External Validation of a Model for Selecting Day 3 Embryos for Transfer Based Upon Deep Learning and Time-Lapse Imaging.

RESEARCH QUESTION:Could objective embryo assessment using iDAScore Version 2.0 perform as well as conventional morphological assessment?DESIGN: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.RESULTS: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).CONCLUSIONS: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.