Fine-tuning IVF laboratory key performance indicators of the Vienna consensus according to female age

Zacà, Carlotta; Coticchio, Giovanni; Vigiliano, Vincenzo; Lagalla, Cristina; Nadalini, Marco; Tarozzi, Nicoletta; Borini, Andrea

doi:10.1007/s10815-022-02468-2

Cited by 4 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, it is standard procedure to reject these embryos after a fertilization check. When we assessed the studies published by Pirea et al , Variaelli et al , Zaca et al , Hammond et al , and Wang et al [9,10,11 ▪▪ ,15,16], we concluded that polyspermy rate was not considered an important KPI when compared to other evaluated PIs. Although many publications do not mention the number of PNs as a PI should be considered, as also mentioned in the Vienna Consensus, it can provide a marker of a problem in gamete handling or culture conditions and should be low under normal conditions.…”

Section: Technical Key Performance Indicators In Embryology Labmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Zaca et al [10] found no significant differences in fertilization and embryo cleavage KPIs between the Vienna consensus and older age groups.…”

Section: Total Fertilization Failure Ratementioning

confidence: 93%

“…Zaca et al [10] found no significant differences in fertilization and embryo cleavage KPIs between the Vienna consensus and older age groups. However, Campos et al [20] reviewed that 1–3% of ICSI cycles suffer from oocyte activation deficit (OAD), which affects fertilization and is a recognized cause of infertility.…”

Section: Technical Key Performance Indicators In Embryology Labmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Similarly, another study published by Hammond et al [9] used ICSI fertilization KPI as suggested by the Vienna Consensus definition to assess if KPIs detect shifts in laboratory performance that precede changes in clinical outcomes. In addition, Zaca et al [10] validated the Vienna consensus to monitor the outcome of treatments involving women of different age ranges in 2022 and concluded that ICSI fertilization rates were comparable between the Vienna consensus and the older female age groups (72.3% and 75.3%, respectively, P = NS). In a very recent consensus between the Italian Society of Fertility and Sterility and Reproductive Medicine (SIFES-MR) and the Italian Society of Embryology, Reproduction, and Research (SIERR) [11 ▪▪ ], in addition to acceptance of the definition and importance of this KPI, they also suggested that the frequency of analysis should be monthly or every 100 cycles, whichever comes first.…”

Section: Technical Key Performance Indicators In Embryology Labmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They suggested tracking the KPI monthly or every 100 cycles, whichever occurs first [11 ▪▪ ]. Like the ICSI fertilization rate, when Zaca et al [10] compared the Vienna consensus parameters in advanced-age females, the comparison of standard IVF fertilization rates did not show significant differences (67.2% and 67.3%, respectively, P = NS).…”

Section: Technical Key Performance Indicators In Embryology Labmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Embryology with precision: effective quality control in the in vitro fertilization laboratory

Basar,

Unsal,

Ergun

2024

Current Opinion in Obstetrics &Amp; Gynecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this review is to address the critical need for standardization and clarity in the use of key performance indicators (KPIs) within the realm of in vitro fertilization (IVF), particularly emphasizing the integration of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) processes. This review is timely and relevant given the persistently modest success rates of IVF treatments, which stand at approximately 30%, and the growing complexity of IVF procedures, including PGT practices. The review synthesizes recent findings across studies focusing on technical and clinical KPIs in embryology and genetic laboratories, identifying gaps in current research and practice, particularly the lack of standardized KPIs and terminology. Recent findings highlighted include the critical evaluation of technical KPIs such as Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) fertilization rates, embryo development rates, and laboratory performance metrics, alongside clinical KPIs like the proportion of mature oocytes and clinical pregnancy rates. Notably, the review uncovers a significant gap in integrating and standardizing KPIs for PGT applications, which is essential for improving IVF outcomes and genetic diagnostic accuracy. The implications of these findings are profound for both clinical practice and research. For clinical practice, establishing a standardized set of KPIs, especially for PGT, could significantly enhance the success rates of IVF treatments by providing clearer benchmarks for quality and performance. For research, this review underscores the necessity for further studies to close the identified gaps, promoting a more integrated and standardized approach to KPIs in IVF and PGT processes. This comprehensive approach will not only aid in improving clinical outcomes but also in advancing the field of reproductive medicine.

show abstract

Section: Technical Key Performance Indicators In Embryology Labmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Zaca et al [10] found no significant differences in fertilization and embryo cleavage KPIs between the Vienna consensus and older age groups.…”

Section: Total Fertilization Failure Ratementioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Technical Key Performance Indicators In Embryology Labmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Technical Key Performance Indicators In Embryology Labmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Technical Key Performance Indicators In Embryology Labmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Embryology with precision: effective quality control in the in vitro fertilization laboratory

Basar,

Unsal,

Ergun

2024

Current Opinion in Obstetrics &Amp; Gynecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Quality assurance (QA) for monitoring the performance of assisted reproductive technology (ART) staff using artificial intelligence (AI)

Cherouveim

Jiang

Kanakasabapathy

et al. 2022

J Assist Reprod Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical and laboratory key performance indicators in IVF: A consensus between the Italian Society of Fertility and Sterility and Reproductive Medicine (SIFES-MR) and the Italian Society of Embryology, Reproduction and Research (SIERR)

Vaiarelli

Zacà²,

Spadoni³

et al. 2023

J Assist Reprod Genet

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Infertility is increasing worldwide, and many couples seek IVF. Clinical management and laboratory work are fundamental in the IVF journey. Therefore, the definition of reliable key performance indicators (KPIs) based on clinical and laboratory parameters, is essential for internal quality control (IQC). Laboratory performance indicators have been identified and a first attempt to also determine clinical ones has been recently published. However, more detailed indicators are required. Methods An Italian group of experts in Reproductive Medicine from both public and private clinics on behalf of SIFES-MR and SIERR was established to define IVF indicators to monitor clinical performance. Results The working group built a consensus on a list of KPIs, performance indicators (PIs) and recommendation indicators (RIs). When deemed necessary, the reference population was stratified by woman age, response to ovarian stimulation and adoption of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A). Each indicator was scored with a value from 1 to 5 and a weighted average formula – considering all the suggested parameters—was defined. This formula generates a center performance score, indicating low, average, good, or excellent performance. Conclusion This study is intended to provide KPIs, PIs and RIs that encompass several essential aspects of a modern IVF clinic, including quality control and constant monitoring of clinical and embryological features. These indicators could be used to assess the quality of each center with the aim of improving efficacy and efficiency in IVF.

show abstract

Fine-tuning IVF laboratory key performance indicators of the Vienna consensus according to female age

Cited by 4 publications

References 33 publications

Embryology with precision: effective quality control in the in vitro fertilization laboratory

Embryology with precision: effective quality control in the in vitro fertilization laboratory

Quality assurance (QA) for monitoring the performance of assisted reproductive technology (ART) staff using artificial intelligence (AI)

Clinical and laboratory key performance indicators in IVF: A consensus between the Italian Society of Fertility and Sterility and Reproductive Medicine (SIFES-MR) and the Italian Society of Embryology, Reproduction and Research (SIERR)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About