Arnaud Reignier1,2, Tiphaine Lefebvre1,2, Sophie Loubersac1,2, Jenna Lammers1,2, Paul Barriere1,2, Thomas Freour3,4. 1. Nantes Université, Inserm, Centre de Recherche en Transplantation et immunologie, UMR 1064, ITUN, F-44000, Nantes, France. 2. Service de médecine et biologie du développement et de la reproduction, CHU Nantes, Nantes Université, CHU de Nantes, 38 boulevard Jean Monnet, Nantes, France. 3. Nantes Université, Inserm, Centre de Recherche en Transplantation et immunologie, UMR 1064, ITUN, F-44000, Nantes, France. thomas.freour@chu-nantes.fr. 4. Service de médecine et biologie du développement et de la reproduction, CHU Nantes, Nantes Université, CHU de Nantes, 38 boulevard Jean Monnet, Nantes, France. thomas.freour@chu-nantes.fr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The improvement of clinical outcome provided by time-lapse technology (TLT) in IVF over conventional incubation (CI) still remains controversial. This study aimed at evaluating whether the exclusive use of time-lapse technology (TLT) during whole IVF care improves total cumulative live birth rate (TCLBR) and shortens time to live birth (TTLB) as compared to the use of CI in couples undergoing ICSI. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in couples with male infertility undergoing their first ICSI cycle in 2014-2015 and for whom embryo culture system remained the same during their whole IVF care, i.e., TLT or CI. Couples were followed up up to 2020, including all following frozen-embryo transfers and ICSI cycles (if any). Survival analysis was used to compare clinical outcome and time-related endpoints between both groups. RESULTS: A total of 151 and 250 couples underwent their whole IVF care with the exclusive use of TLT and CI, respectively. Survival analysis showed that TCLBR after whole IVF care was significantly higher in TLT than in CI group (66.9 vs 56.4%, p=0.02, log-rank test). Median live birth time was significantly shorter in TLT than CI group (464 vs 596 days, p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: We found that TCLBR and TTLB were significantly improved with TLT over CI in couples undergoing ICSI for male factor. This study fuels the debate on the clinical benefit of using TLT. The use of time-related endpoints adds important information for both patients and practitioners.
PURPOSE: The improvement of clinical outcome provided by time-lapse technology (TLT) in IVF over conventional incubation (CI) still remains controversial. This study aimed at evaluating whether the exclusive use of time-lapse technology (TLT) during whole IVF care improves total cumulative live birth rate (TCLBR) and shortens time to live birth (TTLB) as compared to the use of CI in couples undergoing ICSI. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in couples with male infertility undergoing their first ICSI cycle in 2014-2015 and for whom embryo culture system remained the same during their whole IVF care, i.e., TLT or CI. Couples were followed up up to 2020, including all following frozen-embryo transfers and ICSI cycles (if any). Survival analysis was used to compare clinical outcome and time-related endpoints between both groups. RESULTS: A total of 151 and 250 couples underwent their whole IVF care with the exclusive use of TLT and CI, respectively. Survival analysis showed that TCLBR after whole IVF care was significantly higher in TLT than in CI group (66.9 vs 56.4%, p=0.02, log-rank test). Median live birth time was significantly shorter in TLT than CI group (464 vs 596 days, p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: We found that TCLBR and TTLB were significantly improved with TLT over CI in couples undergoing ICSI for male factor. This study fuels the debate on the clinical benefit of using TLT. The use of time-related endpoints adds important information for both patients and practitioners.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cumulative live birth rate; IVF; Time to live birth; Time-lapse