Advertisement

Building the Laboratory

  • Dean E. MorbeckEmail author
  • Marlena Duke
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter focuses on the critical aspects of building a laboratory in a private practice setting as part of an assisted reproductive technology (ART) clinic. Knowledge of these factors is essential for ART professionals planning a new facility or redesigning an existing one.

Keywords

In vitro fertilization laboratory Laboratory construction Laboratory air quality Laboratory design 

References

  1. 1.
    De los Santos MJ, Apter S, Coticchio G, Debrock S, Lundin K, et al. Revised guidelines for good practice in IVF laboratories (2015). Hum Reprod. 2016;31(4):685–6.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    ASRM. Revised minimum standards for practices offering assisted reproductive technologies. Fertil Steril [Internet]. 2008;90(5, Supplement 1):S165–8. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6T6K-4TWWJPV-12/2/48c1d8764612a4365d6049c81df82d69.
  3. 3.
    Esteves SC, Bento FC. Implementation of air quality control in reproductive laboratories in full compliance with the Brazilian cells and Germinative tissue directive. Reprod Biomed Online [Internet]. 2012/11/28. 2013;26(1):9–21. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23177417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Morbeck DE. Air quality in the assisted reproduction laboratory: a mini-review. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015;32(7):1019–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barnes FL. Equipment and general technical aspects of micromanipulation of gametes embryos. In: Gardner DK, Weissman A, Howles CM, Shoham Z, editors. Textbook of assisted reproductive techniques. 2nd ed. London: Taylor and Francis; 2004. p. 163–70.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boone WR, Higdon HL, Skelton WD. How to design and implement an assisted reproductive technology (ART) cleanroom. JCE. 2007.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boone WR, Johnson JE, Locke AJ, Crane MM 4th, Price TM. Control of air quality in an assisted reproductive technology laboratory. Fertil Steril. 1999;71(1):150–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cohen J, Gilligan A, Garrisi J. Setting up an ART laboratory. In: Gardner DK, Weissman A, Howles CM, Shoham Z, editors. Textbook of assisted reproductive techniques. New York: Taylor & Francis Group; 2004.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cohen J, Gilligan A, Willadsen S. Culture and quality control of embryos. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(Suppl 3):137–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Morbeck DE. Basics of laboratory set-up in the office. In: Collins RL, Seifer DB, editors. Office-Based Infertility Practice. New York: Springer; 2002. p. 63.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Korhonen K, Sjovall S, Viitanen J, Ketoja E, Makarevich A, Peippo J. Viability of bovine embryos following exposure to the green filtered or wider bandwidth light during in vitro embryo production. Hum Reprod. 2009;24(2):308–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oh SJ, Gong SP, Lee ST, Lee EJ, Lim JM. Light intensity and wavelength during embryo manipulation are important factors for maintaining viability of preimplantation embryos in vitro. Fertil Steril. 2007;88(4 Suppl):1150–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ottosen LDM, Hindkjaer J, Ingerslev J. Light exposure of the ovum and preimplantation embryo during ART procedures. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2007;24(2–3):99–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Takenaka M, Horiuchi T, Yanagimachi R. Effects of light on development of mammalian zygotes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104(36):14289–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Meintjes M, Chantilis SJ, Douglas JD, Rodriguez AJ, Guerami AR, Bookout DM, et al. A controlled randomized trial evaluating the effect of lowered incubator oxygen tension on live births in a predominantly blastocyst transfer program. Hum Reprod. 2009;24(2):300–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cooke S, Tyler JPP, Driscoll G. Objective assessments of temperature maintenance using in vitro culture techniques. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2002;19(8):368–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lemmen JG, Agerholm I, Ziebe S. Kinetic markers of human embryo quality using time-lapse recordings of IVF/ICSI-fertilized oocytes. Reprod Biomed Online [Internet]. 2008/09/04. 2008;17(3):385–91. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18765009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kirkegaard K, Agerholm IE, Ingerslev HJ. Time-lapse monitoring as a tool for clinical embryo assessment. Hum Reprod [Internet]. 2012/03/16. 2012;27(5):1277–85. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22419744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wolff HS, Fredrickson JR, Walker DL, Morbeck DE. Advances in quality control: mouse embryo morphokinetics are sensitive markers of in vitro stress. Hum Reprod [Internet]. 2013/04/19. 2013;28(7):1776–82. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23595971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ainsworth AJ, Fredrickson JR, Morbeck DE. Improved detection of mineral oil toxicity using an extended mouse embryo assay. J Assist Reprod Genet [Internet]. 2017;1–7. Available from:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-016-0856-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fertility AssociatesAucklandNew Zealand
  2. 2.Reproductive Medicine Associates of New YorkNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations