No abstract

STUDY QUESTIONCan a generally applicable morphokinetic algorithm suitable for Day 3 transfers of time-lapse monitored embryos originating from different culture conditions and fertilization methods be developed for the purpose of supporting the embryologist's decision on which embryo to transfer back to the patient in assisted reproduction?SUMMARY ANSWERThe algorithm presented here can be used independently of culture conditions and fertilization method and provides predictive power not surpassed by other published algorithms for ranking embryos according to their blastocyst formation potential.WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADYGenerally applicable algorithms have so far been developed only for predicting blastocyst formation. A number of clinics have reported validated implantation prediction algorithms, which have been developed based on clinic-specific culture conditions and clinical environment. However, a generally applicable embryo evaluation algorithm based on actual implantation outcome has not yet been reported.STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATIONRetrospective evaluation of data extracted from a database of known implantation data (KID) originating from 3275 embryos transferred on Day 3 conducted in 24 clinics between 2009 and 2014. The data represented different culture conditions (reduced and ambient oxygen with various culture medium strategies) and fertilization methods (IVF, ICSI). The capability to predict blastocyst formation was evaluated on an independent set of morphokinetic data from 11 218 embryos which had been cultured to Day 5.PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODSThe algorithm was developed by applying automated recursive partitioning to a large number of annotation types and derived equations, progressing to a five-fold cross-validation test of the complete data set and a validation test of different incubation conditions and fertilization methods. The results were expressed as receiver operating characteristics curves using the area under the curve (AUC) to establish the predictive strength of the algorithm.MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCEBy applying the here developed algorithm (KIDScore), which was based on six annotations (the number of pronuclei equals 2 at the 1-cell stage, time from insemination to pronuclei fading at the 1-cell stage, time from insemination to the 2-cell stage, time from insemination to the 3-cell stage, time from insemination to the 5-cell stage and time from insemination to the 8-cell stage) and ranking the embryos in five groups, the implantation potential of the embryos was predicted with an AUC of 0.650. On Day 3 the KIDScore algorithm was capable of predicting blastocyst development with an AUC of 0.745 and blastocyst quality with an AUC of 0.679. In a comparison of blastocyst prediction including six other published algorithms and KIDScore, only KIDScore and one more algorithm surpassed an algorithm constructed on conventional Alpha/ESHRE consensus timings in terms of predictive power.LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTIONSome morphological assessments were not available and co...

PurposeFertility preservation methods are playing an increasing role in women up to the age of 40 years because of rising survival rates in those affected by cancer. However, balanced practical recommendations concerning all relevant fertility preservation, to support doctors in counselling and treating patients, are still rare.MethodsThese recommendations were prepared by the network FertiPROTEKT (http://www.fertiprotect.eu), a collaboration of around 70 centres in Germany, Switzerland and Austria. The recommendations were developed by specialists in reproductive medicine, reproductive biology and oncology, which gave a comprehensive overview of all named techniques as well as their benefits and risks. Furthermore, practice-orientated recommendations for the individual use of fertility preservation methods for various indications such as breast cancer, Hodgkin’s lymphoma and borderline ovarian tumours are given.ResultsVarious options such as ovarian stimulation and cryopreservation of unfertilised or fertilised oocytes, cryopreservation and transplantation of ovarian tissue, GnRH-agonist administration and transposition of the ovaries can be offered. All the techniques can be performed alone or in combination within a maximum of 2 weeks with low risk and different success rates.ConclusionsFertility preservation in women has become an option with realistic chances to become pregnant after cytotoxic therapies. The information provided allows a well balanced and realistic counselling and treatment.

No abstract

Cytogenetic investigations were performed in 781 couples prior to intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) because of severe male infertility or fertilization failures in previous in-vitro fertilization attempts. Out of these 1562 patients, 1012 had a normal karyotype without any aberrations (64.8%), 204 patients had an abnormal karyotypes (13.1%). These chromosome aberrations included constitutional aberrations (4.4%), fragile sites of autosomes (3.0%), low level mosaicism of sex chromosomes (4.0%) and secondary structural chromosome aberrations (4.2%). Combinations of different types of abnormalities were stated. Another 346 patients (22.1%) showed single cell aberrations; the significance of these is unclear at the moment. Constitutional chromosome aberrations were detected in 69 patients. The following chromosome aberrations were observed: 35 sex chromosomal aberrations (comprising hyperploidies of X or Y chromosomes, mosaicisms and derivative X and Y chromosomes), 34 autosomal aberrations including 14 reciprocal translocations, five Robertsonian translocations, six inversions, one marker chromosome, one trisomy 18 mosaicism and seven other structural aberrations. Three autosomal regions showed fragile sites: 6q13 in 2.9% of the patients, 17p12 and 10q24 in 0.05% each. In conclusion, our data show that a high number of infertile couples in an ICSI programme are affected by chromosome aberrations which occur in both sexes. It is suggested that a chromosomal analysis should be performed on both partners before ICSI treatment is initiated.

BACKGROUNDSeveral randomized controlled trials have not shown a benefit from preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) biopsy of cleavage-stage embryos and assessment of up to 10 chromosomes for aneuploidy. Therefore, a proof-of-principle study was planned to determine the reliability of alternative form of PGS, i.e. PGS by polar body (PB) biopsy, with whole genome amplification and microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH) analysis.METHODSIn two centres, all mature metaphase II oocytes from patients who consented to the study were fertilized by ICSI. The first and second PBs (PB1and PB2) were biopsied and analysed separately for chromosome copy number by array CGH. If either or both of the PBs were found to be aneuploid, the corresponding zygote was then also processed by array CGH for concordance analysis.RESULTSBoth PBs were biopsied from a total of 226 zygotes from 42 cycles (average 5.5 per cycle; range 1–15) in 41 couples with an average maternal age of 40.0 years. Of these, the ploidy status of the zygote could be predicted in 195 (86%): 55 were euploid (28%) and 140 were aneuploid (72%). With only one exception, there was at least one predicted aneuploid zygote in each cycle and in 19 out of 42 cycles (45%), all zygotes were predicted to be aneuploid. Fresh embryos were transferred in the remaining 23 cycles (55%), and one frozen transfer was done. Eight patients had a clinical pregnancy of which seven were evolutive (ongoing pregnancy rates: 17% per cycle and 30% per transfer). The ploidy status of 156 zygotes was successfully analysed by array CGH: 38 (24%) were euploid and 118 (76%) were aneuploid. In 138 cases complete information was available on both PBs and the corresponding zygotes. In 130 (94%), the ploidy status of the zygote was concordant with the ploidy status of the PBs and in 8 (6%), the results were discordant.CONCLUSIONSThis proof-of-principle study indicates that the ploidy of the zygote can be predicted with acceptable accuracy by array CGH analysis of both PBs.

In 2005, the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) Consortium published a set of Guidelines for Best Practice to give information, support and guidance to potential, existing and fledgling PGD programmes (Thornhill AR, De Die-Smulders CE, Geraedts JP, Harper JC, Harton GL, Lavery SA, Moutou C, Robinson MD, Schmutzler AG, Scriven PN et al. ESHRE PGD Consortium best practice guidelines for clinical preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and preimplantation genetic screening (PGS). Hum Reprod 2005;20:35-48.). The subsequent years have seen the introduction of a number of new technologies as well as the evolution of current techniques. Additionally, in light of ESHRE's recent advice on how practice guidelines should be written and formulated, the Consortium believed it was timely to revise and update the PGD guidelines. Rather than one document that covers all of PGD as in the original publication, these guidelines are separated into four new documents that apply to different aspects of a PGD programme; Organization of a PGD centre, fluorescence in situ hybridization-based testing, amplification-based testing and polar body and embryo biopsy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis/screening (PGD/PGS). Here we have updated the sections that pertain to embryology (including cryopreservation) and biopsy of embryos prior to PGD or PGS. Topics covered in this guideline include uses of embryo biopsy, laboratory issues relating to biopsy, timing of biopsy, biopsy procedure and cryopreserving biopsied embryos.

No abstract