Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T08:46:11.063Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Use of time-lapse monitoring in medically assisted reproduction treatments: a mini-review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 November 2020

Romualdo Sciorio Open the ORCID record for Romualdo Sciorio [Opens in a new window]
Romualdo Sciorio*
Affiliation:
Edinburgh Assisted Conception Programme, EFREC, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, UK
*
Author for correspondence: Romualdo Sciorio. Edinburgh Assisted Conception Programme, EFREC, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, UK. E-mail: sciorioromualdo@hotmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

During human in vitro culture, a morphological microscope analysis is normally performed to select the best embryo to transfer, with the hope of obtaining a successful pregnancy. The morphological evaluation may combine number and size of blastomeres, fragmentation, multinucleation, blastocyst expansion, inner-cell mass and trophectoderm appearance. However, standard microscopy evaluation involves the removal of the embryos from the incubator, exposing them to changes in pH, temperature, and oxygen level. Additionally, morphological assessments might include high inter-observer variability. Recently, continuous embryo culture using time-lapse monitoring (TLM) has allowed embryologists to analyse the dynamic and morphokinetic events of embryo development and, based on that, the embryologist is able to scrutinize the complete sequence of embryonic evolution, from fertilization to the blastocyst formation. Therefore, TLM allows an uninterrupted culture condition, reducing the need to remove embryos from the incubator. The monitoring system is normally composed of a standard incubator with an integrated microscope coupled to a digital camera, which is able to collect images at regular times, and subsequently processed into video. These data can be annotated and analyzed using an integrated software, therefore this allows embryologists to facilitate the process of embryo selection for transfer. The main aim of this paper is to discuss the potential benefits and uses of the TLM in the embryology laboratory.

Keywords

Embryo cultureEmbryo viabilityMedically assisted reproductionMorphokinetic evaluationTime-lapse monitoring
Type
Review Article
Information
Zygote , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , April 2021 , pp. 93 - 101
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aguilar, J, Motato, Y, Escriba, MJ, Ojeda, M, Munoz, E and Meseguer, M (2014). The human first cell cycle: impact on implantation. Reprod Biomed Online 28, 475–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aparicio-Ruiz, B, Basile, N, Perez, AS, Bronet, F, Remohi, J and Meseguer, M (2016). Automatic time-lapse instrument is superior to single point morphology observation for selecting viable embryos: retrospective study in oocyte donation. Fertil Steril 106, 1379–85.e10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Armstrong, S, Bhide, P, Jordan, V, Pacey, A, Marjoribanks, J and Farquhar, C (2019). Time-lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 5, CD011320.Google ScholarPubMed
Athayde Wirka, K, Chen, AA, Conaghan, J, Ivani, K, Gvakharia, M, Behr, B, Suraj, V, Tan, L and Shen, S (2014). Atypical embryo phenotypes identified by time-lapse microscopy: high prevalence and association with embryo development. Fertil Steril 101, 1637–48.e1631-e1635.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Azzarello, A, Hoest, T and Mikkelsen, AL (2012). The impact of pronuclei morphology and dynamicity on live birth outcome after time-lapse culture. Hum Reprod 27, 2649–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnes, FL, Crombie, A, Gardner, DK, Kausche, A, Lacham-Kaplan, O, Suikkari, AM, Tiglias, J, Wood, C and Trounson, AO (1995). Blastocyst development and birth after in-vitro maturation of human primary oocytes, intracytoplasmic sperm injection and assisted hatching. Hum Reprod 10, 3243–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barrie, A, Homburg, R, McDowell, G, Brown, J, Kingsland, C and Troup, S (2017). Examining the efficacy of six published time-lapse imaging embryo selection algorithms to predict implantation to demonstrate the need for the development of specific, in-house morphokinetic selection algorithms. Fertil Steril 107, 613–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Basile, N, Nogales, MC, Bronet, F, Florensa, M, Riqueiros, M, Rodrigo, L, Garcia-Velasco, J and Meseguer, M (2014). Increasing the probability of selecting chromosomally normal embryos by time-lapse morphokinetics analysis. Fertil Steril 101, 699–704.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Basile, N, Morbeck, D, Garcia-Velasco, J, Bronet, F and Meseguer, M (2013). Type of culture media does not affect embryo kinetics: a time-lapse analysis of sibling oocytes. Hum Reprod 28, 634–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bontekoe, S, Mantikou, E, van Wely, M, Seshadri, S, Repping, S and Mastenbroek, S (2012). Low oxygen concentrations for embryo culture in assisted reproductive technologies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 7, CD008950.Google Scholar
Boueilh, T, Reignier, A, Barrière, P and Fréour, T (2018). Time-lapse imaging systems in IVF laboratories: a French national survey. J Assist Reprod Genet 35, 2181–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Braude, P (2013). Selecting the ‘best’ embryos: prospects for improvement. Reprod Biomed Online 27, 644–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, A and Fishel, S (2015). Atlas of Time Lapse Embryology. CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, A, Fishel, S, Bowman, N, Duffy, S, Sedler, M and Hickman, CF (2013a). Modelling a risk classification of aneuploidy in human embryos using non-invasive morphokinetics. Reprod Biomed Online 26, 477–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, A, Fishel, S, Bowman, N, Duffy, S, Sedler, M and Thornton, S (2013b). Retrospective analysis of outcomes after IVF using an aneuploidy risk model derived from time-lapse imaging without PGS. Reprod Biomed Online 27, 140–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chavez, SL, Loewke, KE, Han, J, Moussavi, F, Colls, P, Munne, S, Behr, B and Reijo Pera, RA (2012). Dynamic blastomere behaviour reflects human embryo ploidy by the four-cell stage. Nat Commun 3, 1251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chawla, M, Fakih, M, Shunnar, A, Bayram, A, Hellani, A, Perumal, V, et al. (2015). Morphokinetic analysis of cleavage stage embryos and its relationship to aneuploidy in a retrospective time-lapse imaging study. J Assist Reprod Genet 32, 69–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, AA, Tan, L, Suraj, V, Pera, RR and Shen, S (2013). Biomarkers identified with time-lapse imaging: discovery, validation, and practical application. Fertil Steril 99, 1035–1043.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ciray, HN, Aksoy, T, Goktas, C, Ozturk, B and Bahceci, M (2012). Time-lapse evaluation of human embryo development in single versus sequential culture media—a sibling oocyte study. J Assist Reprod Genet 29, 891–900.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coticchio, G, Mignini Renzini, M, Novara, PV, Lain, M, De Ponti, E, Turchi, D, Fadini, R and Dal Canto, M (2018). Focused time-lapse analysis reveals novel aspects of human fertilization and suggests new parameters of embryo viability. Hum Reprod 2018; 33, 23–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coticchio, G, Lagalla, C, Sturmey, R, Pennetta, F and Borini, A (2019). The enigmatic morula: mechanisms of development, cell fate determination, self-correction and implications for ART. Hum Reprod Update 25, 422–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cruz, M, Garrido, N, Herrero, J, Perez-Cano, I, Munoz, M and Meseguer, M (2012). Timing of cell division in human cleavage-stage embryos is linked with blastocyst formation and quality. Reprod Biomed Online 25, 371–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dal Canto, M, Coticchio, G, Mignini Renzini, M, De Ponti, E, Novara, PV, Brambillasca, F, Comi, R and Fadini, R (2012). Cleavage kinetics analysis of human embryos predicts development to blastocyst and implantation. Reprod Biomed Online 25, 474–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davies, S, Christopikou, D, Tsorva, E, Karagianni, A, Handyside, AH and Mastrominas, M (2012). Delayed cleavage division and a prolonged transition between 2- and 4-cell stages in embryos identified as aneuploidy at the 8-cell stage by array-CGH. Hum Reprod 27, ii84–6.Google Scholar
De Geyter, C, Calhaz-Jorge, C., Kupka, MS, Wyns, C, Mocanu, E, Motrenko, T, Scaravelli, G, Smeenk, J, Vidakovic, S and Goossens, V (2018). European IVF-monitoring Consortium (EIM) for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). ART in Europe, 2014: results generated from European registries by ESHRE: The European IVF- monitoring Consortium (EIM) for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). Hum Reprod 33, 1586–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De los Santos, MJ, Apter, S, Coticchio, G, Debrock, S, Lundin, K, Plancha, CE, Prados, F, Rienzi, L, Verheyen, G. Woodward, B et al. (2016). Revised guidelines for good practice in IVF laboratories (2015). Hum Reprod 31, 685–6.Google Scholar
De Vos, A, Van Landuyt, L, Santos-Ribeiro, S, Camus, M, Van de Velde, H, Tournaye, H and Verheyen, G (2016). Cumulative live birth rates after fresh and vitrified cleavage-stage versus blastocyst-stage embryo transfer in the first treatment cycle. Hum Reprod 31, 2442–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Desai, N, Ploskonka, S, Goodman, LR, Austin, C, Goldberg, J and Falcone, T (2014). Analysis of embryo morphokinetics, multinucleation and cleavage anomalies using continuous time-lapse monitoring in blastocyst transfer cycles. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 12, 54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dolinko, AV, Farland, LV, Kaser, DJ, Missmer, SA and Racowsky, C (2017). National survey on use of time-lapse imaging systems in IVF laboratories. J Assist Reprod Genet 34, 1167–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edwards, RG, Fishel, SB, Cohen, J, Fehilly, CB, Purdy, JM, Slater, JM, Steptoe, PC and Webster, JM (1984). Factors influencing the success of in vitro fertilization for alleviating human infertility. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf 1, 3–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ezoe, K, Ohata, K, Morita, H, Ueno, S, Miki, T, Okimura, T, Uchiyama, K, Yabuuchi, A, Kobayashi, T, Montag, M et al. (2019). Prolonged blastomere movement induced by the delay of pronuclear fading and first cell division adversely affects pregnancy outcomes after fresh embryo transfer on day 2: a time-lapse study. Reprod Biomed Online 38, 659–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fischer, B and Bavister, BD (1993). Oxygen tension in the oviduct and uterus of rhesus monkeys, hamsters and rabbits. J Reprod Fertil 99, 673–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fréour, T, Dessolle, L, Lammers, J, Lattes, S and Barrière, P (2013). Comparison of embryo morphokinetics after in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection in smoking and nonsmoking women. Fertil Steril 99, 1944–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gardner, DK and Schoolcraft, WB (1999). Culture and transfer of human blastocysts. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 11, 307–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gardner, DK, Kuramoto, T, Tanaka, M, Mitzumoto, S, Montag, M and Yoshida, A (2020). Prospective randomized multicentre comparison on sibling oocytes comparing G-Series media system with antioxidants versus standard G-Series media system. Reprod Biomed Online 5, 637–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Handyside, AH, Kontogianni, EH, Hardy, K and Winston, RM (1990). Pregnancies from biopsied human preimplantation embryos sexed by Y-specific DNA amplification. Nature 344(6268), 768–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hashimoto, S, Kato, N, Saeki, K and Morimoto, Y (2012). Selection of high-potential embryos by culture in poly(dimethylsiloxane) microwells and time-lapse imaging. Fertil Steril 97, 332–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hashimoto, S, Nakano, T, Yamagata, K, Inoue, M, Morimoto, Y and Nakaoka, Y (2016). Multinucleation per se is not always sufficient as a marker of abnormality to decide against transferring human embryos. Fertil Steril 106, 133–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holubcova, Z, Blayney, M, Elder, K and Schuh, M (2015). Human oocytes. Errorprone chromosome-mediated spindle assembly favors chromosome segregation defects in human oocytes. Science 348, 1143–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (2018). Fertility Treatment 2014–2016: Trends and Figures. https://www.hfea.gov. uk/media/2563/hfea-fertility-trends-and-figures-2017-v2.pdf (accessed 1 March 2018).Google Scholar
Kazdar, N, Brugnon, F, Bouche, C, Jouve, G, Veau, S, Drapier, H, Rousseau, C, Pimentel, C, Viard, P, Belaud-Rotureau, MA et al. (2017). Comparison of human embryomorphokinetic parameters in sequential or global culture media. Ann Biol Clin 75, 403–10.Google ScholarPubMed
Khosravi, P, Kazemi, E, Zhan, Q, Malmsten, JE, Toschi, M, Zisimopoulos, P, Sigaras, A, Lavery, S, Cooper, LAD, Hickman, C et al. (2019). Deep learning enables robust assessment and selection of human blastocysts after in vitro fertilization. NPJ Digit Med 2, 21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirkegaard, K, Agerholm, IE and Ingerslev, HJ (2012). Time-lapse monitoring as a tool for clinical embryo assessment. Hum Reprod 27, 1277–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirkegaard, K, Kesmodel, US, Hindkjaer, JJ and Ingerslev, HJ (2013). Time-lapse parameters as predictors of blastocyst development and pregnancy outcome in embryos from good prognosis patients: a prospective cohort study. Hum Reprod 28, 2643–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iwata, K, Yumoto, K, Sugishima, M, Mizoguchi, C, Kai, Y, Iba, Y and Mio, Y (2014). Analysis of compaction initiation in human embryos by using timelapse cinematography. J Assist Reprod Genet 31, 421–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemmen, JG, Agerholm, I and Ziebe, S (2008). Kinetic markers of human embryo quality using time-lapse recordings of IVF/ICSI-fertilized oocytes. Reprod Biomed Online 17, 385–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, WH and Gregory, PW (1929). Cinematographs of living developing rabbit-eggs. Science 69(1782), 226–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marcos, J, Perez-Albala, S, Mifsud, A, Molla, M, Landeras, J and Meseguer, M (2015). Collapse of blastocysts is strongly related to lower implantation success: a time-lapse study. Hum Reprod 30, 2501–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meintjes, M, Chantilis, SJ, Douglas, JD, Rodriguez, AJ, Guerami, AR, Bookout, DM, Barnett, BD and Madden, JD (2009). A controlled randomized trial evaluating the effect of lowered incubator oxygen tension on live births in a predominantly blastocyst transfer program. Hum Reprod 24, 300–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meseguer, M, Herrero, J, Tejera, A, Hilligsoe, KM, Ramsing, NB and Remohi, J (2011). The use of morphokinetics as a predictor of embryo implantation. Hum Reprod 26, 2658–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meseguer, M, Rubio, I, Cruz, M, Basile, N, Marcos, J and Requena, A (2012). Embryo incubation and selection in a time-lapse monitoring system improves pregnancy outcome compared with a standard incubator: a retrospective cohort study. Fertil Steril 98, 1481–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mio, Y and Maeda, K (2008). Time-lapse cinematography of dynamic changes occurring during in vitro development of human embryos. Am J Obstet Gynecol 199, 660.e1–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Montag, M (2013). Morphokinetics and embryo aneuploidy: has time come or not yet? Reprod Biomed Online 26, 528–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Motato, Y, de los Santos, MJ, Escriba, MJ, Ruiz, BA, Remohi, J and Meseguer, M (2016). Morphokinetic analysis and embryonic prediction for blastocyst formation through an integrated time-lapse system. Fertil Steril 105, 376–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munõz, M, Cruz, M, Humaidan, P, Garrido, N, Pérez-Cano, I and Meseguer, M (2013). The type of GnRH analogue used during controlled ovarian stimulation influences early embryo developmental kinetics: a time-lapse study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod 168, 167–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Niederberger, C, Pellicer, A, Cohen, J, Gardner, DK, Palermo, GD, O’Neill, CL, Chow, S, Rosenwaks, Z, Cobo, A, Swain, JE, Schoolcraft, WB, Frydman, R et al. (2018). Forty years of IVF. Fertil Steril 110, 185–324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Otsuki, J, Iwasaki, T, Tsuji, Y, Katada, Y, Sato, H, Tsutsumi, Y, Hatano, K, Furuhashi, K, Matsumoto, Y, Kokeguchi, S et al. (2017). Potential of zygotes to produce live births can be identified by the size of the male and female pronuclei just before their membranes break down. Reprod Med Biol 16, 200–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patel, J, Tan, SL, Hartshorne, GM and McAinsh, AD (2015). Unique geometry of sister kinetochores in human oocytes during meiosis I may explain maternal age-associated increases in chromosomal abnormalities. Biol Open 5, 178–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Payne, D, Flaherty, SP, Barry, MF and Matthews, CD (1997). Preliminary observations on polar body extrusion and pronuclear formation in human oocytes using time-lapse video cinematography. Hum Reprod 12, 532–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Racowsky, C, Kovacs, P and Martins, WP (2015). A critical appraisal of time-lapse imaging for embryo selection: where are we and where do we need to go? J Assist Reprod Genet 32, 1025–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reignier, A, Lammers, J, Barrière, P and Fréour, T (2018). Can time-lapse parameters predict embryo ploidy? A systematic review. Reprod Biomed Online 36, 380–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rinaudo, PF, Giritharan, G, Talbi, S, Dobson, AT and Schultz, RM (2006). Effects of oxygen tension on gene expression in preimplantation mouse embryos. Fertil Steril 86, 1252–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rubio, I, Kuhlmann, R, Agerholm, I, Kirk, J, Herrero, J, Escriba, MJ, Bellver, J and Meseguer, M (2012). Limited implantation success of direct-cleaved human zygotes: a time-lapse study. Fertil Steril 98, 1458–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rubio, I, Galan, A, Larreategui, Z, Ayerdi, F, Bellver, J, Herrero, J and Meseguer, M (2014). Clinical validation of embryo culture and selection by morphokinetic analysis: a randomized, controlled trial of the EmbryoScope. Fertil Steril 102, 1287–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sciorio, R and Dattilo, M (2020). PGT–A preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies and embryo selection in routine ART cycles: time to step back? Clin Genet 98, 107–115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sciorio, R and Smith, GD (2019). Embryo culture at a reduced oxygen concentration of 5%: a mini review. Zygote 27, 355–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sciorio, R, Herrer Saura, R, Thong, KJ, Esbert Algam, M, Pickering, SJ and Meseguer, M (2020a). Blastocyst collapse as an embryo marker of low implantation potential: a time-lapse multicentre study. Zygote 13, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sciorio, R, Thong, KJ and Pickering, SJ (2020b). Spontaneous blastocyst collapse as an embryo marker of low pregnancy outcome: a time-lapse study. JBRA Assist Reprod 24, 34–40.Google ScholarPubMed
Sermon, K, Capalbo, A, Cohen, J, Coonen, E, De Rycke, M, De Vos, A, Delhanty, J, Fiorentino, F, Gleicher, N, Griesinger, G et al. (2016). The why, the how and the when of PGS 2.0: current practices and expert opinions of fertility specialists, molecular biologists, and embryologists. Mol Hum Reprod 22, 845–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sfontouris, IA, Martins, WP, Nastri, CO, Viana, IG, Navarro, PA, Raine-Fenning, N, van der Poel, S, Rienzi, L and Racowsky, C (2016). Blastocyst culture using single versus sequential media in clinical IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Assist Reprod Genet 33, 1261–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sfontouris, A I, Kolibianakis, ME, Lainas, GT, Venetis, CA, Petsas, GK, Tarlatzis, BC and Lainas, TG (2017). Blastocyst utilization rates after continuous culture in two commercial single-step media: a prospective randomized study with sibling oocytes J Assist Reprod Genet 34, 1377–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steptoe, PC and Edwards, RG (1978). Birth after the reimplantation of a human embryo. Lancet 2, 366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sullivan, EA, Wang, YA, Hayward, I, Chambers, GM, Illingworth, P, McBain, J and Norman, RJ (2012). Single embryo transfer reduces the risk of perinatal mortality, a population study. Hum Reprod 27, 3609–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Summers, MC, Bhatnagar, PR, Lawitts, JA and Biggers, JD (1995). Fertilization in vitro of mouse ova from inbred and outbred strains: complete preimplantation embryo development in glucose-supplemented KSOM. Biol Reprod 53, 431–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sundvall, L, Ingerslev, HJ, Breth Knudsen, U and Kirkegaard, K (2013). Inter-, intra-observer variability of time-lapse annotations. Hum Reprod 28, 3215–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swain, JE (2013). Could time-lapse embryo imaging reduce the need for biopsy and PGS? J Assist Reprod Genet 30, 1081–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thoma, ME, McLain, AC, Louis, JF, King, RB, Trumble, AC, Sundaram, R and Buck, LGM (2013). Prevalence of infertility in the United States as estimated by the current duration approach and a traditional constructed approach. Fertil Steril 99, 1324–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tran, D, Cooke, S, Illingworth, PJ and Gardner, DK (2019). Deep learning as a predictive tool for fetal heart pregnancy following time-lapse incubation and blastocyst transfer. Hum Reprod 34, 1011–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wale, PL and Gardner, DK (2012). Oxygen regulates amino acid turnover and carbohydrate uptake during the preimplantation period of mouse embryo development. Biol Reprod 87, 21–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wale, PL and Gardner, DK (2016). The effects of chemical and physical factors on mammalian embryo culture and their importance for the practice of assisted human reproduction. Hum Reprod Update 22, 2–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Werner, MD, Hong, KH, Franasiak, JM, Forman, EJ, Reda, CV, Molinaro, TA, Upham, KM and Scott, RT Jr (2016). Sequential versus Monophasic Media Impact Trial (SuMMIT): a paired randomized controlled trial comparing a sequential media system to a monophasic medium. Fertil Steril 105, 1215–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wong, CC, Loewke, KE, Bossert, NL, Behr, B, De Jonge, CJ, Baer, TM and Reijo Pera, RA (2010). Non-invasive imaging of human embryos before embryonic genome activation predicts development to the blastocyst stage. Nat Biotechnol 28, 1115–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yeung, S, Downing, NL, Fei-Fei, L and Milstein, A (2018). Bedside computer vision — moving artificial intelligence from driver assistance to patient safety. N Engl J Med 378, 1271–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhang, JQ, Li, XL, Peng, Y, Guo, X, Heng, BC and Tong, GQ (2010). Reduction in exposure of human embryos outside the incubator enhances embryo quality and blastulation rate. Reprod Biomed Online 20, 510–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhao, Y, Brezina, P, Hsu, CC, Garcia, J, Brinsden, PR and Wallach, E (2011). In vitro fertilization: four decades of reflections and promises. Biochim Biophys Acta 1810, 843–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed