Which key performance indicators are most effective in evaluating and managing an in vitro fertilization laboratory?

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

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.

Identifying predictors of Day 5 blastocyst utilization rate using an artificial neural network

RESEARCH QUESTION

Can artificial intelligence identify predictors of an increased Day 5 blastocyst utilization rate (D5BUR), which is one of the most informative key performance indicators in an IVF laboratory?

DESIGN

This retrospective, multicentre study evaluated six variables for predicting D5BUR using an artificial neural network (ANN): number of metaphase II (MII) oocytes injected (intracytoplasmic sperm injection); use of autologous/donated gametes; maternal age at oocyte retrieval; sperm concentration; progressive sperm motility rate; and fertilization rate. Cycles were divided into training and testing sets through stratified random sampling. D5BUR on Day 5 was grouped into <60% and ≥60% as per the Vienna consensus benchmark values.

RESULTS

The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) to predict the D5BUR groups was 80.2%. From the ANN model, all six independent variables were found to be of significant value for the prediction of D5BUR (P<0.0001), with the most important variable being the number of MII oocytes injected. Investigation of the effect of MII oocytes injected on D5BUR indicated an inverse correlation, with injection of an increasing number of MII oocytes resulting in a decreasing D5BUR (r=-0.344, P<0.001) and injection of up to six oocytes resulting in D5BUR ≥60%.

CONCLUSION

The number of MII oocytes injected is the most important predictor of D5BUR. Exploration of additional variables and further validation of models that can predict D5BUR can guide the way towards personalized treatment and increased safety.

Steps forward in embryo transfer technique: a retrospective study comparing direct versus afterload catheters at different time frames

PURPOSE

To assess whether embryo transfer (ET) technique can influence the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and its correlation with the embryo transfer difficulty.

DESIGN

This single center retrospective cohort analysis of fresh and frozen single blastocyst transfers performed between January 2016 and December 2021 included fresh and frozen single blastocyst transfers performed during the study timeframe. Direct technique was the only one used from January 2016 to September 2017. From September 2017 to March 2019, the choice between the two techniques was given by randomization, due to a clinical trial recruitment. From April 2019, only the afterload technique was used. Preimplantation genetic testing cycles and gamete donation procedures and cycles performed with external gametes or embryos were excluded. CPR was the primary outcome, while difficult transfer rate the secondary one. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were performed.

RESULTS

During the period, 8,189 transfers were performed. CPR of the afterload group resulted significantly higher compared to the direct group (44.69% versus 41.65%, OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02-1.25, p = 0.017) and the rate of difficult transfers two-thirds lower (9.06% versus 26.85%, OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.24-0.31, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that CPR is significantly affected by the ET technique. In particular, with the afterload protocol, both CPR and easy transfer rates increased.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

http://clinicaltrials.gov registration number: NCT05364528, retrospectively registered on 3rd of May 2022.

Electronic witnessing in the medically assisted reproduction laboratory: insights and considerations after 10 years of use

STUDY QUESTION

What have we learnt after 10 years of electronic witnessing?

SUMMARY ANSWER

When applied correctly, an electronic witnessing system can replace manual witnessing in the medically assisted reproduction lab to prevent sample mix-up.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Electronic witnessing systems have been implemented to improve the correct identification, processing, and traceability of biological materials. When non-matching samples are simultaneously present in a single workstation, a mismatch event is generated to prevent sample mix-up.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This evaluation investigates the mismatch and administrator assign rate over a 10-year period (March 2011-December 2021) with the use of an electronic witnessing system. Radiofrequency identification tags and barcodes were used for patient and sample identification. Since 2011, IVF and ICSI cycles and frozen embryo transfer cycles (FET) were included; IUIs cycles were included since 2013.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

The total number of tags and witnessing points were recorded. Witnessing points in a particular electronic witnessing system represent all the actions that have been performed from gamete collection through embryo production, to cryopreservation and transfer. Mismatches and administrator assigns were collected and stratified per procedure (sperm preparation, oocyte retrieval, IVF/ICSI, cleavage stage embryo or blastocyst embryo biopsy, vitrification and warming, embryo transfer, medium changeover, and IUI). Critical mismatches (such as mislabelling or non-matching samples within one work area) and critical administrator assigns (such as samples not identified by the electronic witnessing system and unconfirmed witnessing points) were selected.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

A total of 109 655 cycles were included: 53 023 IVF/ICSI, 36 347 FET, and 20 285 IUI cycles. The 724 096 used tags, led to a total of 849 650 witnessing points. The overall mismatch rate was 0.251% (2132/849 650) per witnessing point and 1.944% per cycle. In total, 144 critical mismatches occurred over the different procedures. The yearly mean critical mismatch rate was 0.017 ± 0.007% per witnessing point and 0.129 ± 0.052% per cycle. The overall administrator assign rate was 0.111% (940/849 650) per witnessing point and 0.857% per cycle, including 320 critical administrator assigns. The yearly mean critical administrator assign rate was 0.039 ± 0.010% per witnessing point and 0.301 ± 0.069% per cycle. Overall mismatch and administrator assign rates remained fairly stable during the evaluated time period. Sperm preparation and IVF/ICSI were the procedures most prone to critical mismatch and administrator assigns.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The procedures and methods of integration of an electronic witnessing system may vary from one laboratory to another and result in differences in the potential risks related to sample identification. Individual embryos cannot (yet) be identified by such a system; this makes extra manual witnessing indispensable at certain critical steps where potential errors are not recorded. The electronic witnessing system still needs to be used in combination with manual labelling of both the bottom and lid of dishes and tubes to guarantee correct assignment in case of malfunction or incorrect use of radiofrequency identification tags.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Electronic witnessing is considered to be the ultimate tool to safeguard correct identification of gametes and embryos. But this is only possible when used correctly, and proper training and attention of the staff is required. It may also induce new risks, i.e. blind witnessing of samples by the operator.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No funding was either sought or obtained for this study. J.S. presents webinars on RIW for CooperSurgical. The remaining authors have nothing to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

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)

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.

Taking a closer look at the key performance indicators in an assisted reproductive technology laboratory: a guide for reproductive professionals

Over the years, laboratories performing assisted reproductive technologies have been tasked with a growing number of procedures of increased complexity. New technologies, including hardware and software innovations, are constantly evolving, and being evaluated as potential tools to improve laboratory and clinical outcomes. The ART laboratory plays a crucial role in fertility treatments and, therefore, it is often under intense scrutiny with regards to performance and success rates. As the reproductive medicine field strives to deliver improved clinical outcomes to patients, IVF clinics - including the ART laboratories - are required to monitor their performance and seek improvement in the many different aspects related to patient care. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and benchmarking are important tools to support performance monitoring and quality improvement processes. The concept and potential benefits of KPI utilization is generally accepted. However, its adoption poses some challenges that may discourage ART practices from pursuing it as part of their Quality Management Systems (QMS). Properly selecting and using KPIs will allow laboratories to successfully manage their performance and set up realistic target goals to consistently deliver high rates. Existing literature can guide reproductive medicine professionals to embark on their journey to successfully select, implement, and manage KPI and benchmarking as part of their ART programs. This article discusses the concept and essentials of KPI and benchmarking applied to the ART laboratory, as well as potential challenges and how to overcome them.

Common practices among consistently high-performing in vitro fertilization programs in the United States: 10-year update

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate similarities and differences in clinical and laboratory practices among high-performing fertility clinics.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional questionnaire study of selected programs.

SETTING

Academic and private fertility practices performing in vitro fertilization (IVF).

PATIENT(S)

Not applicable.

INTERVENTION(S)

A comprehensive survey was conducted of 13 IVF programs performing at least 100 cycles a year and having high cumulative singleton delivery rates for 2 years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Clinical and laboratory IVF practices.

RESULT(S)

Although many areas of clinical practice varied among top programs, some commonalities were observed. All programs used a combination of follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone for IVF stimulation, intramuscular progesterone in frozen embryo transfer cycles, ultrasound-guided embryo transfers, and a required semen analysis before starting the IVF cycle. Common laboratory practices included vitrification of embryos at the blastocyst stage, air quality control with positive air pressure and high-efficiency particulate air filtration, use of incubator gas filters, working on heated microscope stages, and incubating embryos in a low-oxygen environment, most often in benchtop incubators.

CONCLUSION(S)

Some areas of consistency in clinical and laboratory practices were noted among high-performing IVF programs that are likely contributing to their success. High-performing programs focused on singleton deliveries. As the field of IVF is rapidly evolving, it is imperative that we share best practices in an effort to improve outcomes from all clinics for the good of our patients.

Inter-centre reliability in embryo grading across several IVF clinics is limited: implications for embryo selection

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the intra- and inter-centre reliability in embryo grading performed according to the Istanbul Consensus across several IVF clinics?

DESIGN

Forty Day 3 embryos and 40 blastocysts were photographed on three focal planes. Senior and junior embryologists from 65 clinics were invited to grade them according to the Istanbul Consensus (Study Phase I). All participants then attended interactive training where a panel of experts graded the same embryos (Study Phase II). Finally, a second set of pictures was sent to both embryologists and experts for a blinded evaluation (Study Phase III). Intra-centre reliability was reported for Study Phase I as Cohen's kappa between senior and junior embryologists; inter-centre reliability was instead calculated between senior/junior embryologists and experts in Study Phase I versus III to outline improvements after training (i.e. upgrade of Cohen's kappa category according to Landis and Koch).

RESULTS

Thirty-six embryologists from 18 centres participated (28% participation rate). The intra-centre reliability was (i) substantial (0.63) for blastomere symmetry (range -0.02 to 1.0), (ii) substantial (0.72) for fragmentation (range 0.29-1.0), (iii) substantial (0.66) for blastocyst expansion (range 0.19-1.0), (iv) moderate (0.59) for inner cell mass quality (range 0.07-0.92), (v) moderate (0.56) for trophectoderm quality (range 0.01-0.97). The inter-centre reliability showed an overall improvement from Study Phase I to III, from fair (0.21-0.4) to moderate (0.41-0.6) for all parameters under analysis, except for blastomere fragmentation among senior embryologists, which was already moderate before training.

CONCLUSIONS

Intra-centre reliability was generally moderate/substantial, while inter-centre reliability was just fair. The interactive training improved it to moderate, hence this workflow was deemed helpful. The establishment of external quality assessment services (e.g. UK NEQAS) and the avant-garde of artificial intelligence might further improve the reliability of this key practice for embryo selection.

Use of a new set of key performance indicators for evaluating the performance of an in vitro fertilization laboratory in which blastocyst culture and the freeze-all strategy are the primary treatment in patients with in vitro fertilization

Objective

To evaluate the performance of an in vitro fertilization (IVF) laboratory using a new set of key performance indicators (KPIs) when the main treatment of IVF patients had been changed.

Methods

Patients who underwent fresh embryo transfer and the freeze-all strategy in August, September, and October 2017 were retrospectively studied to evaluate the performance of an IVF laboratory in September when implantation rate of fresh embryo transfer decreased. KPIs associated with blastocyst culture and the first frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycle in patients with the freeze-all strategy were compared over 3 months.

Results

Day 5 usable blastocyst and good quality blastocyst rates, and day 3 usable/good quality embryo rates were not different among the three periods. The implantation rate and KPIs associated with morphological changes in warmed blastocysts in the first FET cycle in patients with the freeze-all strategy were also not different among the periods.

Conclusions

KPIs associated with embryo quality, blastocyst culture, and the pregnancy outcome of the first FET cycle in patients with the freeze-all strategy suggested that performance was unaffected in our IVF laboratory in September. These KPIs might be useful for internal quality control analysis of IVF laboratories.

2017–2018 Assisted Reproduction Cost Analysis Performance Indexes: Lombardy County Case Study

Objective: The aim of the present study was to analyze the IVF success rates and the economic cost per delivery in all the public funded IVF Units in Lombardy in the 2017–2018 period and to assess any significant difference in ART outcomes among the enrolled centers.

Methods: Analysis of costs for the 2017 and 2018 fresh transfer delivery rate (DR) and Cumulative delivery rate (CDR) considering both fresh and frozen cycles were extracted from the ART Italian Registry on oocytes retrievals, fresh and frozen embryos and oocytes embryo transfer performed in 22 Lombardy IVF Units.

Results: In 2017, 29,718 procedures were performed, resulting in 4,543 pregnancies and 3,253 deliveries. In 2018, there were 29,708 procedures, 4,665 pregnancies and 3,348 deliveries. Pregnancies lost to follow up were 5.0% with a (range of 0–67.68%) in 2017 and 3.4% (range of 0–45.1%) in 2018. The cost reimbursement for the cycles were €2,232 ($2,611) for oocyte retrieval and €2,194 ($2,567) for embryo transfer, excluding ovarian stimulation therapy and luteal phase support. 19.33 (5.80). The DR was 13.23 ± 5.69% (range 2.86–29.11%) in 2017 and 19.33 ± 5.80% in 2018 (range 11.82–34.98 %) and the CDR was 19.86 ± 9.38% (range 4.43–37.88%) in 2017 and 21.32 ± 8.84% (range 4.24–37.11%). The mean multiple pregnancy delivery rate (MDR) was 11.08 ± 5.55% (range 0.00–22.73%) in 2017 and 10.41 ± 4.99% (range 1.33–22.22%) in 2018. The mean CDR cost in euros was 26,227 ± 14,737 in 2017 and 25,018 ± 16,039 in 2018. The mean CDR cost among centers was 12,480 to 76,725 in 2017 and 12,973 to 86,203 in 2018.

Conclusions: Our findings show impressive differences in the DR and CDR among centers and the importance of cryopreservation in patients' safety and economic cost reduction suggesting the formulation of specific KPI's (Key performance indexes) and minimal performance indexes (PI) as a basis for the allocation of public or insurance resources. In particular, the reduction of multiple pregnancy rates costs, may lead to a more widespread use of ART even in lower resources countries.

The Maribor consensus: report of an expert meeting on the development of performance indicators for clinical practice in ART

STUDY QUESTION

Is it possible to define a set of performance indicators (PIs) for clinical work in ART, which can create competency profiles for clinicians and for specific clinical process steps?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The current paper recommends six PIs to be used for monitoring clinical work in ovarian stimulation for ART, embryo transfer, and pregnancy achievement: cycle cancellation rate (before oocyte pick-up (OPU)) (%CCR), rate of cycles with moderate/severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (%mosOHSS), the proportion of mature (MII) oocytes at ICSI (%MII), complication rate after OPU (%CoOPU), clinical pregnancy rate (%CPR), and multiple pregnancy rate (%MPR).

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

PIs are objective measures for evaluating critical healthcare domains. In 2017, ART laboratory key PIs (KPIs) were defined.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A list of possible indicators was defined by a working group. The value and limitations of each indicator were confirmed through assessing published data and acceptability was evaluated through an online survey among members of ESHRE, mostly clinicians, of the special interest group Reproductive Endocrinology.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

The online survey was open for 5 weeks and 222 replies were received. Statements (indicators, indicator definitions, or general statements) were considered accepted when ≥70% of the responders agreed (agreed or strongly agreed). There was only one round to seek levels of agreement between the stakeholders.

Indicators that were accepted by the survey responders were included in the final list of indicators. Statements reaching less than 70% were not included in the final list but were discussed in the paper.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Cycle cancellation rate (before OPU) and the rate of cycles with moderate/severe OHSS, calculated on the number of started cycles, were defined as relevant PIs for monitoring ovarian stimulation. For monitoring ovarian response, trigger and OPU, the proportion of MII oocytes at ICSI and complication rate after OPU were listed as PIs: the latter PI was defined as the number of complications (any) that require an (additional) medical intervention or hospital admission (apart from OHSS) over the number of OPUs performed. Finally, clinical pregnancy rate and multiple pregnancy rate were considered relevant PIs for embryo transfer and pregnancy. The defined PIs should be calculated every 6 months or per 100 cycles, whichever comes first. Clinical pregnancy rate and multiple pregnancy rate should be monitored more frequently (every 3 months or per 50 cycles). Live birth rate (LBR) is a generally accepted and an important parameter for measuring ART success. However, LBR is affected by many factors, even apart from ART, and it cannot be adequately used to monitor clinical practice. In addition to monitoring performance in general, PIs are essential for managing the performance of staff over time, and more specifically the gap between expected performance and actual performance measured. Individual clinics should determine which indicators are key to the success in their organisation based on their patient population, protocols, and procedures, and as such, which are their KPIs.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The consensus values are based on data found in the literature and suggestions of experts. When calculated and compared to the competence/benchmark limits, prudent interpretation is necessary taking into account the specific clinical practice of each individual centre.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The defined PIs complement the earlier defined indicators for the ART laboratory. Together, both sets of indicators aim to enhance the overall quality of the ART practice and are an essential part of the total quality management. PIs are important for education and can be applied during clinical subspecialty.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This paper was developed and funded by ESHRE, covering expenses associated with meetings, literature searches, and dissemination. The writing group members did not receive payment.

Dr G.G. reports personal fees from Merck, MSD, Ferring, Theramex, Finox, Gedeon-Richter, Abbott, Biosilu, ReprodWissen, Obseva, PregLem, and Guerbet, outside the submitted work. Dr A.D. reports personal fees from Cook, outside the submitted work; Dr S.A. reports starting a new employment in May 2020 at Vitrolife. Previously, she has been part of the Nordic Embryology Academic Team, with meetings were sponsored by Gedeon Richter. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

DISCLAIMER

This document represents the views of ESHRE, which are the result of consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders and where relevant based on the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation.

The recommendations should be used for informational and educational purposes. They should not be interpreted as setting a standard of care, or be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care nor exclusive of other methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. They do not replace the need for application of clinical judgment to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type.

Furthermore, ESHREs recommendations do not constitute or imply the endorsement, recommendation, or favouring of any of the included technologies by ESHRE.

Design and validation of a model for quality control monitoring of dichotomous in vitro fertilization outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate a practical model for quality control monitoring of dichotomous in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes such as pregnancy resulting from the transfer of euploid blastocysts.

DESIGN

We designed and validated a model for quality control monitoring of dichotomous IVF outcomes. We demonstrate use of this model for assessment of euploid blastocyst transfer quality control based on fetal heartbeat rate per embryo. The model uses 3 weighted moving averages with window sizes of 21, 51, and 101 embryo transfers to detect short and long-term shifts in success rates. The quality warning limit was set to have a 2-sided type I error rate of 0.30 per 100 embryo transfers and the control limit was set to have a type I error rate of 0.05 per 100 embryo transfers. Simulation studies were performed to validate the model through assessment of type I and type II errors using custom computer programs.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

Patients undergoing IVF.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Type I and type II error rates and statistical power analysis.

RESULT(S)

Validated quality warning and control limits are presented for a range of expected outcome rates. The power to detect a 20% decrease from an expected fetal heartbeat rate of 50%, when the decrease persisted for 50 embryo transfers, was 86% for the warning limit and 57% for the control limit.

CONCLUSION(S)

This model can be used for continuous quality control assessment of dichotomous IVF outcomes such as pregnancy rates.

Fertility technologies and how to optimize laboratory performance to support the shortening of time to birth of a healthy singleton: a Delphi consensus

PURPOSE

To explore how the assisted reproductive technology (ART) laboratories can be optimized and standardized to enhance embryo culture and selection, to bridge the gap between standard practice and the new concept of shortening time to healthy singleton birth.

METHODS

A Delphi consensus was conducted (January to July 2018) to assess how the ART laboratory could be optimized, in conjunction with existing guidelines, to reduce the time to a healthy singleton birth. Eight experts plus the coordinator discussed and refined statements proposed by the coordinator. The statements were distributed via an online survey to 29 participants (including the eight experts from step 1), who voted on their agreement/disagreement with each statement. Consensus was reached if ≥ 66% of participants agreed/disagreed with a statement. If consensus was not achieved for any statement, that statement was revised and the process repeated until consensus was achieved. Details of statements achieving consensus were communicated to the participants.

RESULTS

Consensus was achieved for all 13 statements, which underlined the need for professional guidelines and standardization of lab processes to increase laboratory competency and quality. The most important points identified were the improvement of embryo culture and embryo assessment to shorten time to live birth through the availability of more high-quality embryos, priority selection of the most viable embryos and improved cryosurvival.

CONCLUSION

The efficiency of the ART laboratory can be improved through professional guidelines on standardized practices and optimized embryo culture environment, assessment, selection and cryopreservation methodologies, thereby reducing the time to a healthy singleton delivery.

Blastulation rates of sibling oocytes in two IVF culture media: an evidence-based workflow to implement newly commercialized products

RESEARCH QUESTION

An evidence-based novel commercially available continuous IVF culture medium in compliance with an efficient quality-management system is proposed.

DESIGN

Non-interventional study on sibling oocytes. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles among women aged 42 years or younger that used ejaculated spermatozoa and retrieved four to eight oocytes were included. Sibling oocytes were randomized for culture in the novel Geri-medium or continuous single culture medium (CSCM). Primary outcome measure was blastulation rate per cohort of inseminated oocytes; 1182 oocytes were required to outline down to a 7% difference (power = 80%).

RESULTS

A total of 181 cohorts of sibling oocytes were included. Geri-medium (n = 631 oocytes) and CSCM (n = 643 oocytes) resulted in similar blastulation rates (mean ± SD: 42.8% ± 30.1% versus 43.1% ± 29.0%; Wilcoxon signed rank test = 0.77). Blastocysts cultured in the former (n = 275 versus n = 277) showed longer timings during preimplantation development (P < 0.01) and were poorer quality (26% versus 18%; P = 0.03). Euploidy rate was no different in cycles that underwent preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (n = 113) (117/237 [49%] versus 117/249 blastocysts [47%]; P = 0.6). Ongoing implantation rate was comparable in the study arms after euploid (29/47 [63%] versus 14/ 34 [41%]; P = 0.1) or untested (12/31 [39%] versus 7/18 [39%]; P = 0.3) transfers.

CONCLUSION

Blastulation rate among cohorts of sibling oocytes cultured in the same incubator is a fast, reliable and comprehensive performance indicator to validate novel commercially available culture medium. The media tested were considered similarly efficient. The differences in blastocyst morphology and developmental timings warrant further investigation, although euploidy and ongoing implantation rates were similar.

Why are multiple pregnancy rates and single embryo transfer rates so different globally, and what do we do about it?

In the early years of in vitro fertilization, overall pregnancy rates were low, and it was considered necessary to transfer more than one embryo to increase the chances of pregnancy. It was not until advances in assisted reproductive technologies resulting in increased pregnancy rates that the concept of transferring just one embryo was considered possible. A consequence of improvements in implantation rates was also an increase in multiple pregnancies when more than one embryo was transferred. Although some countries have reduced the number of embryos transferred, international data show that in many parts of the world high twin and higher order multiple pregnancy rates still exist. Even in developed countries these problems persist depending on clinical practice, funding of health services, and patient demands. Perinatal and other outcomes are significantly worse with twins compared with singleton pregnancies and there is an urgent need to reduce multiple pregnancy rates to at least 10%. This has been achieved in several countries and clinics by introducing single embryo transfer but there are many barriers to the introduction of this technique in most clinics worldwide. We discuss the background to the high multiple rate in assisted reproduction and the factors that contribute to its persistence even in excellent clinics and in high-quality health services. Practices that may promote single embryo transfer are discussed.

