A comprehensive randomized controlled trial (RCT) conducted across the UK and Hong Kong has found that time-lapse imaging (TLI) does not enhance the success rates of in vitro fertilization (IVF). Published in The Lancet, this pivotal study challenges the perceived efficacy of TLI in improving fertility treatment outcomes.
Time-Lapse Imaging Techniques Under Scrutiny
Time-lapse imaging, which involves capturing continuous, high-resolution images of embryos throughout their development, is employed by some fertility specialists to select the most viable embryos for implantation. Proponents argue that this method, which keeps embryos within their incubators, minimizes external environmental fluctuations that could affect embryo development. In contrast, traditional methods require removing embryos from incubators for assessment, potentially disrupting their growth.
Despite the widespread use of TLI, which is touted for its advanced monitoring capabilities, recent findings question its benefits. In the UK, where over 100,000 IVF cycles were performed in 2022–23, and globally, where subfertility affects one in six adults, the effectiveness of TLI has become a critical point of discussion.
RCT Results Challenge TLI’s Clinical Value
Dr. Priya Bhide from Queen Mary University of London spearheaded the double-blind study, which involved over 1,500 IVF patients across seven centers in the UK and Hong Kong. Participants were randomly divided into three groups: one received TLI-based embryo selection, another underwent static assessment with undisturbed culture, and the third group had conventional evaluation with a light microscope and standard incubation.
The results showed no significant advantage for TLI. Live birth rates were 33.7% in the TLI group, 36.6% in the undisturbed culture group, and 33.0% in the control group. Clinical pregnancy rates were similarly comparable, with 42.2% in the TLI group, 43.4% in the undisturbed culture group, and 40.9% in the control group. Additionally, secondary outcomes related to clinical effectiveness and safety did not reveal any noteworthy differences among the groups.
Reevaluating the Role of Advanced Technology in IVF
The study’s findings indicate that advanced imaging technology, such as TLI, does not translate into better live birth outcomes. Dr. Bhide, who is also a Clinical Reader at the Women’s Health Research Unit, emphasized the study’s implications, stating, “Our trial demonstrates that TLI does not enhance the likelihood of live birth in IVF and ICSI treatments. This underscores that advanced technology does not always lead to improved clinical results, a crucial consideration for patients, healthcare providers, funders, and policymakers.”
Dr. David Chan, lab director at the Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, added that the study provides a basis for IVF laboratories to reconsider their investment in TLI machines. He suggested that labs, especially those with limited resources, should evaluate their equipment budgets and prioritize investments that more directly impact live birth rates. By doing so, IVF treatments could become more cost-effective and accessible, particularly in resource-constrained environments.
This research highlights the need for a thoughtful approach to technology in fertility treatments, advocating for a focus on practical improvements over advanced but ineffective solutions.
Related Links:
