Download PDF
Semin Reprod Med 2014; 32(02): 134-140
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1363555
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Time-Lapse Imaging of Preimplantation Embryos

Joe Conaghan
1   Pacific Fertility Center, San Francisco, California
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
10 February 2014 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Time-lapse imaging of preimplantation embryos is a relatively new and developing technology that may allow embryologists to be more objective in scoring embryos, and allow better selection of embryos for transfer and cryopreservation. The technology is easily assimilated into the in vitro fertilization (IVF) laboratory and is used with any preferred culture medium and culture environment. Embryos are loaded into dedicated culture dishes or trays which allow for individual embryo tracking and in some devices, group culture and individual embryo scoring at the same time. The embryos are imaged at regular intervals without removal from the culture environment, and the images can be viewed individually or stitched together to form a video showing complete development from oocyte to blastocyst. Automated or manual review of time-lapse videos can assist in identifying embryos with normal developmental profiles, and in deselecting embryos for consideration for transfer based on abnormal phenotypes. Time-lapse data are used in conjunction with traditional embryo scoring based on morphology to make embryo selection decisions. Improved embryo selection for transfer could allow for more widespread use of elective single embryo transfer without compromising pregnancy rates after IVF.

Keywords

preimplantation embryo - time-lapse - embryo selection - embryo assessment - embryo morphology
 

  • References

  • 1 Buitendijk SE. Children after in vitro fertilization. An overview of the literature. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1999; 15 (1) 52-65
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 De Sutter P. Single embryo transfer (set) not only leads to a reduction in twinning rates after IVF/ICSI, but also improves obstetrical and perinatal outcome of singletons. Verh K Acad Geneeskd Belg 2006; 68 (5-6) 319-327
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Pinborg A. IVF/ICSI twin pregnancies: risks and prevention. Hum Reprod Update 2005; 11 (6) 575-593
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Källén B, Finnström O, Lindam A, Nilsson E, Nygren KG, Otterblad Olausson P. Trends in delivery and neonatal outcome after in vitro fertilization in Sweden: data for 25 years. Hum Reprod 2010; 25 (4) 1026-1034
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Pinborg A, Loft A, Rasmussen S , et al. Neonatal outcome in a Danish national cohort of 3438 IVF/ICSI and 10,362 non-IVF/ICSI twins born between 1995 and 2000. Hum Reprod 2004; 19 (2) 435-441
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Healy DL, Breheny S, Halliday J , et al. Prevalence and risk factors for obstetric haemorrhage in 6730 singleton births after assisted reproductive technology in Victoria Australia. Hum Reprod 2010; 25 (1) 265-274
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) Clinic Summary Report 2011. Available at: https://www.sartcorsonline.com/rptCSR_PublicMultYear.aspx?ClinicPKID=0 . Accessed June 20, 2013
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Adashi EY, Barri PN, Berkowitz R , et al. Infertility therapy-associated multiple pregnancies (births): an ongoing epidemic. Reprod Biomed Online 2003; 7 (5) 515-542
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Bissonnette F, Phillips SJ, Gunby J , et al. Working to eliminate multiple pregnancies: a success story in Québec. Reprod Biomed Online 2011; 23 (4) 500-504
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Hamberger L, Hardarson T, Nygren KG. Avoidance of multiple pregnancy by use of single embryo transfer. Minerva Ginecol 2005; 57 (1) 15-19
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Cutting R, Morroll D, Roberts SA, Pickering S, Rutherford A ; BFS and ACE. Elective single embryo transfer: guidelines for practice British Fertility Society and Association of Clinical Embryologists. Hum Fertil (Camb) 2008; 11 (3) 131-146
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Rai V, Betsworth A, Beer C, Ndukwe G, Glazebrook C. Comparing patients' and clinicians' perceptions of elective single embryo transfer using the attitudes to a twin IVF pregnancy scale (ATIPS). J Assist Reprod Genet 2011; 28 (1) 65-72
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Leese B, Denton J. Attitudes towards single embryo transfer, twin and higher order pregnancies in patients undergoing infertility treatment: a review. Hum Fertil (Camb) 2010; 13 (1) 28-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Hope N, Rombauts L. Can an educational DVD improve the acceptability of elective single embryo transfer? A randomized controlled study. Fertil Steril 2010; 94 (2) 489-495
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Gardner DK, Lane M. Towards a single embryo transfer. Reprod Biomed Online 2003; 6 (4) 470-481
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Quinn P. Culture systems: sequential. Methods Mol Biol 2012; 912: 211-230
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Cooke S, Quinn P, Kime L, Ayres C, Tyler JP, Driscoll GL. Improvement in early human embryo development using new formulation sequential stage-specific culture media. Fertil Steril 2002; 78 (6) 1254-1260
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Machtinger R, Racowsky C. Culture systems: single step. Methods Mol Biol 2012; 912: 199-209
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Practice Committees of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Blastocyst culture and transfer in clinical-assisted reproduction: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2013; 99 (3) 667-672
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Kresowik JDK, Sparks AET, Van Voorhis BJ. Clinical factors associated with live birth after single embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 2012; 98 (5) 1152-1156
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Gardner DK, Lane M, Schoolcraft WB. Physiology and culture of the human blastocyst. J Reprod Immunol 2002; 55 (1-2) 85-100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Liebermann J, Conaghan J. Artificial collapse prior to blastocyst vitrification: improvement of clinical outcomes. Journal of Clinical Embryology 2013; 16 (1) 107-118
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Veleva Z, Karinen P, Tomás C, Tapanainen JS, Martikainen H. Elective single embryo transfer with cryopreservation improves the outcome and diminishes the costs of IVF/ICSI. Hum Reprod 2009; 24 (7) 1632-1639
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Scott Jr RT, Upham KM, Forman EJ , et al. Blastocyst biopsy with comprehensive chromosome screening and fresh embryo transfer significantly increases in vitro fertilization implantation and delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril 2013; 100 (3) 697-703
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Gardner DK, Surrey E, Minjarez D, Leitz A, Stevens J, Schoolcraft WB. Single blastocyst transfer: a prospective randomized trial. Fertil Steril 2004; 81 (3) 551-555
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Styer AK, Wright DL, Wolkovich AM, Veiga C, Toth TL. Single-blastocyst transfer decreases twin gestation without affecting pregnancy outcome. Fertil Steril 2008; 89 (6) 1702-1708
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Schoolcraft WB, Gardner DK. Blastocyst versus day 2 or 3 transfer. Semin Reprod Med 2001; 19 (3) 259-268
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. 2010 Assisted Reproductive Technology Fertility Clinic Success Rates Report. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/art/ART2010/index.htm . Accessed on December 23, 2013
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Mio Y, Maeda K. Time-lapse cinematography of dynamic changes occurring during in vitro development of human embryos. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199 (6) e1-e5
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Mio Y. Morphological analysis of human embryonic development using time-lapse cinematography. J Mamm Ova Res 2006; 23: 27-35
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 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) 532-541
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Wong CC, Loewke KE, Bossert NL , et al. Non-invasive imaging of human embryos before embryonic genome activation predicts development to the blastocyst stage. Nat Biotechnol 2010; 28 (10) 1115-1121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Barlow P, Puissant F, Van der Zwalmen P, Vandromme J, Trigaux P, Leroy F. In vitro fertilization, development, and implantation after exposure of mature mouse oocytes to visible light. Mol Reprod Dev 1992; 33 (3) 297-302
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Grisart B, Massip A, Dessy F. Cinematographic analysis of bovine embryo development in serum-free oviduct-conditioned medium. J Reprod Fertil 1994; 101 (2) 257-264
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Pribenszky C, Mátyás S, Kovács P, Losonczi E, Zádori J, Vajta G. Pregnancy achieved by transfer of a single blastocyst selected by time-lapse monitoring. Reprod Biomed Online 2010; 21 (4) 533-536
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Cruz M, Gadea B, Garrido N , 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) 569-573
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Kirkegaard K, Hindkjaer JJ, Grøndahl 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) 565-572
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Van Royen E, Mangelschots K, Vercruyssen M , et al. Multinucleation in cleavage stage embryos. Hum Reprod 2003; 18 (5) 1062-1069
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Rubio I, Kuhlmann R, Agerholm I , et al. Limited implantation success of direct-cleaved human zygotes: a time-lapse study. Fertil Steril 2012; 98 (6) 1458-1463
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Chen AA, Tan L, Suraj V, Reijo Pera R, Shen S. Biomarkers identified with time-lapse imaging: discovery, validation, and practical application. Fertil Steril 2013; 99 (4) 1035-1043
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Cruz M, Garrido N, Herrero J, Pérez-Cano I, Muñoz 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) 371-381
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Lee MJ, Lee RK, Lin MH, Hwu YM. Cleavage speed and implantation potential of early-cleavage embryos in IVF or ICSI cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet 2012; 29 (8) 745-750
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Racowsky C, Stern JE, Gibbons WE, Behr B, Pomeroy KO, Biggers JD. National collection of embryo morphology data into Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcomes Reporting System: associations among day 3 cell number, fragmentation and blastomere asymmetry, and live birth rate. Fertil Steril 2011; 95 (6) 1985-1989
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Wong C, Chen AA, Behr B, Shen S. Time-lapse microscopy and image analysis in basic and clinical embryo development research. Reprod Biomed Online 2013; 26 (2) 120-129
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 McLaren A. Early mammalian development. Prog Clin Biol Res 1985; 163A: 29-40
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Dumoulin JC, Land JA, Van Montfoort AP , et al. Effect of in vitro culture of human embryos on birthweight of newborns. Hum Reprod 2010; 25 (3) 605-612
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Thompson JG, Kind KL, Roberts CT, Robertson SA, Robinson JS. Epigenetic risks related to assisted reproductive technologies: short- and long-term consequences for the health of children conceived through assisted reproduction technology: more reason for caution?. Hum Reprod 2002; 17 (11) 2783-2786
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Hlinka D, Kaľatová B, Uhrinová I , et al. Time-lapse cleavage rating predicts human embryo viability. Physiol Res 2012; 61 (5) 513-525
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Meseguer M, Herrero J, Tejera A, Hilligsøe KM, Ramsing NB, Remohí J. The use of morphokinetics as a predictor of embryo implantation. Hum Reprod 2011; 26 (10) 2658-2671
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 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) 2649-2657
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Chavez SL, Loewke KE, Han J , et al. Dynamic blastomere behaviour reflects human embryo ploidy by the four-cell stage. Nat Commun 2012; 3: 1251
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Conaghan J, Chen AA, Willman SP , 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) 412-419 , e5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Hossain A. Potential for empowering and broadening the application of the SART embryo grading system. Journal of Clinical Embryology 2012; 15 (3) 54-66
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Vaccari S, Gvakharia M, Ivani K, Le A, Suarez M, Conaghan J. Adding Time-Lapse Imaging Parameters to Morphology for Embryo Selection May Improve Implantation Rates for Cleavage-Stage or Blastocyst Transfer. Fertil Steril 2013; 99 (3) S23-S24
    PubMedGoogle Scholar