Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prediction of Embryo Viability by Morphokinetic Evaluation to Facilitate Single Transfer

  • Chapter
Screening the Single Euploid Embryo

Abstract

The recent development of clinical time-lapse instruments has enabled continuous monitoring of human embryos to facilitate single embryo transfers in IVF. Time-lapse imaging (TLI) allows for a refined evaluation of known morphological parameters along with dynamic parameters and represents a new method of evaluating embryo viability morphologically. Timing of development has been correlated to blastocyst development, pregnancy outcome, and recently, chromosomal content, which suggests time-lapse imaging as a promising method for a more reliable embryo selection than morphology alone. The present challenge is that no consensus exists on which parameters are the most predictive, and only a few publications have offered clinically applicable models of embryo selection. Furthermore, due to the influence of culture conditions on development, selection models need modifications before transfer between clinics. This chapter addresses the use of TLI in the evaluation of pre-implantation embryo development and pregnancy potential in an effort to provide an overview of the feasibility and potential use of TLI in IVF treatment and single embryo transfer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. ESHRE/ALPHA. The Istanbul consensus workshop on embryo assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(6):1270–83. doi:10.1093/humrep/der037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Montag M, Liebenthron J, Koster M. Which morphological scoring system is relevant in human embryo development? Placenta. 2011;32 Suppl 3:S252–6. doi:10.1016/j.placenta.2011.07.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Paternot G, Wetzels AM, Thonon F, Vansteenbrugge A, Willemen D, Devroe J, et al. Intra- and interobserver analysis in the morphological assessment of early stage embryos during an IVF procedure: a multicentre study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2011;9:127. doi:10.1186/1477-7827-9-127.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ruiz de Assin R, Clavero A, Gonzalvo MC, Ramirez JP, Zamora S, Fernandez A, et al. Comparison of methods to determine the assigned value in an external quality control programme for embryo evaluation. Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;19(6):824–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Arce JC, Ziebe S, Lundin K, Janssens R, Helmgaard L, Sorensen P. Interobserver agreement and intraobserver reproducibility of embryo quality assessments. Hum Reprod. 2006;21(8):2141–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sundvall L, Ingerslev HJ, Breth Knudsen U, Kirkegaard K. Inter- and intra-observer variability of time-lapse annotations. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(12):3215–21. doi:10.1093/humrep/det366.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cruz M, Gadea B, Garrido N, Pedersen KS, Martinez M, Perez-Cano I, et al. Embryo quality, blastocyst and ongoing pregnancy rates in oocyte donation patients whose embryos were monitored by time-lapse imaging. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2011;28(7):569–73. doi:10.1007/s10815-011-9549-1.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kirkegaard K, Hindkjaer JJ, Grondahl ML, Kesmodel US, Ingerslev HJ. A randomized clinical trial comparing embryo culture in a conventional incubator with a time-lapse incubator. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012;29(6):565–72. doi:10.1007/s10815-012-9750-x.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lewis WH, Gregory PW. Cinematographs of living developing rabbit-eggs. Science. 1929;69(1782):226–9. doi:10.1126/science.69.1782.226-a.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Alberts B, Johnson A, Lewis J, Raff M, Roberts K, Walter P. Molecular biology of the cell. 5th ed. Extended version. 2008. Garland science, ISBN 978-0-8153-4111-6, http://www.garlandscience.com/product/isbn/9780815341055;jsessionid=eCTO1gTepTYrBm5MHJQoZg__

  11. Azzarello A, Hoest T, Mikkelsen AL. The impact of pronuclei morphology and dynamicity on live birth outcome after time-lapse culture. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(9):2649–57. doi:10.1093/humrep/des210.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Payne D, Flaherty SP, Barry MF, Matthews CD. Preliminary observations on polar body extrusion and pronuclear formation in human oocytes using time-lapse video cinematography. Hum Reprod. 1997;12(3):532–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Conaghan J, Chen AA, Willman SP, Ivani K, Chenette PE, Boostanfar R, et al. Improving embryo selection using a computer-automated time-lapse image analysis test plus day 3 morphology: results from a prospective multicenter trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(2):412–9. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.04.021.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wong CC, Loewke KE, Bossert NL, Behr B, De Jonge CJ, Baer TM, et al. Non-invasive imaging of human embryos before embryonic genome activation predicts development to the blastocyst stage. Nat Biotechnol. 2010;28(10):1115–21. doi:10.1038/nbt.1686.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cruz M, Garrido N, Herrero J, Perez-Cano I, Munoz M, Meseguer M. Timing of cell division in human cleavage-stage embryos is linked with blastocyst formation and quality. Reprod Biomed Online. 2012;25(4):371–81. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.06.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dal Canto M, Coticchio G, Mignini Renzini M, De Ponti E, Novara PV, Brambillasca F, et al. Cleavage kinetics analysis of human embryos predicts development to blastocyst and implantation. Reprod Biomed Online. 2012;25(5):474–80. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.07.016.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Meseguer M, Herrero J, Tejera A, Hilligsoe KM, Ramsing NB, Remohi J. The use of morphokinetics as a predictor of embryo implantation. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(10):2658–71. doi:10.1093/humrep/der256.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Joergensen MW, Agerholm I, Hindkjaer J, Bolund L, Sunde L, Ingerslev HJ, et al. Altered cleavage patterns in human tripronuclear embryos and their association to fertilization method: a time-lapse study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014;31(4):435–42. doi:10.1007/s10815-014-0178-3.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Campbell A, Fishel S, Bowman N, Duffy S, Sedler M, Hickman CF. Modelling a risk classification of aneuploidy in human embryos using non-invasive morphokinetics. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;26(5):477–85. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.02.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rubio I, Kuhlmann R, Agerholm I, Kirk J, Herrero J, Escriba MJ, et al. Limited implantation success of direct-cleaved human zygotes: a time-lapse study. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(6):1458–63. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.07.1135.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Diamond MP, Willman S, Chenette P, Cedars MI. The clinical need for a method of identification of embryos destined to become a blastocyst in assisted reproductive technology cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012;29(5):391–6. doi:10.1007/s10815-012-9732-z.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Harper J, Magli MC, Lundin K, Barratt CL, Brison D. When and how should new technology be introduced into the IVF laboratory? Hum Reprod. 2012;27(2):303–13. doi:10.1093/humrep/der414.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kirkegaard K, Campbell A, Agerholm I, Bentin-Ley U, Gabrielsen A, Kirk J, et al. Limitations of a time-lapse blastocyst prediction model: a large multicentre outcome analysis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;29(2):156–8. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.04.011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hlinka D, Kalatova B, Uhrinova I, Dolinska S, Rutarova J, Rezacova J, et al. Time-lapse cleavage rating predicts human embryo viability. Physiol Res. 2012;61(5):513–25.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kirkegaard K, Kesmodel US, Hindkjaer JJ, Ingerslev HJ. Time-lapse parameters as predictors of blastocyst development and pregnancy outcome in embryos from good prognosis patients: a prospective cohort study. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(10):2643–51. doi:10.1093/humrep/det300.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Chamayou S, Patrizio P, Storaci G, Tomaselli V, Alecci C, Ragolia C, et al. The use of morphokinetic parameters to select all embryos with full capacity to implan. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013;30:703–10. doi:10.1007/s10815-013-9992-2.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Meseguer M, Rubio I, Cruz M, Basile N, Marcos J, Requena A. Embryo incubation and selection in a time-lapse monitoring system improves pregnancy outcome compared with a standard incubator: a retrospective cohort study. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(6):1481–9.e10. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.08.016.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Tejera A, Herrero J, Rubio I, Castelló D, Pellicer A, Meseguer M, et al. Session 57: time lapse: the real revolution for ambryo assessment? Hum Reprod. 2013;28 Suppl 1:i87–90. doi:10.1093/humrep/det190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Basile N, Nogales Mdel C, Bronet F, Florensa M, Riqueiros M, Rodrigo L, et al. Increasing the probability of selecting chromosomally normal embryos by time-lapse morphokinetics analysis. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(3):699–704. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Freour T, Dessolle L, Lammers J, Lattes S, Barriere P. Comparison of embryo morphokinetics after in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection in smoking and nonsmoking women. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:1944–50. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.01.136.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Campbell A, Fishel S, Bowman N, Duffy S, Sedler M, Thornton S. Retrospective analysis of outcomes after IVF using an aneuploidy risk model derived from time-lapse imaging without PGS. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;27(2):140–6. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.04.013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Campbell A, Fishel S, Laegdsmand M. Aneuploidy is a key causal factor of delays in blastulation: author response to ‘a cautionary note against aneuploidy risk assessment using time-lapse imaging’. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;28(3):279–83. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.11.016.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Chavez SL, Loewke KE, Han J, Moussavi F, Colls P, Munne S, et al. Dynamic blastomere behaviour reflects human embryo ploidy by the four-cell stage. Nat Commun. 2012;3:1251. doi:10.1038/ncomms2249.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Eaton JL, Hacker MR, Barrett CB, Thornton KL, Penzias AS. Influence of patient age on the association between euploidy and day-3 embryo morphology. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(1):365–7. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.09.019.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Eaton JL, Hacker MR, Harris D, Thornton KL, Penzias AS. Assessment of day-3 morphology and euploidy for individual chromosomes in embryos that develop to the blastocyst stage. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(6):2432–6. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.03.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Finn A, Scott L, O’Leary T, Davies D, Hill J. Sequential embryo scoring as a predictor of aneuploidy in poor-prognosis patients. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010;21(3):381–90. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.05.004.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Wells D. Embryo aneuploidy and the role of morphological and genetic screening. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010;21(3):274–7. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.06.035.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Kligman I, Benadiva C, Alikani M, Munne S. The presence of multinucleated blastomeres in human embryos is correlated with chromosomal abnormalities. Hum Reprod. 1996;11(7):1492–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Staessen C, Van Steirteghem A. The genetic constitution of multinuclear blastomeres and their derivative daughter blastomeres. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(6):1625–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Davies S, Christopikou D, Tsorva E, Karagianni A, Handyside AH, Mastrominas M, et al. SESSION 59: embryology—development and quality. Hum Reprod. 2012;27 Suppl 2:ii84–6. doi:10.1093/humrep/27.s2.58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Hickman CFL, Campbell A, Duffy S, Fishel S, Rubio I, Agerholm I, et al. Session 69: embryology—cause and effect of bad timing. Hum Reprod. 2012;27 Suppl 2:ii103–5. doi:10.1093/humrep/27.s2.67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Friedman BE, Chavez SL, Behr B, Lathi RB, Baker VL, Reijo Pera RA. Non-invasive imaging for the detection of human embryonic aneuploidy at the blastocyst stag. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(3):S38. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.07.141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Semeniuk L, Mazur P, Mikitenko D, Nagorny V, Zukin V. Time-lapse and aCGH, is there any connection between ploidy and embryo cleavage timing on early stages of embryo development? Fertil Steril. 2013;99(3):S6. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.01.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Melzer KE, McCaffrey C, Adler A, Colls P, Munne S, Grifo JA. Developmental morphology and continuous time-lapse microscopy (TLM) of human embryos: can we predict euploidy? Fertil Steril. 2012;98(3):S136. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.07.501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Stevens J, Rawlins M, Janesch A, Treff N, Schoolcraft WB, Katz-Jaffe MG. Time lapse observation of embryo development identifies later stage morphology based parameters associated with blastocyst quality but not chromosome constitution. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(3):S30. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.07.112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Montgomery S, Duffy S, Bowman N, Sedler M, Campbell A, Fishel S, et al. Session 02: from oocyte to blastocyst. Hum Reprod. 2013;28 Suppl 1:i1–4. doi:10.1093/humrep/det147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Melzer KE, Noyes N, Hodes-Wertz B, McCulloh D, Munne S, Grifo JA. How well do morphokinetic (MK) parameters and time-lapse microscopy (TLM) predict euploidy? A pilot study of TLM with trophectoderm (TE) biopsy with array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH). Fertil Steril. 2013;100(3):S209. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.07.1387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Hong KH, Forman EJ, Prodoehl A, Upham KM, Treff NR, Scott Jr RT. Early times to cavitation are associated with a reduced prevalence of aneuploidy in embryos cultured to the blastocyst stage: a prospective blinded morphokinetic study. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(3):S382. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.07.723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Campbell AJ, Fishel SB, Duffy S, Montgomery S. Embryo selection model defined using morphokinetic data from human embryos to predict implantation and live birth. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(3):S502. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.07.306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Bellver J, Mifsud A, Grau N, Privitera L, Meseguer M. Similar morphokinetic patterns in embryos derived from obese and normoweight infertile women: a time-lapse study. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(3):794–800. doi:10.1093/humrep/des438.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Wale PL, Gardner DK. Time-lapse analysis of mouse embryo development in oxygen gradients. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010;21(3):402–10. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.04.028.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Wale PL, Gardner DK. Oxygen regulates amino acid turnover and carbohydrate uptake during the preimplantation period of mouse embryo development. Biol Reprod. 2012;87(1):24, 1–8. doi:10.1095/biolreprod.112.100552.

