scholarly journals TILT: Time-Lapse Imaging Trial: A pragmatic, Multi-Centre, Three-Arm Randomised Controlled Trial to Assess the Clinical Effectiveness and Safety of Time-Lapse Imaging in in-Vitro Fertilisation Treatment.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Priya Bhide ◽  
Arasaratnam Srikanthara ◽  
Doris Lanz ◽  
Julie Dodds ◽  
Bonnie Collins ◽  
...  

Abstract • Background: Subfertility is a common problem for which in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment is commonly recommended. Success rates following IVF are suboptimal and have remained static over the last few years. This imposes a considerable financial burden on overstretched healthcare resources. Time-lapse imaging (TLI) of developing embryos in IVF treatment is hypothesised to improve the success rates of treatment. This may be either by providing undisturbed culture conditions and/or improving the predictive accuracy for optimal embryo selection from a cohort of available embryos. However, current best evidence for its effectiveness is inconclusive. • Methods: The time-lapse imaging trial is a pragmatic, multi-centre, three-arm parallel group randomised controlled trial using re-randomisation. The primary objective of the trial is to determine if the use of TLI or undisturbed culture in IVF treatment results in a higher live birth rate when compared to current standard methods of embryo incubation and assessment. Secondary outcomes include measures of clinical efficacy and safety. The trial will randomise 1575 participants to detect an increase in live birth from 26.5% to 35.25%.• Discussion: In the absence of high quality evidence, there is no current national guidance, recommendation or policy for the use of TLI. The use of TLI is not consistently incorporated into standard IVF care. A large, pragmatic, multicentre, trial will provide much needed definitive evidence regarding the effectiveness of TLI. If proven to be effective, its incorporation into standard care would translate into significant clinical and economic benefits. If not, it would allow allocation of resources to more effective interventions.• Trial registration: ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN17792989, 18/04/2018, prospectively registered.

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e051058
Author(s):  
Sine Berntsen ◽  
Bugge Nøhr ◽  
Marie Louise Grøndahl ◽  
Morten Rønn Petersen ◽  
Lars Franch Andersen ◽  
...  

IntroductionOver the last decades, the use of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) has increased, even among patients without male factor infertility. The increase has happened even though there is no evidence to support that ICSI results in higher live birth rates compared with conventional in vitro fertilisation (IVF) in cases with nonmale factor infertility. The lack of robust evidence on an advantage of using ICSI over conventional IVF in these patients is problematic since ICSI is more invasive, complex and requires additional resources, time and effort. Therefore, the primary objective of the IVF versus ICSI (INVICSI) study is to determine whether ICSI is superior to standard IVF in patients without severe male factor infertility. The primary outcome measure is first live birth from fresh and frozen-thawed transfers after one stimulated cycle. Secondary outcomes include fertilisation rate, ongoing pregnancy rate, birth weight and congenital anomalies.Methods and analysisThis is a two-armed, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial. In total, 824 couples/women with infertility without severe male factor will be recruited and allocated randomly into two groups (IVF or ICSI) in a 1:1 ratio. Participants will be randomised in variable block sizes and stratified by trial site and age. The main inclusion criteria are (1) no prior IVF/ICSI treatment, (2) male partner sperm with an expected count of minimum 2 million progressive motile spermatozoa following density gradient purification on the day of oocyte pick up and (3) age of the woman between 18 and 42 years.Ethics and disseminationThe study will be performed in accordance with the ethical principles in the Helsinki Declaration. The study is approved by the Scientific Ethical Committee of the Capital Region of Denmark. Study findings will be presented, irrespectively of results at international conferences and submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT04128904. Pre-results.


BMJ ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 341 (sep30 2) ◽  
pp. c2501-c2501 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. van Peperstraten ◽  
W. Nelen ◽  
R. Grol ◽  
G. Zielhuis ◽  
E. Adang ◽  
...  

The Lancet ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 387 (10038) ◽  
pp. 2622-2629 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janine G Smit ◽  
Jenneke C Kasius ◽  
Marinus J C Eijkemans ◽  
Carolien A M Koks ◽  
Ronald van Golde ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document