Assessment and management of the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in an IVF laboratory

Research question

The study set out to identify corrective measures aimed at reducing the risk of aerosol-mediated viral infection within an IVF laboratory.

Design

A failure modes and effect analysis (FMEA) was conducted by a multidisciplinary IVF team. A schematic representation of new protocols and procedures adopted during COVID-19 emergency has been defined, including directives about the behaviour to adopt when entering the clinic and the laboratory, in case of face-to-face contact with patients and between staff members. In addition, the risk of cross-contamination between samples belonging to different patients during cell handling and manipulation has been evaluated. Potential failure modes for each phase of the emergency have been analysed, focusing on possible sources of error. Risk priority numbers have been calculated as products of Occurrence × Severity × Detection scores.

Results

Except for cell–cell contamination, which was considered highly unlikely, failure modes during patient–staff, staff–staff and staff–cell interactions were estimated as carrrying a moderate to high risk of infection. The main corrective measures entailed precautionary logistic measures, the implementation of additional personal protective equipment and changes in the IVF laboratory procedures and scheduling of the daily routine. Some procedures were also revised, aiming to increase staff's awareness and caution.

Conclusions

Standard laboratory protocols are insufficient to face a virus whose transmission is aerosol mediated. The measures outlined in this FMEA should thus be considered not only for facing this pandemic, but also for the future to promptly manage any aerosol-mediated virus infection, whose impact on the management of an IVF laboratory might be less severe than COVID-19 although not completely negligible.

Which key performance indicators are optimal to assess clinical management of assisted reproduction cycles?

Like all industries, fertility clinics should identify and follow reference markers of its activity-key performance indicators (KPI)-to allow assisted reproductive technology outcomes to be monitored and compared. Clinical KPIs revolve around following set parameters of the patient population, procedures, and outcome data. Moreover, KPIs should also include identified protocols and standard operating procedures followed in daily practice and should keep track of multiple pregnancy rates, a ruthless confounder of assisted reproductive technology outcomes.

The Role of hCG Triggering Progesterone Levels: A Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study of More Than 8000 IVF/ICSI Cycles

Objective: To assess the association between serum ovulation trigger progesterone (P) levels and the outcome of in vitro fertilization cycles. Design Setting: Real world single-center retrospective cohort study. Patient Intervention(s): All fresh cleavage and blastocyst-stage embryo transfers (ETs) performed from January 2012 to December 2016. Main outcome Measure(s): The impact of premature high serum P levels cycles in terms of clinical pregnancy rates (CPRs) and live birth rates (LBRs). Results: 8,034 ETs were performed: 7,597 cleavage-stage transfers and 437 blastocyst transfers. Serum P levels demonstrated to be inversely related to CPR (OR 0.72, p < 0.001) and LBR (OR 0.73, p < 0.001). The progressive decrease of LBR and CPR started when P levels were >1 ng/ml in a good prognosis cleavage ET subgroup, whereas in patients with worse prognosis only for P ≥ 1.75 ng/ml. In the blastocyst ET subgroup, the negative effect of P elevation was reported only if P was >1.75 ng/ml. CPR (OR 0.71 (0.62-0.80), p < 0.001) and LBR (OR 0.73 (0.63-0.84), p < 0.001) in thawed cycles resulted statistically significantly higher than in fresh cycles in the cleavage-stage subgroup. In the blastocyst group, no significant difference resulted between thawed and fresh cycles, independently of P levels [CPR OR 0. 37 (0.49-1.09), p = 0.123; LBR OR 0.71 (0.46-1.10), p = 0.126]. Conclusion: High P levels decrease CPR as well as LBR in both cleavage and blastocyst ET. In the cleavage group, for P levels below 1.75 ng/ml, our data suggest the possibility to wait until day 5 for ET, and if P level is ≥1.75 ng/ml, it should be considered to freeze all embryos and postpone the ET. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT04253470.