CUHK and Queen Mary University of London led the largest international trial of time-lapse imaging systems for embryo incubation in IVF technology, revealing comparable outcomes to conventional methods.

Full Article

An international trial of time-lapse imaging (TLI) systems for embryo incubation and selection during in vitro fertilisation (IVF), co-led by the Assisted Reproductive Medicine Unit in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK)’ Faculty of Medicine (CU Medicine) and the Women’s Health Research Unit at Queen Mary University of London, has found that a TLI system gives no advantage in clinical outcomes over conventional methods although it offers a seamless process for monitoring embryo development. Researchers believe the findings provide insights that will allow for better allocation of resources and investment in future IVF services. The landmark findings of the largest international trial of its kind have been published in The Lancet.

From left) Professor Liona Poon Chiu-yee, Department Chairperson; Professor David Chan Yiu-leung, Assistant Professor; and Dr Jacqueline ChungPui-wah, Associate Professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at CU Medicine.

Continuous debates over the clinical effectiveness of TLI systems

One out of six couples in Hong Kong experience fertility problems. IVF is the most common treatment allowing infertile couples to achieve pregnancy. Gametes from wife and husband are combined in an IVF laboratory to create the embryo, with a resulting good-quality embryo transferred to the mother’s womb, typically on the fifth day. The conventional incubation method requires an embryologist to observe the embryo once per day. Moving the incubator in order to observe the embryo can potentially disturb the latter. In contrast, a TLI system, equipped with an internal camera for continuous observation without disturbance, offers a seamless monitoring process. While TLI has been a common practice in IVF labs for over a decade, its clinical effectiveness remains controversial. TLI systems are often associated with additional costs for patients due to high equipment expenses.