scholarly journals Mouse whole embryo culture: Evaluating the requirement for rat serum as culture medium

2019 ◽  
Vol 111 (16) ◽  
pp. 1165-1177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucy H. Culshaw ◽  
Dawn Savery ◽  
Nicholas D. E. Greene ◽  
Andrew J. Copp

1990 ◽  
Vol 4 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 598-601 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Klug ◽  
C. Lewandowski ◽  
L. Wildi ◽  
D. Neubert


Author(s):  
Masanori Takahashi ◽  
Sayaka Makino ◽  
Takako Kikkawa ◽  
Noriko Osumi


2021 ◽  
pp. 509-514
Author(s):  
Alison Campbell ◽  
Louise Best


2004 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 391-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen A Augustine-Rauch ◽  
Qin Zhang ◽  
Mark Kleinman ◽  
Richard Lawton ◽  
Michael J Welsh


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven F Mullen

Abstract STUDY QUESTION What factors associated with embryo culture techniques contribute to the rate of medium osmolality change over time in an embryo culture incubator without added humidity? SUMMARY ANSWER The surface area-to-volume ratio of culture medium (surface area of the medium exposed to an oil overlay), as well as the density and height of the overlaying oil, all interact in a quantitative way to affect the osmolality rise over time. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Factors such as medium volume, different oil types, and associated properties, individually, can affect osmolality change during non-humidified incubation. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION Several experimental designs were used, including simple single-factor completely randomized designs, as well as a multi-factor response surface design. Randomization was performed at one or more levels for each experiment. Osmolality measurements were performed over 7 days, with up to 8 independent osmolality measurements performed per treatment group over that time. For the multi-factor study, 107 independent combinations of factor levels were assessed to develop the mathematical model. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS This study was conducted in a research laboratory setting. Commercially available embryo culture medium and oil was used. A MINC incubator without water for humidification was used for the incubation. Osmolality was measured with a vapor pressure osmometer after calibration. Viscometry and density were conducted using a rheometer, and volumetric flasks with an analytical balance, respectively. Data analyses were conducted with several commercially available software programs. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Preliminary experiments showed that the surface area-to-volume ratio of the culture medium, oil density, and oil thickness above the medium all contributed significantly (P < 0.05) to the rise in osmolality. A multi-factor experiment showed that a combination of these variables, in the form of a truncated cubic polynomial, was able to predict the rise in osmolality, with these three variables interacting in the model (P < 0.05). Repeatability, as measured by the response of identical treatments performed independently, was high, with osmolality values being ± 2 of the average in most instances. In the final mathematical model, the terms of the equation were significant predictors of the outcome, with all P-values being significant, and only one P-value > 0.0001. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Although the range of values for the variables were selected to encompass values that are expected to be encountered in usual embryo culture conditions, variables outside of the range used may not result in accurate model predictions. Although the use of a single incubator type and medium type is not expected to affect the conclusions, that remains an uncertainty. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Using this predictive model will help to determine if one should be cautious in using a specific system and will provide guidance on how a system may be modified to provide improved stability during embryo culture. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This study was funded by Cook Medical. The author is a Team Lead and Senior Scientist at Cook Medical. The author has no other conflicts of interest to declare TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.



2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
B Aparicio Ruiz ◽  
L Bori ◽  
E Paya ◽  
M A Valera ◽  
A Quiñonero ◽  
...  

Abstract Study question Would it be possible to predict embryo ploidy by taking into account conventional morphological and morphokinetic parameters together with IL-6 concentration in spent culture medium? Summary answer Our artificial neural network (ANN) trained with blastocyst morphology, embryo morphokinetics and IL-6 concentration distinguished between euploid/aneuploid embryos in 65% of the testing dataset. What is known already The analysis of spent embryo culture media represents the protein and metabolic state of the embryo and could be a non-invasive method of obtaining information about embryo quality. The impact of the presence/absence of several proteins in embryo culture samples over clinical results has been widely studied. The IL-6 is one of the most mentioned protein for its effect on embryo development, implantation and likelihood of achieving a live birth. In this initial attempt, we examined the predictive value for euploidy of a model that took into account the concentration of IL-6 in the spent culture medium. Study design, size, duration This prospective study included 319 embryos with PGT-A results. Out of the total, 127 were euploid and 192 aneuploid embryos. Concentration of IL-6 in spent embryo culture media (collected on the day of trophectoderm biopsy-fifth/sixth day of development), morphokinetic parameters (division time to 2 cells-t2; to 3 cells-t3, to 4 cells-t4; to 5 cells-t5 and time of blastocyst formation-tB) and blastocyst morphological grade (according to ASEBIR criteria) were considered to predict the embryo ploidy. Participants/materials, setting, methods Embryos were cultured in EmbryoScope. The chromosome analysis was performed using next-generation sequence technology. The concentration of IL-6 was measured in 20µL of spent embryo culture media with ELISA kits. Morphokinetic parameters were automatically annotated and the blastocyst morphology was evaluated by senior embryologists based on blastocele expansion, inner cell mass and trophectoderm quality. All the embryos were divided into 70% for training, 15% for validating and 15% for testing our ANN model with MatLab®. Main results and the role of chance The general description for the euploid embryo population was the following: 2% of the embryos were graded as A, 71% were graded as B and 28% were graded as C; the means and standard deviations were 25.32±2.97 hours (h) for t2, 35.33±5.15h for t3, 37.30±5.43h for t4, 48.24±6.62h for t5 and 103.93±12.8h for tB; and the average of IL-6 concentration was 1.51±0.70 pg/ml. The general description for the aneuploid embryo population was the following: 1% of the embryos were graded as A, 48% were graded as B and 51% were graded as C; the means and standard deviations were 26.13±3.51h for t2, 36.70±4.29h for t3, 38.20±4.24h for t4, 49.86±6.89h for t5 and 107.10±8.29h for tB; and the average of IL-6 concentration was 1.47±0.71 pg/ml. Our ANN model showed a higher general success rate as we increased the variables considered in the final prediction of euploid embryos. The accuracy, sensitivity and specificity for the testing dataset were: 0.60, 0.12 and 0.87 with morphokinetic parameters; 0.63, 0.24 and 0.93 with morphokinetics and IL-6 concentration; and 0.65, 0.16 and 0.96 with morphokinetics, IL-6 concentration and blastocyst morphological grade. Limitations, reasons for caution The low sensitivity and high specificity achieved in our models indicated that they were more capable of detecting aneuploid than euploid embryos. As this was a preliminary study, the small number of embryos included in the test (n = 48) was also a limitation. Wider implications of the findings The results showed that our model tended to classify the embryos as aneuploid. More euploid embryos would be necessary to train our model and achieve better results in the prediction of chromosomally normal embryos. Further studies with large number of embryos and additional variables could improve the non-invasive ploidy prediction. Trial registration number not applicable



2016 ◽  
Vol 64 ◽  
pp. 77-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Myrto Dimopoulou ◽  
Aart Verhoef ◽  
Bennard van Ravenzwaay ◽  
Ivonne M.C.M. Rietjens ◽  
Aldert H. Piersma


Author(s):  
Valerie A. Marshall ◽  
Edward W. Carney


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document