  53. Kirkegaard K, Hindkjaer JJ, Ingerslev HJ. Effect of oxygen concentration on human embryo development evaluated by time-lapse monitoring. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(3):738–44.e4. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.11.028.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Giorgetti C, Hans E, Terriou P, Salzmann J, Barry B, Chabert-Orsini V, et al. Early cleavage: an additional predictor of high implantation rate following elective single embryo transfer. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;14(1):85–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Lundin K, Bergh C, Hardarson T. Early embryo cleavage is a strong indicator of embryo quality in human IVF. Hum Reprod. 2001;16(12):2652–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Lemmen JG, Agerholm I, Ziebe S. Kinetic markers of human embryo quality using time-lapse recordings of IVF/ICSI-fertilized oocytes. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008;17(3):385–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Cruz M, Garrido N, Gadea B, Munoz M, Perez-Cano I, Meseguer M. Oocyte insemination techniques are related to alterations of embryo developmental timing in an oocyte donation model. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;27(4):367–75. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.06.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Ben-Yosef D, Amit A, Azem F, Schwartz T, Cohen T, Mei-Raz N, et al. Prospective randomized comparison of two embryo culture systems: P1 medium by Irvine Scientific and the Cook IVF Medium. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2004;21(8):291–5.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Sifer C, Handelsman D, Grange E, Porcher R, Poncelet C, Martin-Pont B, et al. An auto-controlled prospective comparison of two embryos culture media (G III series versus ISM) for IVF and ICSI treatments. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2009;26(11–12):575–81. doi:10.1007/s10815-009-9357-z.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Van Langendonckt A, Demylle D, Wyns C, Nisolle M, Donnez J. Comparison of G1.2/G2.2 and Sydney IVF cleavage/blastocyst sequential media for the culture of human embryos: a prospective, randomized, comparative study. Fertil Steril. 2001;76(5):1023–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Zollner KP, Zollner U, Schneider M, Dietl J, Steck T. Comparison of two media for sequential culture after IVF and ICSI shows no differences in pregnancy rates: a randomized trial. Med Sci Monit. 2004;10(1):CR1–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Ciray HN, Aksoy T, Goktas C, Ozturk B, Bahceci M. Time-lapse evaluation of human embryo development in single versus sequential culture media-a sibling oocyte study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012;29(9):891–900. doi:10.1007/s10815-012-9818-7.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Basile N, Morbeck D, Garcia-Velasco J, Bronet F, Meseguer M. Type of culture media does not affect embryo kinetics: a time-lapse analysis of sibling oocytes. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(3):634–41. doi:10.1093/humrep/des462.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Munoz M, Cruz M, Humaidan P, Garrido N, Perez-Cano I, Meseguer M. Dose of recombinant FSH and oestradiol concentration on day of HCG affect embryo development kinetics. Reprod Biomed Online. 2012;25(4):382–9. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.06.016.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sahlsgrenska University Hospital, Gothenberg, Sweden

    Aisling Ahlström

  2. IVF Laboratory, Reproductive Medicine Unit, CARE Fertility Group, Nottingham, UK

    Alison Campbell

  3. The Fertility Clinic, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark

    Hans Jakob Ingerslev

  4. Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark

    Kirstine Kirkegaard

Authors
  1. Aisling Ahlström
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alison Campbell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hans Jakob Ingerslev
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kirstine Kirkegaard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kirstine Kirkegaard .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Advanced Genetics, Reproductive Research Section, Carlsbad, California, USA

    E Scott Sills

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ahlström, A., Campbell, A., Ingerslev, H.J., Kirkegaard, K. (2015). Prediction of Embryo Viability by Morphokinetic Evaluation to Facilitate Single Transfer. In: Sills, E. (eds) Screening the Single Euploid Embryo. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16892-0_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16892-0_10

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-16891-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-16892-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation