2.6 increase compared to KID1. PR = pregnancy
rate, CPR = clinical pregnancy rate, LBR = live birth rate. Regression
curve with correlation coefficient is presented for LBRThe KIDScore share time-lapse parameters with many of the other morphokinetic models.
Most often, those models are based on a relatively small number of embryos in a
single center setting, and although those models fit the original set of data well,
they have failed independent validation by others. In contrast, the KIDScore was
developed from 24 data sets, all from clinics doing assisted reproduction in
slightly different ways. We applied it retrospectively to all transferred embryos
from 2013 to 2015, regardless of day of transfer (day 3 or blastocyst), type of
cycle (fresh or frozen), or type of treatment (IVF or ICSI). Here we show that is
functions as a blastocyst prediction algorithm, as implantation prediction
algorithm, and as live birth predictor in a clinical setting using sequential media,
reduced oxygen, both IVF and ICSI treatments and both antagonist and agonist type of
stimulation. The differences found for IVF and ICSI morphokinetics (Cruz ; Liu ; Kirkegaard ) is
caused by differences in early cleavage times. These cleavage times are related to
time of insemination, but it is difficult to establish such time for IVF. The time
of gamete co-incubation is often used, although fertilization may take place much
later. By using tPNf as a starting point, the differences between IVF and ICSI is
removed. In KIDScore, t2, t3, and t5 are used in relation to each other and are
therefore independent of time of insemination. t3 is used twice, and in one of the
splits, t3 is used in relation to tPNf. The uncertainty of time of insemination for
IVF is almost excluded from the model. No differences were found between IVF-derived
embryos compared to ICSI-derived embryos in this validation in terms of embryo
distribution or LBR (data not shown).The clinical use of time-lapse incubators with regards to improved culture conditions
and increased ease of quality control makes them invaluable in clinical practice -
even without using morphokinetics for embryo evaluation and selection. A recent
meta-analysis on morphokinetics showed increased pregnancy rates, reduction in early
pregnancy loss and increase in live births when selecting embryos using the
morphokinetic embryo evaluation (Pribenszky
). This study supports that when using
the information obtained by time-lapse, the likelihood of choosing the right embryo
increases.
Authors: D Hlinka; B Kaľatová; I Uhrinová; S Dolinská; J Rutarová; J Rezáčová; S Lazarovská; M Dudáš Journal: Physiol Res Date: 2012-08-08 Impact factor: 1.881
Authors: Liubin Yang; Mary Peavey; Khalied Kaskar; Neil Chappell; Lynn Zhu; Darius Devlin; Cecilia Valdes; Amy Schutt; Terri Woodard; Paul Zarutskie; Richard Cochran; William E Gibbons Journal: F S Rep Date: 2022-04-15
Authors: J Barberet; C Bruno; E Valot; C Antunes-Nunes; L Jonval; J Chammas; C Choux; P Ginod; P Sagot; A Soudry-Faure; P Fauque Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Esther B Baart; Régine P M Steegers-Theunissen; Linette van Duijn; Melek Rousian; Jeffrey Hoek; Sten P Willemsen; Eva S van Marion; Joop S E Laven Journal: Reprod Biol Endocrinol Date: 2021-09-18 Impact factor: 5.211
Authors: Linette van Duijn; Melek Rousian; Charlotte S Kramer; Eva S van Marion; Sten P Willemsen; Jeroen P Speksnijder; Joop S E Laven; Régine P M Steegers-Theunissen; Esther B Baart Journal: Reprod Sci Date: 2022-05-09 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Jeffrey Hoek; Sam Schoenmakers; Esther B Baart; Maria P H Koster; Sten P Willemsen; Eva S van Marion; Eric A P Steegers; Joop S E Laven; Régine P M Steegers-Theunissen Journal: Reprod Sci Date: 2020-06-15 Impact factor: 3.060