Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Design and Development of Simplified, Low-Cost Technologies for Clinical IVF: Applications in High- and Low-Resource Settings

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
In Vitro Fertilization

  • 2120 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter discusses methods by which the human in vitro fertilization and embryo culture process can be significantly simplified for use in low-resource developing countries at low cost yet deliver outcomes similar to those commonplaces in high-resource developed countries using high-complexity IVF laboratories. The addition of a simplified albeit robust time-lapse and streaming video capacity adds a competence assessment function that is emerging as an important diagnostic tool for embryo selection in high-complexity laboratories in developed countries that can be extended to their counterparts in developing countries at low cost. The purposes of developing these methodologies is to offer an affordable treatment option to a larger population of infertile couples in both developed and developing countries that are currently under-represented and unserved owing to issues associated with affordability, absence, or lack of access to IVF programs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Dyer S, Abrahams N, Mokoena N, Lombard C, van der Spuy Z. Psychological distress among women suffering from couple infertility in South Africa: a quantitative assessment. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:1938–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ombelet W. Is global access to infertility care realistic? The Walking Egg Project. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;28:267–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ombelet W, Cooke I, Dyer S, Serour G, Devroey P. Infertility and the provision of infertility medical services in developing countries. Hum Reprod Update. 2008;14:605–21.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Pennings G, deWert G, Shenfield F, Cohen J, Tarlatzis B, Devroey P. ESHRE task force on ethics and law. Providing infertility treatment in resource-poor countries. Hum Reprod. 2009;24:1008–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Vayena E, Peterson H, Adamson D, Nygren K. Assisted reproduction technologies in developing countries: are we caring yet? Fertil Steril. 2009;92:413–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Johnson M. Accessible and affordable IVF: is Bob Edwards’ dream about to become reality? RBM Online. 2014;28:265.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Blockeel C, Mock P, Verheyen G, Bouche N, Le Goff P, Heyman Y, Wrenzycki C, Höffmann K, Niemann H, Haentjens P, De Los Santos M, Fernandez-Sanchez M, Velasco M, Aebischer P, Devroey P, Simón C. An in vivo culture system for human embryos using an encapsulation technology: a pilot study. Hum Reprod. 2009;24:790–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Frydman R, Ranoux C. INVO: a simple, low-cost, effective assisted reproduction technology. Hum Reprod. 2008;1(Monographs):85–9.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Mitri F, Esfandiari N, Coogan-Prewer J, Chang P, Bentov Y, McNaught J, Klement A, Casper R. A pilot study to evaluate a device for the intravaginal culture of embryos. RBM Online. 2015;31:732–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Van Blerkom J, Ombelet W, Klerkx E, Janssen M, Dhont N, Nargund G, Campo R. First births with a simplified culture system for clinical IVF and embryo transfer. RBM Online. 2014;28:310–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dhont N. The Walking Egg non-profit organization. Facts, Views Vis, Obgyn. 2011;3:253–25.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Irani M, Reichman D, Robles A, Melnick A, Davis O, Zaninovic N, Xu K, Rosenwaks Z. Morphological grading of euploid blastocysts influences implantation and ongoing pregnancy rates. Fertil Steril. 2017;107:664–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Richter K, Harris D, Daneshmand S, Shapiro B. Quantitative grading of a human blastocyst, optimal inner cell mass size and shape. Fertil Steril. 2001;76:1157–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Thompson S, Onwubalili N, Brown K, Jindal S, McGovern P. Blastocyst expansion score and trophectoderm morphology strongly predict successful clinical pregnancy and live birth following elective single embryo blastocyst transfer (eSET): a national study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013;30:1577–81.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Verberg M, Macklon N, Nargund G, Frydman R, Devroey P, Broekmans F, Fauser B. Mild ovarian stimulation for IVF. Hum Reprod Update. 2009;15:13–29.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kato K, Takehara Y, Segawa T, Kawachiya S, Okuno T, Kobayashi T, Bodri D, Kato O. Minimal ovarian stimulation combined with elective single embryo transfer policy: age-specific results of a large, single-centre, Japanese cohort. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2012;10:35–42.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Nargund G. (2008). Natural-cycle/mild IVF: a science-based and patient-centered approach for the future. Womens Health (Lond) 4:327–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ferraretti A, Gianaroli L, Magli M, Devroey P. Mild ovarian stimulation with clomiphene citrate launch is a realistic option for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:333–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wu Y, Lazzaroni-Tealdi E, Wang Q, Zhang L, Barad D, Kushnir V, Darmon K, Albertini D, Gleicher N. Different effectiveness of closed embryo culture system with time-lapse imaging (EmbryoScope TM) in comparison to standard manual embryology in good and poor prognosis patients: a prospectively randomized pilot study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2016;14:49–60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Dal Canto M, Coticchio G, Mignini Renzini M, De Ponti E, Novara P, Brambillasca F, Comi R, Fadini R. Cleavage kinetics analysis of human embryos predicts development to blastocyst and implantation. RBM Online. 2012;25:474–80.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Liu Y, Chapple V, Feenan K, Roberts P, Matson P. Time-lapse deselection model for human day 3 in vitro fertilization embryos: the combination of qualitative and quantitative measures of embryo growth. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:656–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pribenszky C, Nilselid A-M, Montag M. Time-lapse culture with morphokinetic embryo selection improves pregnancy and live birth chances and reduces early pregnancy loss: a meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed Online. (in press). 2017;35:511–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Rubio I, Galan A, Larreategui Z, Ayerdi F, Bellver J, Herrero J, Meseguer M. Clinical validation of embryo culture and selection by morphokinetic analysis: a randomized, controlled trial of the EmbryoScope. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:1287–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Basile N, Nogales Mdel C, Bronet F, Florensa M, Riqueiros M, Rodrigo L, Garcia-Velasco J, Meseguer M. Increasing the probability of selecting chromosomally normal embryos by time-lapse morphokinetics analysis. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:699–704.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Campbell A, Fishel S, Bowman N, Duffy S, Sedler M, Thornton S. Retrospective analysis of outcomes after IVF using an aneuploidy risk model derived from time-lapse imaging without PGS. RBM Online. 2013;27:140–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Chavez S, Loewke K, Han J, Moussavi F, Colls P, Munne S, Behr B, ReijoPera R. Dynamic blastomere behaviour reflects human embryo ploidy by the four-cell stage. Nat Commun. 2012;3:1251–63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Del Carmen Nogales M, Bronet F, Basile N, Martinez E, Linan A, Rodrigo L, Meseguer M. Types of chromosome abnormality affects embryo morphology dynamics. Fertil Steril. 2017;107:229–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kramer Y, Kofinas J, Melzer K, Noyes N, McCaffrey C, Buldo-Licciardi J, McCulloh D, Grifo A. Assessing morphokinetic parameters via time lapse microscopy (TLM) to predict euploidy: are aneuploidy risk classification models universal? J Assist Reprod Gen. 2014;31:1231–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rienzi L, Capalbo A, Stoppa M, Romano S, Maggiulli R, Albricci L, Scarica C, Farcomeni A, Vajta G, Ubaldi F. No evidence of association between blastocyst aneuploidy and morphokinetic assessment in a selected population of poor-prognosis patients: a longitudinal cohort study. RBM Online. 2015;30:57–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kirkegaard K, Sundvall L, Erlandsen M, Hindkjær J, Knudsen UB, Ingerslev H. Timing of human preimplantation embryonic development is confounded by embryo origin. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:324–31.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Athayde Wirka K, Chen A, Conaghan J, Ivani K, Gvakharia M, Behr B, Suraj V, Tan L, Shen S. Atypical embryo phenotypes identified by timelapse microscopy: high prevalence and association with embryo development. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:1637–416796.8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Azzarello A, Hoest T, Mikkelsen A. The impact of pronuclei morphology and dynamicity on live birth outcome after time-lapse culture. Hum Reprod. 2012;27:2649–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Papale L, Fiorentino A, Montag M, Tomasi G. The Zygote. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(S1):122–49.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Lin P-Y, Huang F-J, Kung F-T, Lin Y-C, Chiang H-J, Lin Y-J, Lan K-C. Reassessing the feasibility of the zygote score for predicting embryo viability in IVF/ICSI using GnRH antagonist protocol compared to long protocol. PLoS One. 2017;12(2):e0171465.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Montag M, Liebebthron J, Koster M. Which morphological scoring system is relevant in human embryo development. Placenta. 2011;32:S252–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Sathananthan H, Menezes J, Gunasheela S. Mechanics of human blastocyst hatching in vitro. Reprod Biomed Online. 2003;7:228–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Dyer S. The value of children in African countries: insights from studies on infertility. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;228:69–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Dyer S, Patel M. The economic impact of infertility on women in developing countries – a systematic review. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2012;4:102–9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA

    Jonathan Van Blerkom & Christine Hennigan

  2. Colorado Reproductive Endocrinology, Rose Medical Center, Denver, CO, USA

    Jonathan Van Blerkom

  3. Genk Institute for Fertility Technology, Genk, Belgium

    Willem Ombelet

Authors
  1. Jonathan Van Blerkom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christine Hennigan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Willem Ombelet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan Van Blerkom .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Reproductive Biology Associates – Prelude, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Zsolt Peter Nagy

  2. Astra Fertility Group, Mississauga, ON, Canada

    Alex C. Varghese

  3. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Ashok Agarwal

Review Questions

Review Questions

  1. 1.

    What are the basic elements of culture needed to support successful human fertilization and preimplantation embryogenesis in vitro?

  2. 2.

    What modifications could be made to address potential concerns from regulatory authorities about thermal stability for time-lapse microscopy using the simplified culture system?

  3. 3.

    Given the limitations of the simplest iteration of a time-lapse system application for the simplified IVF culture system compared to current commercial systems, what patients may benefit the most with respect to outcome from its use?

  4. 4.

    Why might there be resistance to the introduction of a lower-cost IVF model in both developing and developed countries if treatment can be more affordable and accessible?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Van Blerkom, J., Hennigan, C., Ombelet, W. (2019). Design and Development of Simplified, Low-Cost Technologies for Clinical IVF: Applications in High- and Low-Resource Settings. In: Nagy, Z., Varghese, A., Agarwal, A. (eds) In Vitro Fertilization. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43011-9_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43011-9_18

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-43010-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-43011-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation