Suppr超能文献

胚胎延时摄影算法和第 5 天胚胎形态学选择用于移植:一项临床前验证研究。

Time-lapse algorithms and morphological selection of day-5 embryos for transfer: a preclinical validation study.

机构信息

IVF Australia, Sydney; and School of Women's and Children's Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Randwick, New South Wales, Australia.

IVF Australia, Sydney; and School of Women's and Children's Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Randwick, New South Wales, Australia.

出版信息

Fertil Steril. 2018 Feb;109(2):276-283.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.10.036. Epub 2018 Jan 11.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine the agreement between published time-lapse algorithms in selecting the best day-5 embryo for transfer, as well as the agreement between these algorithms and embryologists.

DESIGN

Prospective study.

SETTING

Private in vitro fertilization center.

PATIENT(S): Four hundred and twenty-eight embryos from 100 cycles cultured in the EmbryoScope.

INTERVENTION(S): None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Interalgorithm agreement as assessed by the Fleiss kappa coefficient.

RESULT(S): Of seven published algorithms analyzed in this study, only one of the 18 possible pairs showed very good agreement (κ = 0.867); one pair showed good agreement (κ = 0.725), four pairs showed fair agreement (κ = 0.226-0.334), and the remaining 12 pairs showed poor agreement (κ = 0.008-0.149). Even in the best-case scenario, the majority of algorithms showed poor to moderate kappa scores (κ = 0.337-0.722) for the assessment of agreement between the embryo(s) selected as "best" by the algorithms and the embryo that was chosen by the majority (>5) of embryologists, as well as with the embryo that was actually selected in the laboratory on the day of transfer (κ = 0.315-0.802).

CONCLUSION(S): The results of this study raise concerns as to whether the tested algorithms are applicable in different clinical settings, emphasizing the need for proper external validation before clinical use.

摘要

目的

确定发表的时间延迟算法在选择最佳第 5 天胚胎进行移植方面的一致性,以及这些算法与胚胎学家之间的一致性。

设计

前瞻性研究。

地点

私人体外受精中心。

患者

100 个周期中在胚胎镜下培养的 428 个胚胎。

干预措施

无。

主要观察指标

采用 Fleiss kappa 系数评估算法间的一致性。

结果

在本研究分析的 7 种已发表的算法中,只有 18 对中 1 对显示出非常好的一致性(κ=0.867);1 对显示出良好的一致性(κ=0.725),4 对显示出适度的一致性(κ=0.226-0.334),其余 12 对显示出较差的一致性(κ=0.008-0.149)。即使在最佳情况下,大多数算法(κ=0.337-0.722)对于评估算法所选“最佳”胚胎与大多数(>5)胚胎学家选择的胚胎之间的一致性,以及与实验室在移植当天实际选择的胚胎之间的一致性(κ=0.315-0.802),评分都较差或中等。

结论

本研究结果对所测试的算法是否适用于不同的临床环境提出了关注,强调在临床应用前需要进行适当的外部验证。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验