Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32083189›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction open2020

The impact of selected embryo culture conditions on ART treatment cycle outcomes: a UK national study.

Catherine M Castillo, Joyce Harper, Stephen A Roberts, Helen C O'Neill, Edward D Johnstone, Daniel R Brison

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07270250 (Impact of Dry vs Humidified Culture Conditions on Blastocyst Development and Aneuploidy), which is not on this map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT07270250 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Impact of Dry vs Humidified Culture Conditions on Blastocyst Development and Aneuploidy: A Time-lapse Sibling Oocyte Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorART Fertility Clinics LLCRan2026 to 2027Enrolled60ConditionsIncubator Stay, Total Blastulation, Blastocyst Quality, Biopsy RateArmsK- system incubator
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Catherine M CastilloMaternal & Fetal Health Research Centre, Division of Developmental Biology and Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, Oxford Rd., Manchester M13 9WL, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7204-6169
Joyce HarperInstitute for Women's Health, University College London, London WC1E 6HX, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6364-2367
Stephen A RobertsMaternal & Fetal Health Research Centre, St. Mary's Hospital, Manchester University National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, Oxford Rd., Manchester M13 9WL, UK.
Helen C O'NeillInstitute for Women's Health, University College London, London WC1E 6HX, UK.
Edward D JohnstoneMaternal & Fetal Health Research Centre, Division of Developmental Biology and Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, Oxford Rd., Manchester M13 9WL, UK.
Daniel R BrisonMaternal & Fetal Health Research Centre, Division of Developmental Biology and Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, Oxford Rd., Manchester M13 9WL, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4307-1293
National Health Service · GBUniversity College London · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

study questionAre selected embryo culture conditions namely media, oxygen level, and incubator type, associated with IVF live birth rate (LBR) and the health of singleton offspring at birth? SUMMARY ANSWER: There were statistically significant differences in LBR between the eight culture media systems analysed; however, none of the embryo culture factors showed statistically significant associations with birth weight (BW) in multivariable regression analyses. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In clinical ART culture media is the initial environment provided for the growth of human embryos. Pre-implantation development is a critical period of developmental plasticity, which could have long-lasting effects on offspring growth and health. Although some studies have shown an impact of culture medium type on BW, the interaction between culture medium type and associated culture conditions on both treatment success rates (LBR) and offspring BW is largely unexplored. This study aimed to examine these factors in a large multicentre national survey capturing the range of clinical practice. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: In this cross-sectional study, data from a survey circulated to all UK IVF clinics requesting information regarding culture medium type, incubator type, and oxygen level used in ART between January 2011 and December 2013 were merged with routinely recorded treatment and outcome data held in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Register up to the end of 2014. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING

methodsForty-six (62%) UK clinics responded to the survey. A total of 75 287 fresh IVF/ICSI cycles were captured, including 18 693 singleton live births. IVF success (live birth, singleton or multiple; LB), singleton gestation and singleton gestation-adjusted BW were analysed using logistic and linear regression models adjusting for patient/treatment characteristics and clinic-specific effects. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Culture medium type was shown to have some impact on LBR (multivariable logistic regression, (MRL); post-regression Wald test, LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: Larger datasets with more inter-centre variation are also needed, with key embryo culture variables comprehensively recorded in national treatment registries. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE

findingsThis study is the largest investigation of laboratory environmental effects in IVF on both LBR and singleton BW. Our findings largely agree with the literature, which has failed to show a consistent advantage of one culture media type over another. However, we noted some association of LBR with medium type, and the duration of embryo exposure to laboratory conditions (blastocyst culture) was associated with both LBR and singleton health at birth. Because of the strong effect of clinic site noted, further randomized controlled trials are needed in order to reliably determine the effect of embryo culture on IVF success rates and the growth and health of subsequent offspring. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This study was funded by the EU FP7 project grant EpiHealthNet (FP7-PEOPLE-2012-ITN -317 146). The authors have no competing interests to declare.

Indexed as

ARTassisted reproductionbirth weightblastocyst embryo cultureculture mediadevelopmental origins of health and diseasefertilization in vitroICSIlive birth ratepre-term birth

Identifiers

PMID32083189
PMCPMC7016773
OpenAlexW2974371570

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.