Abstract
Background: Pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) has been using for years in embryoselection. However, this is an invasive method and may cause harm to the embryos. Therefore, time-lapse monitoring has been thought to be an alternative approach for embryo selection due to its efficiency. Up to now, several studies were investigating the relationship between the morphokinetic parameters and the embryo ploidy. However, the results are not consistent. This study aims to evaluate the correlation between morphokinetic parameters and PGT-A results.
 Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at IVFMD Phu Nhuan, My Duc Phu Nhuan Hospital, between September 2018 and June 2019. Patients undergoing PGT-A due to advanced maternal age, repeated implantation failure or recurrent miscarriage and having embryo cultured under time-lapse monitoring were included. Patients with the re-thawing embryo for PGT-A were not eligible. The time from insemination to the pronuclear appearing (tPN), the onset of two to eight-cell divisions (t2 to t8) and the duration of the second cell cycle (cc2, t3-t2) were observed.
 Results: There were 39 patients included in the study, with mean age of 36.4 +/- 5.7 years. A total of 110 blastocysts were biopsied. Amongst them, 63 embryos (57.3%) were euploidy (group 1), and 47 embryos (42.7%) were aneuploidy (group 2). There was no significant difference between euploid, and aneuploid embryos regarding all morphokinetic parameters, including tPN, t2, t3, t4, t5, cc2, and t8 (7.2 +/- 1.5 hours vs. 7.4 +/- 1.6 hours; 25.0 +/- 2.8 hours vs. 25.6 +/- 3.2 hours; 35.8 +/- 3.6 hours vs. 36.9 +/- 3.3 hours; 37.5 +/- 4.4 hours vs. 38.3 +/- 4.3 hours; 49.2 +/- 5.52 hours vs. 49.9 +/- 6.2 hours; 10.7 +/- 2.6 hours vs. 11.2 +/- 1.7 hours; and 55.7 +/- 6.4 hours vs. 58.1 +/- 7.4 hours, respectively).
 Conclusion: In this study, we found no difference in the morphokinetic parameters between euploid and aneuploid embryos.
Highlights
The selection of an embryo with the highest potential to implant is the top priority of many IVF centers
There was no significant difference between euploid, and aneuploid embryos regarding all morphokinetic parameters, including the pronuclear appearing (tPN), t2, t3, t4, t5, cc2, and t8 (7.2 ± 1.5 hours vs. 7.4 ± 1.6 hours; 25.0 ± 2.8 hours vs. 25.6 ± 3.2 hours; 35.8 ± 3.6 hours vs. 36.9 ± 3.3 hours; 37.5 ± 4.4 hours vs. 38.3 ± 4.3 hours; 49.2 ± 5.52 hours vs. 49.9 ± 6.2 hours; 10.7 ± 2.6 hours vs. 11.2 ± 1.7 hours; and 55.7 ± 6.4 hours vs. 58.1 ± 7.4 hours, respectively)
There was no significant difference between euploid and aneuploid embryos according to the morphokinetic parameters, such as tPN (7.2 ± 1.5 hours vs. 7.4 ± 1.6 hours, p > 0.05); t2 (25.0 ± 2.8 hours vs. 25.6 ± 3.2 hours, p > 0.05); t3 (35.8 ± 3.6 hours vs. 36.9 ± 3.3 hours, p > 0.05); t4 (37.5 ± 4.4 hours and 38.3 ± 4.3 hours, p > 0.05); t5 (49.2 ± 5.5 hours vs. 49.9 ± 6.2 hours, p > 0.05); cc2 (10.7 ± 2.6 hours vs. 11.2 ± 1.7 hours, p > 0.05), and t8 (55.7 ± 6.4 hours vs. 58.1 ± 7.4 hours, p > 0.05) (Table 4)
Summary
The selection of an embryo with the highest potential to implant is the top priority of many IVF centers. Pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) has been used for embryo selection [6,7]. PGT-A has been indicated for patients at high-risk aneuploidy, such as advanced maternal age, repeated implantation failure, and recurrent miscarriage [8,9]. Pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) has been using for years in embryoselection. This is an invasive method and may cause harm to the embryos. This study aims to evaluate the correlation between morphokinetic parameters and PGT-A results. Patients undergoing PGT-A due to advanced maternal age, repeated implantation failure or recurrent miscarriage and having embryo cultured under time-lapse monitoring were included.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
