RESUMEN
LGBTQ+ patients comprise one of the fastest-growing user demographics in fertility care, yet they remain underrepresented in fertility research, practice, and discourse. Existing studies have revealed significant systemic barriers, including cisheteronormativity, discrimination, and gaps in clinical expertise. In this article, we present a checklist of measures clinics can take to improve LGBTQ+ inclusion in fertility care, co-created with members of the LGBTQ+ community. This checklist focuses on three key areas: cultural competence, clinical considerations, and online presence. The cultural competence criteria encompass inclusive communication practices, a broad understanding of LGBTQ+ healthcare needs, and knowledge of treatment options suitable for LGBTQ+ individuals. Clinical considerations include awareness of alternative examination and gamete collection techniques for transgender and non-binary patients, the existence of specific clinical pathways for LGBTQ+ patients, and sensitivity to the psychological aspects of fertility care unique to this demographic. The online presence criteria evaluate provider websites for the use of inclusive language and the availability of LGBTQ+-relevant information. The checklist was used as the foundation for an audit of fertility care providers across the UK in early 2024. Our audit identified a widespread lack of LGBTQ+ inclusion, particularly for transgender and non-binary patients, highlighting deficiencies in clinical knowledge and cultural competence. Our work calls attention to the need for further work to understand the barriers to inclusive and competent LGBTQ+ fertility care from both healthcare provider and patient perspectives.
RESUMEN
RESEARCH QUESTION: What can three-dimensional cell contact networks tell us about the developmental potential of cleavage-stage human embryos? DESIGN: This pilot study was a retrospective analysis of two Embryoscope imaging datasets from two clinics. An artificial intelligence system was used to reconstruct the three-dimensional structure of embryos from 11-plane focal stacks. Networks of cell contacts were extracted from the resulting embryo three-dimensional models and each embryo's mean contacts per cell was computed. Unpaired t-tests and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis were used to statistically analyse mean cell contact outcomes. Cell contact networks from different embryos were compared with identical embryos with similar cell arrangements. RESULTS: At t4, a higher mean number of contacts per cell was associated with greater rates of blastulation and blastocyst quality. No associations were found with biochemical pregnancy, live birth, miscarriage or ploidy. At t8, a higher mean number of contacts was associated with increased blastocyst quality, biochemical pregnancy and live birth. No associations were found with miscarriage or aneuploidy. Mean contacts at t4 weakly correlated with those at t8. Four-cell embryos fell into nine distinct cell arrangements; the five most common accounted for 97% of embryos. Eight-cell embryos, however, displayed a greater degree of variation with 59 distinct cell arrangements. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence is provided for the clinical relevance of cleavage-stage cell arrangement in the human preimplantation embryo beyond the four-cell stage, which may improve selection techniques for day-3 transfers. This pilot study provides a strong case for further investigation into spatial biomarkers and three-dimensional morphokinetics.