Ionophore application for artificial oocyte activation and its potential effect on morphokinetics: a sibling oocyte study

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Assisted Oocyte Activation in ICSI: Pairwise Meta-Analyses and Systematic Evidence Evaluation

BACKGROUND

Artificial oocyte activation (AOA) is used to improve fertilisation rates in intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of AOA on fertilisation, embryo development, and clinical outcomes, including live birth.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus from January 1990 to March 2024 using terms related to 'artificial oocyte activation' and 'ICSI.'

SELECTION CRITERIA

Study designs included randomised trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental, cohort, and case-control studies that evaluated AOA's effects on ICSI outcomes, provided quantitative data and were published in English.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Reviewers independently performed data extraction using a standardised form. Study quality was appraised using Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklists. Meta-analyses employed a random-effects model, and evidence was classified using a comprehensive numerical framework.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 45 studies covering 56 787 mature oocytes, 7463 women for clinical pregnancies, and 7063 women for live births. AOA showed potential in increasing fertilisation rates in patients with a history of low or absent fertilisation but did not enhance embryo development or clinical outcomes. This effect diminished when excluding low-quality studies or focusing solely on RCTs. In other patient groups, AOA showed limited or nonsignificant benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

Applying comprehensive evidence assessment, AOA showed potential in improving fertilisation rates in patients with fertilisation problems but no benefits for embryo development or live birth rates. This underscores the critical importance of rigorous evidence credibility in informing clinical practice in assisted conception.

Add-On Technologies That Aim to Improve Oocyte Quality and Embryo Implantation Potential

Advancements in assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) have led to the development of various add-on techniques aimed at improving oocyte quality and enhancing embryo implantation potential. These techniques target critical stages of both oocyte and embryo physiology, including oocyte growth and maturation, fertilization, chromosomal status, and embryo development. Key approaches involve the optimization of in vitro fertilization (IVF) protocols, recruiting capable follicles giving rise to dynamic oocytes to evolve, culture media supplementation, preimplantation genetic testing (PGT), and mitochondrial replacement therapy (MRT), all of which are designed to enhance oocyte competence through its function and metabolism. The use of PGT has been promising in selecting embryos suitable for transfer, thus optimizing implantation success. Emerging technologies, such as platelet-rich plasma treatment (PRP), time-lapse imaging (TLI), and hyaluronan-rich (HA) culture media, claim to improve ovarian rejuvenation and uterine receptivity, embryo selection, as well as embryo implantation potential, respectively. Evidence for certain add-on approaches remains limited, but ongoing research suggests that the use of such treatments may lead to increased clinical pregnancies and live birth rates, especially in poor-prognosis patients. The present review describes the current state of the add-on innovations, their mechanisms of action, as well as their possibilities to increase ART success rates.

Oocyte activation for women following intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)

BACKGROUND

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), a type of assisted reproductive technology (ART), is offered as a treatment option for male factor infertility. Over the years, the indications for ICSI have been expanded, despite uncertainty about its benefits and harms compared to the conventional method of achieving fertilisation. Artificial oocyte activation (AOA), which can be performed by chemical, electrical or mechanical intervention, has been employed during ART ICSI treatment where there has been a history of low fertilization rate or total fertilization failure, and it has been reported to improve reproductive outcomes. It is important to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of AOA in women undergoing ART ICSI treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of artificial oocyte activation in women affected by infertility undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO international Clinical Trials Registry Platform (8 August 2024). We also searched reference lists of relevant articles and contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing artificial oocyte activation (AOA) (chemical, electrical or mechanical interventions) versus no intervention, placebo or another method of AOA in women undergoing ART.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used methodological procedures as per Cochrane recommendations. We assessed the risk of bias in the included studies using ROB 2. The primary outcomes were live birth and miscarriage rates. We analyzed data using the risk ratio (RR) and a fixed-effect model. We assessed the certainty of the evidence by using GRADE criteria. We restricted the primary analyses to studies at low risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 20 studies, four of which were participant-based randomized trials with 743 participants. The remaining 16 were sibling-oocyte-model randomized studies. We based the main clinical findings of the current review on the participant-based RCTs, and we restricted our primary analysis to studies with a low risk of bias. Based on the one trial with 343 participants that we included in our primary analysis, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of AOA on the live birth rate when compared to conventional ICSI without AOA in women undergoing ART ICSI (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.29 to 3.01; one trial; 343 participants). For a typical clinic with a live birth rate of 18% following ART, the addition of AOA may result in live birth rates between 24% and 55%, but this evidence is very uncertain. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of AOA on the miscarriage rate compared to conventional ICSI without AOA in women undergoing ART ICSI (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.48 to 2.04; one trial; 343 participants). If the miscarriage rate was 9% following ART, addition of oocyte activation may result in miscarriage rates between 4% and 18%, but this evidence is very uncertain. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of AOA on the clinical pregnancy rate compared to conventional ICSI without AOA in women undergoing ART ICSI (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.32; one trial; 343 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of AOA on the multiple pregnancy rate per participant compared to conventional ICSI without AOA in women undergoing ART ICSI (RR 1.91, 95% CI 0.48 to 7.67; one trial; 343 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of AOA on the total fertilization failure rate compared to conventional ICSI without AOA in women undergoing ART ICSI (RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.40; one trial; 343 participants). When we stratified our analysis according to various infertility factors, we found low-certainty evidence that in couples undergoing ICSI treatment who have had a history of low or no fertilization, AOA may help improve the live birth rate while making little or no difference to the miscarriage rate. Further research is needed to confirm or refute this finding. None of the trials reported congenital anomalies (birth defects) as an outcome. Lack of short- or long-term safety data is an important limitation of the review and of the trials in this field. We did not find any trials that compared two different methods of oocyte activation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain about the effect of AOA on the live birth and miscarriage rates in women undergoing ART ICSI. In the subpopulation of those who have had a previous history of low or no fertilization, AOA may result in an increase in the live birth rate when compared to conventional ICSI without AOA, while making little or no difference to the miscarriage rate. There was considerable variation in the protocols used for chemical AOA, which affects the generalizability of the findings. Due to the very low to low certainty of evidence, the results should be interpreted with caution.

Early rescue oocyte activation at 5 h post-ICSI is a useful strategy for avoiding unexpected fertilization failure and low fertilization in ICSI cycles

Introduction

Attempts to artificially activate unfertilized oocytes at 24 h post intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) have generally resulted in poor outcomes. This study aims to explore a new strategy for early judgement and rescue activation of unfertilized oocytes at 5 h post ICSI to avoid unexpected fertilization failure (UFF) or unexpected low fertilization (ULF) in ICSI cycles.

Methods

Firstly, time-lapse data from 278 ICSI cycles were retrospectively analyzed to establish an indicator for fertilization failure prediction. Secondly, 14 UFF and 20 ULF cycles were enrolled for an observational study, early rescue oocyte activation (EROA) was performed on oocytes without post-ICSI Pb2 extrusion to investigate fertilization efficiency, embryo development and clinical outcomes.

Results

The average time to Pb2 extrusion post-ICSI was 3.03±1.21 h, 95.54% of oocytes had extruded Pb2 before 5 h, and the sensitivity and specificity for monitoring Pb2 extrusion at 5 h by time-lapse imaging to predict fertilization were 99.59% and 99.78%, respectively. Early rescue activation of oocytes with no Pb2 extrusion resulted in acceptable fertilization and embryo developmental outcomes, in terms of the fertilization rate (75.00, 72.99%), 2PN fertilization rate (61.36, 56.93%), good-quality embryo rate (42.59, 50.00%), blastocyst formation rate (48.28, 46.03%), good-quality blastocyst rate (34.48, 33.33%), and oocyte utilization rate (36.36, 27.74%), for both UFF and ULF cycles. The clinical pregnancy, embryo implantation, and early miscarriage rates in the rescue oocyte activation group did not significantly differ from those in the Pb2 extrusion group. Fourteen unexpected fertilization failures and 20 low fertilization ICSI cycles were rescued and resulted in clinical pregnancy rates of 40.00% (4/10) and 57.14% (8/14), respectively.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that monitoring Pb2 extrusion by time-lapse imaging can accurately predict fertilization outcomes, suggesting that early rescue oocyte activation at 5 h post ICSI is an effective strategy for avoiding unexpected fertilization failure and low fertilization in ICSI cycles.

ESHRE Add-ons working group, Lundin K, Bentzen JG, Bozdag G, Ebner T, Harper J, Le Clef N, Moffett A, Norcross S, Polyzos NP, Rautakallio-Hokkanen S, Sfontouris I, Sermon K, Vermeulen N, Pinborg A. Good practice recommendations on add-ons in reproductive medicine†

STUDY QUESTION

Which add-ons are safe and effective to be used in ART treatment?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Forty-two recommendations were formulated on the use of add-ons in the diagnosis of fertility problems, the IVF laboratory and clinical management of IVF treatment.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The innovative nature of ART combined with the extremely high motivation of the patients has opened the door to the wide application of what has become known as 'add-ons' in reproductive medicine. These supplementary options are available to patients in addition to standard fertility procedures, typically incurring an additional cost. A diverse array of supplementary options is made available, encompassing tests, drugs, equipment, complementary or alternative therapies, laboratory procedures, and surgical interventions. These options share the common aim of stating to enhance pregnancy or live birth rates, mitigate the risk of miscarriage, or expedite the time to achieving pregnancy.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

ESHRE aimed to develop clinically relevant and evidence-based recommendations focusing on the safety and efficacy of add-ons currently used in fertility procedures in order to improve the quality of care for patients with infertility.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

ESHRE appointed a European multidisciplinary working group consisting of practising clinicians, embryologists, and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of infertility. Patient representatives were included in the working group. To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, recommendations were based on the professional experience and consensus of the working group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 46 independent international reviewers. A total of 272 comments were received and incorporated where relevant.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The multidisciplinary working group formulated 42 recommendations in three sections; diagnosis and diagnostic tests, laboratory tests and interventions, and clinical management.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Of the 42 recommendations, none could be based on high-quality evidence and only four could be based on moderate-quality evidence, implicating that 95% of the recommendations are supported only by low-quality randomized controlled trials, observational data, professional experience, or consensus of the development group.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

These guidelines offer valuable direction for healthcare professionals who are responsible for the care of patients undergoing ART treatment for infertility. Their purpose is to promote safe and effective ART treatment, enabling patients to make informed decisions based on realistic expectations. The guidelines aim to ensure that patients are fully informed about the various treatment options available to them and the likelihood of any additional treatment or test to improve the chance of achieving a live birth.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

All costs relating to the development process were covered from ESHRE funds. There was no external funding of the development process or manuscript production. K.L. reports speakers fees from Merck and was part of a research study by Vitrolife (unpaid). T.E. reports consulting fees from Gynemed, speakers fees from Gynemed and is part of the scientific advisory board of Hamilton Thorne. N.P.P. reports grants from Merck Serono, Ferring Pharmaceutical, Theramex, Gedeon Richter, Organon, Roche, IBSA and Besins Healthcare, speakers fees from Merck Serono, Ferring Pharmaceutical, Theramex, Gedeon Richter, Organon, Roche, IBSA and Besins Healthcare. S.R.H. declares being managing director of Fertility Europe, a not-for-profit organization receiving financial support from ESHRE. I.S. is a scientific advisor for and has stock options from Alife Health, is co-founder of IVFvision LTD (unpaid) and received speakers' fee from the 2023 ART Young Leader Prestige workshop in China. A.P. reports grants from Gedeon Richter, Ferring Pharmaceuticals and Merck A/S, consulting fees from Preglem, Novo Nordisk, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Gedeon Richter, Cryos and Merck A/S, speakers fees from Gedeon Richter, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Merck A/S, Theramex and Organon, travel fees from Gedeon Richter. The other authors disclosed no conflicts of interest.

DISCLAIMER

This Good Practice Recommendations (GPRs) document represents the views of ESHRE, which are the result of consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders and are based on the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation.ESHRE GPRs should be used for information and educational purposes. They should not be interpreted as setting a standard of care or bedeemedinclusive of all proper methods of care, or be exclusive of other methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results.Theydo not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, or variations based on locality and facility type.Furthermore, ESHRE GPRs do not constitute or imply the endorsement, or favouring, of any of the included technologies by ESHRE.

Artificial oocyte activation with Ca2+ ionophore improves reproductive outcomes in patients with fertilization failure and poor embryo development in previous ICSI cycles

Research question

Does artificial oocyte activation (AOA) by a calcium ionophore (ionomycin) improve the previous fertilization failure or poor embryo development of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) account for male factor infertility or other infertility causes?

Design

This retrospective study involved 114 patients receiving ICSI-AOA in Shanghai First Maternity and Infant Hospital with previous ICSI fertilization failure or poor embryo development. The previous ICSI cycles of the same patients without AOA served as the control group. The fertilization rates, cleavage rates, transferable embryo rates and blastocyst formation rates of the two groups were compared. Additionally, the clinical pregnancy, implantation rate and live birth rates were also compared to assess the efficiency and safety of AOA. Furthermore, two subgroup analyses were performed in this study based on the cause of infertility and the reason for AOA. The fertilization rate, embryonic development potential and clinical outcome were compared among groups.

