External validation of a model for selecting day 3 embryos for transfer based upon deep learning and time-lapse...

Could objective embryo assessment using iDAScore Version 2.0 perform as well as conventional morphological assessment?

A retrospective cohort study of fresh day 3 embryo transfer cycles was conducted at a large reproductive medicine centre. In total, 7786 embryos from 4328 cycles with known implantation data were cultured in a time-lapse incubator and included in the study. Fetal heartbeat (FHB) rate was analysed retrospectively using iDAScore Version 2.0 and conventional morphological assessment associated with the transferred embryos. The pregnancy-prediction performance of the two assessment methods was compared using area under the curve (AUC) values for predicting FHB.

AUC values were significantly higher for iDAScore compared with morphological assessment for all cycles (0.62 versus 0.60; P = 0.005), single-embryo transfer cycles (0.63 versus 0.60; P = 0.043) and double-embryo transfer cycles (0.61 versus 0.59; P = 0.012). For the age subgroups, AUC values were significantly higher for iDAScore compared with morphological assessment in the <35 years subgroup (0.62 versus 0.60; P = 0.009); however, no significant difference was found in the ≥35 years subgroup. In terms of the number of blastomeres, AUC values were significantly higher for iDAScore compared with morphological assessment for both the <8c subgroup (0.67 versus 0.56; P < 0.001) and the ≥8c subgroup (0.58 versus 0.55; P = 0.012).

iDAScore Version 2.0 performed as well as, or better than, conventional morphological assessment in fresh day 3 embryo transfer cycles. iDAScore Version 2.0 may therefore constitute a promising tool for selecting embryos with the highest likelihood of implantation.