Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Using time-lapse technology to explore vacuolization in embryos on Day 3 and Day 4

  • Gynecologic Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the occurrence and development state of embryo vacuoles between the 8-cell and morula stages, and to explore how vacuoles affected the development of embryos.

Methods

A retrospective study of a cohort of 422 patients undergoing conventional in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. With the help of time-lapse imaging, the development processes and outcomes of good quality embryos with or without vacuoles were analyzed.

Results

Vacuole positive embryos had significantly lower blastulation rate and good quality blastulation rate than vacuole negative embryos, p < 0.05. Compared to vacuole negative embryos, the number of best and good quality blastocysts was significantly reduced, while the number of fair and discarded ones was significantly increased, p < 0.05. The average starting time of vacuolization was 73.7 ± 9.3 h after insemination. The proportion of blastomeres affected by vacuoles was associated with embryonic developmental potential.

Conclusions

Vacuolization on Day 3 and Day 4 was frequently observed and was detrimental to embryo development. The proportion of blastomeres affected by vacuoles may be an indicator of embryo developmental potential.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Van Blerkom J (1990) Occurrence and developmental consequences of aberrant cellular organization in meiotically mature human oocytes after exogenous ovarian hyperstimulation. J Electron Microsc Tech 16(4):324–346. https://doi.org/10.1002/jemt.1060160405

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hardy K, Warner A, Winston RM, Becker DL (1996) Expression of intercellular junctions during preimplantation development of the human embryo. Mol Hum Reprod 2(8):621–632

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hardy K (1999) Apoptosis in the human embryo. Rev Reprod 4(3):125–134

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ebner T, Moser M, Sommergruber M, Gaiswinkler U, Shebl O, Jesacher K, Tews G (2005) Occurrence and developmental consequences of vacuoles throughout preimplantation development. Fertil Steril 83(6):1635–1640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.02.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. De Sutter P, Dozortsev D, Qian C, Dhont M (1996) Oocyte morphology does not correlate with fertilization rate and embryo quality after intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 11(3):595–597

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Alikani M, Palermo G, Adler A, Bertoli M, Blake M, Cohen J (1995) Intracytoplasmic sperm injection in dysmorphic human oocytes. Zygote 3(4):283–288

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ten J, Mendiola J, Vioque J, de Juan J, Bernabeu R (2007) Donor oocyte dysmorphisms and their influence on fertilization and embryo quality. Reprod Biomed Online 14(1):40–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Yu EJ, Ahn H, Lee JM, Jee BC, Kim SH (2015) Fertilization and embryo quality of mature oocytes with specific morphological abnormalities. Clin Exp Reprod Med 42(4):156–162. https://doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2015.42.4.156

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Meseguer M, Herrero J, Tejera A, Hilligsoe KM, Ramsing NB, Remohi J (2011) The use of morphokinetics as a predictor of embryo implantation. Hum Reprod 26(10):2658–2671. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kirkegaard K, Kesmodel US, Hindkjaer JJ, Ingerslev HJ (2013) Time-lapse parameters as predictors of blastocyst development and pregnancy outcome in embryos from good prognosis patients: a prospective cohort study. Hum Reprod 28(10):2643–2651. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/det300

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Desai N, Ploskonka S, Goodman LR, Austin C, Goldberg J, Falcone T (2014) Analysis of embryo morphokinetics, multinucleation and cleavage anomalies using continuous time-lapse monitoring in blastocyst transfer cycles. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 12:54. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7827-12-54

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Basile N, Nogales Mdel C, Bronet F, Florensa M, Riqueiros M, Rodrigo L, Garcia-Velasco J, Meseguer M (2014) Increasing the probability of selecting chromosomally normal embryos by time-lapse morphokinetics analysis. Fertil Steril 101(3):699–704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Campbell A, Fishel S, Bowman N, Duffy S, Sedler M, Hickman CF (2013) Modelling a risk classification of aneuploidy in human embryos using non-invasive morphokinetics. Reprod Biomed Online 26(5):477–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.02.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Minasi MG, Colasante A, Riccio T, Ruberti A, Casciani V, Scarselli F, Spinella F, Fiorentino F, Varricchio MT, Greco E (2016) Correlation between aneuploidy, standard morphology evaluation and morphokinetic development in 1730 biopsied blastocysts: a consecutive case series study. Hum Reprod 31(10):2245–2254. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Del Carmen Nogales M, Bronet F, Basile N, Martinez EM, Linan A, Rodrigo L, Meseguer M (2017) Type of chromosome abnormality affects embryo morphology dynamics. Fertil Steril 107(1):229–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.09.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gardner DK, Lane M (1997) Culture and selection of viable blastocysts: a feasible proposition for human IVF? Human Reprod Update 3(4):367–382

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Alpha Scientists In Reproductive M (2012) The Alpha consensus meeting on cryopreservation key performance indicators and benchmarks: proceedings of an expert meeting. Reprod Biomed Online 25(2):146–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.05.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gardner DK, Lane M, Stevens J, Schlenker T, Schoolcraft WB (2000) Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome: towards a single blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril 73(6):1155–1158

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Majumdar G, Majumdar A, Verma IC, Upadhyaya KC (2017) Relationship between morphology, euploidy and implantation potential of cleavage and blastocyst stage embryos. J Hum Reprod Sci 10(1):49–57. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-1208.204013

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Fragouli E, Wells D (2011) Aneuploidy in the human blastocyst. Cytogenet Genome Res 133(2–4):149–159. https://doi.org/10.1159/000323500

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Angell RR, Aitken RJ, van Look PF, Lumsden MA, Templeton AA (1983) Chromosome abnormalities in human embryos after in vitro fertilization. Nature 303(5915):336–338

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ivec M, Kovacic B, Vlaisavljevic V (2011) Prediction of human blastocyst development from morulas with delayed and/or incomplete compaction. Fertil Steril 96(6):1473–1478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.09.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tao J, Tamis R, Fink K, Williams B, Nelson-White T, Craig R (2002) The neglected morula/compact stage embryo transfer. Hum Reprod 17(6):1513–1518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wallbutton S, Kasraie J (2010) Vacuolated oocytes: fertilization and embryonic arrest following intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection in a patient exhibiting persistent oocyte macro vacuolization–case report. J Assist Reprod Genet 27(4):183–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-010-9399-2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Alikani M, Cohen J, Tomkin G, Garrisi GJ, Mack C, Scott RT (1999) Human embryo fragmentation in vitro and its implications for pregnancy and implantation. Fertil Steril 71(5):836–842

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by The National Key Research and Development Program of China (2017YFC1001000) and The Shanghai Commission of Science and Technology (17DZ2271100).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Jingye Zhang and Wanxia Zhong contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong University, National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics, 157 Jingliu Road, Jinan, 250021, China

    Jingye Zhang, Hui Liu, Haibin Zhao, Mei Li, Shuiying Ma & Keliang Wu

  2. The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology (Shandong University), Ministry of Education, Jinan, China

    Jingye Zhang, Hui Liu, Haibin Zhao, Mei Li, Shuiying Ma & Keliang Wu

  3. Center for Reproductive Medicine, Ren Ji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, 200135, China

    Wanxia Zhong

  4. Shanghai Key Laboratory for Assisted Reproduction and Reproductive Genetics, Shanghai, 200135, China

    Wanxia Zhong

Authors
  1. Jingye Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wanxia Zhong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hui Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Haibin Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mei Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Shuiying Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Keliang Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

ZJY: data management/analysis, manuscript writing/editing. ZWX: data management/analysis, manuscript writing/editing. LH: data collection, manuscript editing. ZHB: data collection, manuscript editing. LM: manuscript editing. MSY: manuscript editing. WKL: project development, manuscript writing/editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Keliang Wu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Center for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong University.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in this study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, J., Zhong, W., Liu, H. et al. Using time-lapse technology to explore vacuolization in embryos on Day 3 and Day 4. Arch Gynecol Obstet 299, 857–862 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-018-5008-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-018-5008-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation