Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 30, 2025

Human Blastocyst Biopsy and Vitrification
Published on: July 26, 2019
The effect of day 5 blastocyst assessment timing on live birth prediction and development of a prediction algorithm
Yanhe Liu1, Kee Ong2, Irving Korman2
1Monash IVF Gold Coast, Southport Queensland, Australia; School of Human Sciences, University of Western Australia, Crawley Western Australia, Australia; School of Medical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup Western Australia, Australia; School of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Robina Queensland, Australia; Monash IVF Auchenflower, Auchenflower Queensland, Australia; Monash IVF Rockhampton, Rockhampton Queensland, Australia.
Research Question:
Does variation in day 5 assessment timing confound live birth prediction using snapshot blastocyst morphology and is it possible to develop a numerical prediction algorithm?
Design:
Retrospective multicentre cohort study including 4851 autologous oocyte single day 5 fresh embryo transfers performed at 11 Monash IVF clinics between 2016 and 2020. Repeat cycles of the same patients were excluded to avoid clustering effects in regression analysis.
Results:
Hours post insemination (HPI) at day 5 assessment (115.9 ± 2.6 h) significantly correlated with blastocyst developmental stage (r = 0.118, P < 0.001). Independent association (expressed as adjusted odds ratio [aOR] and 95% confidence interval [CI]) was identified between live birth and HPI (aOR 0.950, 95% CI 0.925-0.976, P < 0.001) after accounting for blastocyst morphology and a range of patient/cycle characteristics. Algorithms were constructed using four significant live birth predictors: HPI at day 5 assessment, blastocyst developmental stage (aOR 1.347, 95% CI 1.217-1.491, P < 0.001), morphological grade (aOR 1.314, 95% 1.197-1.443, P < 0.001) and maternal age (aOR 0.922, 95% CI 0.907-0.936, P < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed consistent predicting performance of algorithms via five-fold cross-validation, with similar area under the ROC curve (AUC 0.718, 0.715, 0.720, 0.712, 0.726, P < 0.001, respectively, in development subsets; and AUC 0.718, 0.731, 0.709, 0.741, 0.684, P < 0.001, respectively, in validation subsets). A score (ranging from 0.1 to 4.7) calculator based on the final algorithm was subsequently created.
Conclusions:
Day 5 assessment timing is a confounding factor for live birth prediction using snapshot blastocyst morphology. A numerical algorithm incorporating day 5 assessment HPI, blastocyst morphology and maternal age can be developed for live birth prediction.
More Related Videos
08:06Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Impact of Immediate Partial Removal of Cumulus-Oocyte Complexes on Fertilization Efficiency and Embryo Quality
Published on: October 18, 2024
08:28Morphometric Protocol for the Objective Assessment of Blastocyst Behavior During Vitrification and Warming Steps
Published on: February 28, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Cleavage and Blastulation
In Vitro Fertilization
The IVF process begins with ovarian stimulation, during which reproductive endocrinologists prescribe hormonal medications to stimulate the ovaries to produce multiple eggs instead of the single...