Results

Among 114 ICSI-AOA cycles, the fertilization rate, top-quality embryo rate, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy per patient and live birth rate per patient were improved significantly compared with previous ICSI cycles (p<0.05 to P< 0.001), and the miscarriage rate in the AOA group was significantly lower than that of the control group (p<0.001). In the AOA subgroups based on the cause of infertility, the fertilization rates of each subgroup were significantly improved compared with previous control cycles except for the mixed factor infertility subgroup (p<0.05 to p<0.001). In the AOA subgroups based on the reason for AOA, the fertilization rates of each subgroup were significantly increased compared with those in their previous ICSI cycle without AOA (p<0.001); however, there was no significant difference in the top-quality embryo rate. No significant improvement was found in the implantation rates and the clinical pregnancy rate in each subgroup except for the poor embryo development subgroup. In the 114 AOA cycles, 35 healthy infants (21 singletons and 7 twins) were delivered without major congenital birth defects or malformations.

Conclusion

This study showed that AOA with the calcium ionophore ionomycin can improve the reproductive outcomes of patients with previous fertilization failure and poor embryo development after ICSI.

Significant differences in efficiency between two commonly used ionophore solutions for assisted oocyte activation (AOA): a prospective comparison of ionomycin and A23187

PURPOSE

Despite the success of ICSI in treating severe male factor infertile patients, total fertilization failure (FF) still occurs in around 1-3% of ICSI cycles. To overcome FF, the use of calcium ionophores has been proposed to induce oocyte activation and restore fertilization rates. However, assisted oocyte activation (AOA) protocols and ionophores vary between laboratories, and the morphokinetic development underlying AOA remains understudied.

METHODS

A prospective single-center cohort study involving 81 in vitro matured metaphase-II oocytes from 66 oocyte donation cycles artificially activated by A23187 (GM508 CultActive, Gynemed) (n=42) or ionomycin (n=39). Parthenogenesis was induced, and morphokinetic parameters (tPNa, tPNf, t2-t8, tSB, and tB) were compared between the 2 study groups and a control group comprising 39 2PN-zygotes from standard ICSI cycles.

RESULTS

Ionomycin treatment resulted in higher activation rates compared to A23187 (38.5% vs 23.8%, p=0.15). Importantly, none of the A23187-activated parthenotes formed blastocysts. When evaluating the morphokinetic dynamics between the two ionophores, we found that tPNa and tPNf were significantly delayed in the group treated by A23187 (11.84 vs 5.31, p=0.002 and 50.15 vs 29.69, p=0.005, respectively). t2 was significantly delayed in A23187-activated parthenotes when compared to the double heterologous control embryo group. In contrast, the morphokinetic development of ionomycin-activated parthenotes was comparable to control embryos (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that A23187 leads to lower oocyte activation rates and profoundly affects morphokinetic timings and preimplantation development in parthenotes. Despite our limited sample size and low parthenote competence, standardization and further optimization of AOA protocols may allow wider use and improved outcomes for FF cycles.

The effect of ionomycin-induced oocyte activation on multiple morphological abnormalities of the sperm flagella

Artificial oocyte activation (AOA) is considered an effective method to improve clinical outcomes in patients with some forms of male factor infertility and does not increase the risk of birth defects. However, the effects of AOA on patients with multiple morphological abnormalities of the sperm flagella (MMAF) caused by a DNAH1 mutation are still unknown. To explore the effects, our study analyzed a case with MMAF due to DNAH1 homozygous mutation that underwent testicular sperm extraction (TESE) combined with intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). The case had 28 MII oocytes. The 28 oocytes were divided randomly and equally into AOA and non-AOA groups. Ionomycin was used for AOA. We compared the clinical outcomes of two groups and selected three blastulation failure embryos from each group for transcriptome analysis (Data can be accessed through GSE216618). Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were determined with an adjusted p-value <0.05 and a |log2-fold change| ≥1. The comparison of clinical outcomes showed that the two pronuclei (2PN) rate and grade 1-2 embryo rate at day 3 were not significantly different between the two groups. Transcriptome analyses of blastulation failed embryos showed that the use of AOA had potential risks of chromosome structure defects, transcriptional regulation defects, and epigenetic defects. In conclusion, when the case with MMAF due to DNAH1 mutation underwent TESE-ICSI, ionomycin-induced oocyte activation could not improve the clinical outcomes and introduced the risks of chromosome structure defect, transcriptional regulation defect, and epigenetic defect.

Effect of A23187 ionophore treatment on human blastocyst development-a sibling oocyte study

PURPOSE

To investigate whether treatment with commercially available ready-to-use A23187 ionophore (GM508-CultActive) improves embryo development outcome in patients with a history of embryo developmental problems.

METHODS

This is a uni-center prospective study in which sibling oocytes of patients with embryos of poor quality on day 5 in the previous cycle were treated or not with CultActive.

RESULTS

Two hundred forty-seven metaphase II (MII) oocytes from 19 cycles performed between 2016 and 2019 were included in the study. After ICSI, the sibling oocytes were assigned to the treatment group or to the control group, following an electronically generated randomization list. A number of 122 MII were treated with CultActive and 125 MII had no treatment and were assigned to the control group. No difference in fertilization rate (p = 0.255) or in the capacity of embryos to reach good quality on day 5 (p = 0.197) was observed between the two groups. The utilization rates defined as the number of embryos transferred or cryopreserved per mature oocyte (p = 0.438) or per fertilized oocytes (p = 0.299) were not significantly different between the treated group and the control group.

CONCLUSION

The results of the current study do not support the use of CultActive in cases with embryo developmental problems.

OUP accepted manuscript

BACKGROUND

Oocyte activation deficiency (OAD) is attributed to the majority of cases underlying failure of ICSI cycles, the standard treatment for male factor infertility. Oocyte activation encompasses a series of concerted events, triggered by sperm-specific phospholipase C zeta (PLCζ), which elicits increases in free cytoplasmic calcium (Ca²⁺) in spatially and temporally specific oscillations. Defects in this specific pattern of Ca²⁺ release are directly attributable to most cases of OAD. Ca²⁺ release can be clinically mediated via assisted oocyte activation (AOA), a combination of mechanical, electrical and/or chemical stimuli which artificially promote an increase in the levels of intra-cytoplasmic Ca²⁺. However, concerns regarding safety and efficacy underlie potential risks that must be addressed before such methods can be safely widely used.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

Recent advances in current AOA techniques warrant a review of the safety and efficacy of these practices, to determine the extent to which AOA may be implemented in the clinic. Importantly, the primary challenges to obtaining data on the safety and efficacy of AOA must be determined. Such questions require urgent attention before widespread clinical utilization of such protocols can be advocated.

SEARCH METHODS

A literature review was performed using databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, etc. using AOA, OAD, calcium ionophores, ICSI, PLCζ, oocyte activation, failed fertilization and fertilization failure as keywords. Relevant articles published until June 2019 were analysed and included in the review, with an emphasis on studies assessing large-scale efficacy and safety.

OUTCOMES

Contradictory studies on the safety and efficacy of AOA do not yet allow for the establishment of AOA as standard practice in the clinic. Heterogeneity in study methodology, inconsistent sample inclusion criteria, non-standardized outcome assessments, restricted sample size and animal model limitations render AOA strictly experimental. The main scientific concern impeding AOA utilization in the clinic is the non-physiological method of Ca²⁺ release mediated by most AOA agents, coupled with a lack of holistic understanding regarding the physiological mechanism(s) underlying Ca²⁺ release at oocyte activation.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The number of studies with clinical relevance using AOA remains significantly low. A much wider range of studies examining outcomes using multiple AOA agents are required.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

In addition to addressing the five main challenges of studies assessing AOA safety and efficacy, more standardized, large-scale, multi-centre studies of AOA, as well as long-term follow-up studies of children born from AOA, would provide evidence for establishing AOA as a treatment for infertility. The delivery of an activating agent that can more accurately recapitulate physiological fertilization, such as recombinant PLCζ, is a promising prospect for the future of AOA. Further to PLCζ, many other avenues of physiological oocyte activation also require urgent investigation to assess other potential physiological avenues of AOA.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

D.G. was supported by Stanford University’s Bing Overseas Study Program. J.K. was supported by a Healthcare Research Fellowship Award (HF-14-16) made by Health and Care Research Wales (HCRW), alongside a National Science, Technology, and Innovation plan (NSTIP) project grant (15-MED4186-20) awarded by the King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology (KACST). The authors have no competing interests to declare.