Investigation of the reliability of semi-automatic annotation by the Geri time-lapse system.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the reliability of Geri® Assess 2.0 software time-lapse technology for annotating kinetic events and identifying abnormal phenotypes in preimplantation human embryos? DESIGN: Embryos were annotated using Assess 2.0 for the appearance and fading of pronuclei, and for progression to the 2-, 3-, 4-, 5- and 6-cell stages and to three blastocyst stages. Identification of reverse cleavage and direct cleavage phenotypes was also recorded. Manual annotation was undertaken after these events in a blinded fashion. Embryo scores were compared between Assess 2.0 and manual annotation. RESULTS: A total of 513 oocytes from 34 women were included. Detection rates for Assess 2.0 versus manual annotation among the 10 kinetic events and including direct cleavage and reverse cleavage ranged between 0% and 94.4%. The percentage of discordant pairs was significantly different for all 12 events analysed (P-value range 0.036 to <0.0001). The sensitivity of Assess 2.0 ranged from 68.2% to 94.4% and specificity ranged from 63.8% to 97.3%. Assess 2.0 called for verification by the embryologist for at least one event in 55.2% of oocytes assessed. Of the 297 embryos scored by manual annotation, Assess 2.0 assigned the same score for only 125 (42.1%), although after manual corrections, concordance with manual annotation scores was raised to 66.0%. CONCLUSIONS: The results reveal striking differences between Assess 2.0 and manual annotation for kinetic annotations. Failure of Assess 2.0 to detect direct cleavage events and the low detection rate of reverse cleavage are further limitations. These collective findings highlight the importance of validating time-lapse annotation software before clinical implementation. Manual verification of Assess 2.0 outputs remains essential for accurate data interpretation.

Validation of the French IVF guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Is a symptom questionnaire as per the French IVF guidelines adequate for screening patients during the COVID-19 pandemic? DESIGN: Patients planning IVF from June 2020 to February 2021 were included in the study. In compliance with French IVF guidelines, all patients fever-free on the day of oocyte retrieval were screened for risk of COVID-19 by completing a symptom questionnaire after being counselled regarding the importance of a COVID-19-free medical practice. Patients with IVF planned between June and September 2020 only completed the questionnaire (group 1), while those planning IVF after September 2020 also underwent the RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 RNA (group 2). Cycle cancellation rates between groups were compared. Group 1 patients consented for follicular fluid testing for SARS-CoV-2 and an interview after cycle completion to determine COVID-19 exposure during the 6 months before and after retrieval. RESULTS: Cycle cancellation rates for groups 1 and 2 were 0% (0/214) versus 1.4% (8/577), respectively, (P = 0.116). All 183 follicular fluid samples from group 1 were negative for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Of 171 patients interviewed post-IVF, 16 (93.4%) developed COVID-19 symptoms or a positive real-time PCR (RT-PCR) RT-PCR test, but none within 2 months pre- or post-retrieval. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide reassurance that, consistent with the COVID-19 French IVF guidelines, use of a symptom questionnaire is effective in screening patients planning to undergo IVF. Failure to detect viral RNA in any follicular fluid sample does not negate the possibility that follicular fluid is a viral reservoir. However, the findings provide reassurance that the follicular environment in this study's carefully screened population was COVID-free.

Utilization of in vitro maturation in cases with a FSH receptor mutation.

PURPOSE: To identify the FSH receptor (FSHR) variant and efficacy of in vitro maturation (IVM) in a 28-year-old woman with secondary amenorrhea, primary infertility, and ovarian resistance to FSH, and to analyze the genotype-to-phenotype relationship in cases of FSHR mutation for the development of an IVM algorithm for use in patients with gonadotropin resistance syndrome (GRS). METHODS: Oocytes retrieved after menstruation induction with norethisterone, followed by daily estrogen and an ovulatory trigger, underwent IVM, ICSI, and culture in a time-lapse (TL) incubator. Embryo transfers were performed on day 2, and after thawing on day 5. Genes associated with disorders of sex development were sequenced for both the patient and her parents. All reported cases of FSHR mutation were analyzed to investigate genotype/phenotypic relationships. RESULTS: After ovum pickup, seven of 16 oocytes matured and all fertilized. After unsuccessful day 2 transfer, our patient delivered with a thawed day 5 blastocyst, the sole embryo without abnormal TL phenotypes. Genetic analysis revealed a new composite heterozygous FSHR variant. Analysis of our patient case with published cases of GRS revealed associations among FSHR variant genotype, location on the FSHR, functionality of tested variants, and type of amenorrhea. An algorithm for application of IVM for GRS patients was developed. CONCLUSIONS: We report two novel variants of the FSHR. Although IVM successfully matured some oocytes, only one resulted in an embryo with normal TL phenotypes. We recommend FSHR genetic testing in GRS patients, which will help guide their suitability for IVM.

Fertility preservation in borderline ovarian tumor patients and survivors.

Borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) represent around 15% of all epithelial ovarian cancer. Around one third of those patients is under 40 and has not completed childbearing when the tumor is diagnosed. Cancer survivors are more and more concerned about their future fertility since a large proportion of those with BOTs are young. Whatever the tumor stage, information regarding future fertility after treatment and fertility preservation (FP) options must be delivered to all patients before treatment. A multidisciplinary team will discuss and propose personalized treatment and FP strategies. Nowadays, the FP options offered to patients with BOT are the followings: i) minimal invasive conservative surgery, ii) oocyte cryopreservation after controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) or in vitro maturation (IVM) and iii) ovarian tissue cryopreservation. Generally, the most common strategy to preserve future fertility is represented by minimal invasive conservative surgery. However, with the remarkable success and evolution of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) - notably progress and efficiency in COS and oocyte vitrification - have led to offer another potential approach for FP consisting in oocyte cryopreservation. Several COS protocols, such as random start or dual stimulation associating tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors with gonadotropins provide similar results when compared to standard protocols while providing safety by minimizing the risk of high estrogen exposure. When COS is contraindicated, oocyte cryopreservation can still be possible throw IVM. Even though, oocyte competence after IVM is lower than that obtained after COS. A less used approach is cryopreservation of ovarian tissue, consisting in freezing ovarian cortex fragments for a future thawing and graft. Some concerns and limitations regard the ovarian cortex graft and the risk of reintroducing malignant cells once performed. Nonetheless, the latter it is the only option in prepubertal patients.