Skip to main content
Reproductive Medicine and Biology logoLink to Reproductive Medicine and Biology
. 2024 Jul 9;23(1):e12593. doi: 10.1002/rmb2.12593

Developmental perturbation in human embryos: Clinical and biological significance learned from time‐lapse images

Kenji Ezoe 1, Tsubasa Takahashi 1, Tetsuya Miki 1, Keiichi Kato 1,
PMCID: PMC11232294  PMID: 38983691

Abstract

Background

Time‐lapse technology (TLT) has gained widespread adoption worldwide. In addition to facilitating the undisturbed culture of embryos, TLT offers the unique capability of continuously monitoring embryos to detect spatiotemporal changes. Although these observed phenomena play a role in optimal embryo selection/deselection, the clinical advantages of introducing TLT remain unclear. However, manual annotation of embryo perturbation could facilitate a comprehensive assessment of developmental competence. This process requires a thorough understanding of embryo observation and the biological significance associated with developmental dogma and variation. This review elucidates the typical behavior and variation of each phenomenon, exploring their clinical significance and research perspectives.

Methods

The MEDLINE database was searched using PubMed for peer‐reviewed English‐language original articles concerning human embryo development.

Main findings

TLT allows the observation of consecutive changes in embryo morphology, serving as potential biomarkers for embryo assessment. In assisted reproductive technology laboratories, several phenomena have not revealed their mechanism, posing difficulties such as fertilization deficiency and morula arrest.

Conclusion

A profound understanding of the biological mechanisms and significance of each phenomenon is crucial. Further collaborative efforts between the clinical and molecular fields following translational studies are required to advance embryonic outcomes and assessment.

Keywords: assisted reproductive technology, developmental competence, embryo development, embryo selection, time‐lapse imaging

1. INTRODUCTION

Time‐lapse technology (TLT) uses digital cameras built into an incubator for continuous monitoring of embryos under stable and uninterrupted conditions, avoiding the need to remove embryos from the incubator for assessment. TLT was first implemented for research use to monitor human embryo kinetics, revealing the time course of fertilization and early embryo development. 1 Subsequent studies highlighted the potential use of TLT as a clinical tool, 2 leading to its widespread adoption worldwide. 3 , 4 In addition to providing an undisturbed culture environment for embryos, TLT offers the advantage of continuous monitoring, enabling the detection of spatiotemporal changes that may otherwise go unnoticed (Video S1). 5 Several phenomena observed during fertilization, cleavage, compaction, and blastulation have been reported and reviewed, which are considered to enable optimal embryo selection and deselection, leading to improvements in assisted reproductive technology outcomes. 6 However, the clinical advantages of introducing TLT remain unclear.

In a 2019 Cochrane database of systematic reviews, insufficient high‐quality evidence was found regarding differences in pregnancy outcomes when comparing TLT with or without embryo selection software to conventional incubation. 7 Despite the publication of this review, the clinical benefit of implementing TLT remains controversial, with six additional randomized control trials reporting conflicting results (Table 1). 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 This controversy may arise from several factors. Firstly, these studies primarily utilize commercial‐based, automated embryo evaluation systems, which vary in their software implementations. Secondly, the algorithms used for embryo evaluation may not encompass all embryonic phenomena routinely considered predictive factors for embryo development and pregnancy outcomes in embryology laboratories. Lastly, the interpretation of artificial intelligence‐based evaluation systems lacks transparency, leaving uncertainty regarding whether these systems accurately identify abnormal phenomena that could impact clinical outcomes. Therefore, it is imperative to validate the clinical efficacy of these systems in each laboratory before their adoption. On the other hand, combining these automated systems with manual assessment of embryo perturbation could facilitate a detailed prediction of competence for development and subsequent implantation. Manual assessment requires appropriate knowledge of embryo evaluation and an understanding of the biological significance of developmental dogma and variation (Figure 1). In this review, we describe the typical behavior and variation of each phenomenon with videos, exploring their clinical significance and research perspectives.

TABLE 1.

Recent randomized controlled trials assessing the clinical benefit of time‐lapse technology.

Year TLT incubator Outcomes Embryo selection Results
Ahlstrom et al. 8 2022 EmbryoScope Ongoing pregnancy, early pregnancy loss KIDScore or routine (Blastocyst) (Not beneficial) TLT‐based selection did not improve ongoing pregnancy rates compared to morphology alone
Guo et al. 9 2022 EmbryoScope Clinical pregnancy, live birth, birth weight KIDScore or routine (Cleavage) (Beneficial) TLT has a significant benefit on clinical pregnancy rates and overall birth weights while morphokinetic analysis was shown to be unnecessary
Kermack et al. 10 2022 EmbryoScope Blastocyst formation, embryo metabolism (Beneficial) Culturing embryos in a TLT incubator was associated with a higher Day 5 blastocyst formation rate and altered amino acid utilization
Kieslinger et al. 11 2023 Geri Live birth, cumulative live birth EEVA or routine (Cleavage) (Not beneficial) Neither TLT‐based embryo selection using the EEVA test nor uninterrupted culture conditions in a TLT incubator improved clinical outcomes compared with routine methods
Meng et al. 12 2022 EmbryoScope Clinical pregnancy, live birth KIDScore or routine (Cleavage) (Not beneficial) Elective single cleavage‐stage embryo transfer with TLT‐based selection did not have any advantages over conventional morphological evaluation
Zhang et al. 13 2022 Geri Implantation, live birth, cumulative live birth Geri Assess 1.2 software or routine (Cleavage) (Not beneficial) The implantation rate in the first embryo transfer cycle was significantly improved in the TLT group, but the effect of TLT on the live birth or cumulative live birth rate was not significant

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Embryo culture and ranking using time‐lapse technologies. In addition to facilitating the undisturbed culture of embryos, time‐lapse technologies offer the unique capability of continuously monitoring embryos to detect spatiotemporal changes. Combining commercial‐based, automated embryo evaluation systems with manual assessment of embryo perturbation could facilitate a detailed assessment of competence for development and subsequent implantation. However, manual annotation requires appropriate knowledge of embryo observation and an understanding of the biological significance of developmental dogma and variation. AI, artificial intelligence.

2. FERTILIZATION STAGE

2.1. Pronuclear formation and breakdown

2.1.1. Typical behavior

During fertilization, the paternal and maternal DNA undergo decondensation, forming pronuclei (PNs), a process known as “PN formation.” The male and female PNs then migrate toward the center of the ooplasm, where their envelopes interdigitate, referred to as “PN juxtaposition.” Following this, the nuclear envelope becomes indiscernible, termed “PN breakdown (PNBD).” The most common clinical practice involved simply counting the number of PNs. Zygotes with two PNs were identified as normally fertilized zygotes that were available. Discrimination between female and male PNs is based on mutual positions relative to the second polar body (female) and positional association with the cytoplasmic wave (male). The latter is interpreted as the morphokinetic manifestation of the microtubule aster radiation organized by sperm centrioles. 1 , 14 Male and female PNs typically emerged almost simultaneously at approximately 5–6 h post‐insemination (hpi) and juxtaposed at 8–10 hpi. 14 , 15 , 16 Prior to PNBD, the area of female and male PNs were approximately 530 and 610 μm2, respectively. 16 The breakdown of female and male PNs occurs concurrently at 23–25 hpi, 14 , 17 , 18 , 19 with a time interval (TI) from PNs appearance to PNBD lasting approximately 17–19 h (Table 2).

TABLE 2.

Developmental variation during fertilization.

Phenomena Variation Videos Outcomes
PN growth Unequal‐sized PNs Video S2 Embryo quality, live birth
PNBD Delayed PNBD Video S3 Embryo quality, implantation, live birth
Early PNBD Video S4 Missing PNs at fertilization check in static observation
Non‐juxtaposed PNBD Video S5 Abnormal cleavage, blastocyst formation
Asynchronous PNBD Video S6 Abnormal cleavage, blastocyst formation
NPB alignment NPB misalignment Video S7 Controversial
NPB alignment in a1PN zygote Video S8
NPB alignment in a non‐juxtaposed zygote Video S9
Cytoplasmic halo Absence of a cytoplasmic halo Video S10 Abnormal cleavage, blastocyst formation
Prolonged cytoplasmic halo Video S11 Abnormal cleavage, blastocyst formation, ongoing pregnancy
Unstable cytoplasmic halo Video S12

Abbreviations: NPB, nucleolus precursor body; PN, Pronuclear/pronucleus; PNBD, pronuclear breakdown.

2.1.2. Variation and clinical significance

The size and growth pattern of PNs vary among embryos (Video S2). A smaller difference in areas between male and female PNs immediately before PNBD (approximately < 40 μm2) was positively associated with embryo quality and live birth. 20 , 21 Furthermore, the difference between each PN size 8 h before PNBD should be larger than the difference in size immediately before PNBD. Embryos meeting these criteria are recommended for transplantation, while pregnancies were not achieved when the female PN was larger than the male PN in size. 21

The timing of PNBD and the duration of the PN stage varies among embryos (Video S3). The delay in PNBD (>25 h) and prolonged TI from PN appearance to PNBD (>20 h) are associated with poor embryo quality on day 3, affecting implantation and live birth outcome, although the optimal range or cut‐off value have not been reported. 14 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 22 Therefore, embryos without these phenomena should be prioritized for transfer. Furthermore, the proportion of oocytes with visible PNs was highest at 16–16.5 hpi (98.3%). 23 At 18–18.5 h post‐insemination, the number of visible PNs reduces to 95.5% and further declines to 87.0% at 19.5–20 hpi. This implies that the optimum time to perform fertilization assessment for oocytes cultured in standard incubation is 16.5 ± 0.5 h post‐insemination (Video S4). Therefore, the current consensus recommends fertilization verification at 16–18 hpi, 24 , 25 and requires modification to minimize the chance of fertilization being missed, otherwise known as “0PN” zygotes. 23 , 26 , 27 , 28

Some zygotes (2%–5%) exhibit non‐juxtaposed PNBD (Video S5), with a PNs distance of 8.7 ± 0.7 μm (range, 3.5–18.9 μm). 16 , 29 Non‐juxtaposition of PNs is associated with an increased incidence of direct cleavage in the first mitosis and subsequent decreased blastocyst development. However, it does not affect pregnancy outcomes after blastocyst transfer. 29 Consequently, these zygotes should be cultured until the blastocyst stage is attained.

Furthermore, a minority of zygotes (1%–2%) demonstrate asynchronous PNBD (Video S6), with a TI of 3.9 ± 1.5 h (range, 0.5–20.1 h) between each PNBD event. 16 , 29 Asynchronous PNBD is a cause of 1PN zygotes found during static observation. In these zygotes, one PN had already disappeared by the time of fertilization verification at 16–22 hpi, although two PNs were present after insemination (Figure 2). Asynchronous PNBD is likely to increase rapid cleavage during the first mitosis and decrease blastocyst development. However, no adverse effects on pregnancy after blastocyst transfer have been observed. 29 Therefore, these embryos are preferred for culturing until the blastocyst stage.

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

The number of pronuclei observed during fertilization verification at 16–22 hpi in zygotes with asynchronous pronuclear breakdown. PNs, pronuclei.

2.1.3. Current and future research perspectives

Although the association of PN behavior and morphology with various fertility endpoints has been extensively examined and reviewed, 6 , 30 , 31 , 32 the mechanism regulating PN dynamics remains enigmatic. Nuclear size reportedly depends on the chromosome content, 33 the ratio between the amount of chromatin organized in the PN and the cytoplasm volume, 34 and the quantity of zygotic nuclear filamentous actin. 35 Furthermore, female PN size decreases with maternal aging, whereas male PN size remains unaffected. 15 In addition, both female and male PN were larger in 1PN zygotes and smaller in 3PN zygotes than in 2PN zygotes. 16 However, the precise mechanisms underlying the regulation of PN size and growth remain unclear.

PN migration and juxtaposition are regulated by microtubules, dynein, and centrosomes, 36 suggesting that the non‐juxtaposition and displacement of PNs may be induced by disrupting this regulatory system. However, the factors causing disturbances in these systems remain unknown.

Asynchronous PNBD is typically linked to asynchronous nucleolus precursor body (NPB) alignment and errors in chromosome capture, resulting in chromosome segregation errors and micronuclei formation at the 2‐cell stage. 36 Furthermore, maternal aging increases the incidence of asynchronous PNBD. 15 Further studies are required to reveal the mechanisms by which maternal aging affects PNBD synchrony.

2.2. NPB alignment

2.2.1. Typical behavior

The nucleoli in oocytes and zygotes are commonly referred to as NPBs. NPBs, which exhibit compact structure and morphological distinction from nucleoli in somatic cells, 37 move to the area of PN juxtaposition, known as “NPB alignment.” The clustering and alignment of NPBs mirrored the distribution of PN chromatin. As the PN envelopes dissolve in preparation for the first mitosis, this chromatin arrangement plays a crucial role in facilitating the recruitment of chromosomes by kinetochore fibers of the mitotic spindle and their proper arrangement in the metaphase plate. Therefore, the non‐invasive NPB observation provides reliable information on chromatin distribution. 36 The polarization of NPBs occurs at the interface of the PN juxtaposed area, with female PN exhibiting this phenomenon earlier (8–13 hpi) than male PN (11–17 hpi). 14 , 15 , 16

2.2.2. Variation and clinical significance

Some zygotes do not exhibit NPB alignment (Video S7). Moreover, the incidence of alignment varies between female (approximately 65%–75%) and male (approximately 40%–50%) PNs. 15 , 16 Although the large difference in the number of NPBs in both PNs and NPB non‐alignment is reportedly associated with decreased competence for the preimplantation development, the influence of NPB alignment on pregnancy outcomes, including clinical pregnancy and implantation, remains controversial. 38 , 39 , 40 , 41

NPB migration speed differs among zygotes. It is positively associated with the rates of euploid blastocysts and live birth, with a cut‐off value of approximately 3.7–4.6 μm/h. 42 , 43 Measuring the speed by specific software may serve as a predictor of embryonic and pregnancy outcomes.

2.2.3. Current and future research perspectives

The NPB alignment is observed in both maternally and paternally derived 1PN zygotes (Video S8) and non‐juxtaposed PN zygotes (Video S9), suggesting that NPB alignment is not necessarily associated with PN juxtaposition. 16 , 29 However, it remains unclear why NPB alignment with the interface of the PN juxtaposition does not occur in some embryos. Recent high‐resolution live cell imaging of bovine and human zygotes revealed that in the process of PN migration and chromatin clustering, dynein links to nuclear pore complexes and transports the PNs along centrosome‐nucleated microtubules, establishing PN juxtaposition. 36 While two PNs are pulled into proximity, the nuclear pore complexes and parental genomes also migrate and polarize at the interface of the juxtaposition. Therefore, the clustering and polarization of parental genomes toward each other, reflected by the NPB alignment, are considered to be driven by dynein, microtubules, and nuclear pore complexes. Thus, it is hypothesized that a deficiency in these systems may cause a failure in NPB alignment. Further studies are required to elucidate the mechanism of this phenomenon and to develop a treatment that can prevent misalignment.

2.3. Cytoplasmic halo

2.3.1. Typical behavior

“Cytoplasmic halo,” which involves the centripetal redistribution of cytoplasmic granules and organelles, generating a translucent moon‐shaped cytoplasmic domain in the cortex, occurs during human fertilization. 1 , 44 Cytoplasmic granules initiate movement toward the central ooplasm, with peripheral translucency first confirmed (translucent halo appearance, tHa) at 8 hours post‐insemination (hpi). 45 This centripetal movement halts (cytoplasmic granule condensation, tHc) until 13 hpi. Subsequently, granules return to the cortex (cytoplasmic granule redistribution, tHr) at 20 hpi, completing the redistribution (translucent halo disappearance, tHd) at 22 hpi, just before PNBD. The total duration of the cytoplasmic halo is about 14–15 h. 45 This phenomenon is observed in approximately 80%–95% of normally fertilized oocytes. 14 , 45 , 46 , 47 However, it is absent in non‐inseminated or non‐fertilized oocytes and detectable in abnormally fertilized oocytes. 16 , 30

2.3.2. Variation and clinical significance

The absence of a cytoplasmic halo is associated with significantly higher rates of abnormal cleavage (rapid, reverse, or asymmetric cleavage) and impairment in blastocyst formation (Video S10). 45 The embryo development to the blastocyst stage and pregnancy outcomes after cleavage‐stage embryo transfers are adversely affected by the halo absence 45 , 46 , 48 ; however, pregnancy rates after blastocyst transfers are comparable between embryos derived from halo‐positive zygotes and embryos derived from halo‐negative zygotes. 45 Therefore, zygotes without the cytoplasmic halo should be cultured to the blastocyst stage. Categorizing the halo as symmetrical or asymmetrical depends on its position relative to the cell center 47 ; the distribution of the halo is not associated with developmental and pregnancy outcomes. 45 , 47 Therefore, the observation of halo distribution is not required.

Prolonged halo adversely affects preimplantation development and pregnancy outcomes (Video S11). 14 , 45 Therefore, based on our preliminary data, embryos exhibiting appropriate cytoplasmic halo duration, a TI from translucent halo appearance (tHa) to translucent halo disappearance (tHd) of less than 16 h, and a TI from cytoplasmic granul condensation to cytoplasmic granul redistribution of less than 10 h should be prioritized for transfer, especially in cases where multiple transferable embryos are available.

2.3.3. Current and future research perspectives

The cytoplasmic halo serves as a marker for the relocation of mitochondria and other cytoplasmic components from the cell periphery to the center to support PN function. 30 , 49 Although similar organelle clustering has been observed in other species, the mechanism and biological significance of this halo remain uncertain. 50 Furthermore, the characteristics of the cytoplasmic halo are strongly associated with patient and gamete characteristics, such as male age, oocyte diameter, and sperm quality 45 , 46 ; therefore, these factors could influence the regulation of microtubule‐organized translocation in the ooplasm during fertilization. Interestingly, a minority of zygotes (1.6%) exhibit continuous movement of cytoplasmic granules, and the peripheral halo wavers until the first cell division (Video S12). 45 As PNs migrate toward the central ooplasm and align, the formation of the cytoplasmic halo occurs, suggesting the involvement of molecular actors like dynein and microtubules 36 in orchestrating the centripetal redistribution of cytoplasmic granules and organelles. However, it's worth noting that the centripetal movement and juxtaposition of PNs can occur even in zygotes lacking a visible cytoplasmic halo. 16 To elucidate the factors governing granule and organelle movement and understand the variability in cytoplasmic halo presence and duration, further investigations utilizing knockout or conditional knockout animal embryo models are warranted.

3. CLEAVAGE STAGE

3.1. First cell division (first mitotic division/first cleavage)

3.1.1. Typical behavior

After PNBD, the chromosomes of both gametes arrange themselves on the spindle, mediating mitosis, known as “first cell division.” Two equivalent blastomeres were typically generated after the first cell division occurring at 24–28 hpi. 14 , 16 , 51 , 52 The TI from PNBD to the first cell division is 2–3 h, 53 and the duration of the first cytokinesis is 0.2–0.3 h 19 , 54 (Table 3).

TABLE 3.

Developmental variation during the cleavage stage.

Phenomena Variation Videos Outcomes
First cell division Direct cleavage Video S13 Blastocyst formation
Rapid cleavage Video S14 Blastocyst formation
Asymmetric division Video S15
Reverse cleavage Video S16 Early cleavage, implantation
Blastomere movement Blastomere wobbling Video S17 No impact
Twist‐and‐crumble Video S18 Blastocyst formation
Prolonged blastomere movement Video S19 Blastocyst formation
Transzonal projection loss Perivitelline threads Video S20 Fragmentation
Nucleation Multinucleation Video S21 Controversial

3.1.2. Variation and clinical significance

The delay in the first cell division is associated with a decreased developmental rate, poor embryo quality, and adverse pregnancy outcomes. 14 , 22 , 51 , 52 Zygotes with the first cell division occurring after 28 hpi likely have a lower chance of blastocyst formation and pregnancy. 51 , 52

Direct cleavage (Video S13) and rapid cleavage (Video S14): the phenomenon by which an embryonic cell divides into three daughter blastomeres via single multichotomous mitosis (duration of 2‐cell stage = 0 h) is termed “direct cleavage”. 55 The phenomenon where two consecutive mitoses are separated by a very short intervening time (duration of 2‐cell stage >0 h and <5 h) is termed “rapid cleavage”. 6 , 56 , 57 It is essential to distinguish between these phenomena at the blastomere level and large‐generated fragmentation. The incidences of direct and rapid cleavage are 4%–6% and 7%–12%, respectively. 15 , 16 Embryos with direct and rapid cleavage exhibit lower rates of blastocyst formation and pregnancy after cleavage‐stage embryo transfers compared to embryos with normal cleavage. 56 , 57 , 58 The influence of direct and rapid cleavage on pregnancy outcomes after blastocyst transfers has been controversial. 57 , 59 , 60 , 61 However, a recent large cohort study concluded that direct cleavage does not impact the live birth rate once the embryo develops to the blastocyst stage. 58 Therefore, the deselection of the embryos for transfer at the cleavage stage is recommended.

In asymmetric division (Video S15), two uneven‐sized blastomeres are generated after the first cell division (incidence, 20%–25%). 15 , 16 Although the clinical significance of this phenomenon observed using the TLT has not been reported, this phenomenon can be considered an atypical behavior suggested by the association with the absence of a cytoplasmic halo. 45

Reverse cleavage (Video S16) is the phenomenon where two cells fuse into one blastomere (also called cell fusion). 6 , 56 This phenomenon must be distinguished from fragment internalization or reabsorption through the identification of a nucleus within the cells. The incidence of reverse cleavage during the first cell division is 5%–8%. 15 , 16 , 62 Embryos showing reverse cleavage are less competent during embryonic development and pregnancy. 61 , 63 , 64 Therefore, embryos that do not exhibit this phenomenon should be prioritized for transfer.

3.1.3. Current and future research perspectives

As previously mentioned, the mechanism of abnormal cleavage during the first cell division has not been completely elucidated. As reviewed by Coticchio et al., 65 the formation of multipolar spindles is postulated to trigger multichotomous cleavage, which is expected to unevenly distribute chromosomes in the three daughter blastomeres, thereby creating a chaotic aneuploidy. 66 , 67 , 68 Following multipolar zygotic division, fewer embryos reach the blastocyst stage, and diploidization occurs frequently, indicating that blastomeres with genome‐wide errors resulting from whole‐genome segregation errors can either be selected against or contribute to embryonic arrest. 69 , 70 , 71 Regarding rapid cleavage, a short cell cycle may be insufficient to allow complete DNA replication and repair prior to chromosomal alignment. 57 Depending on the timing of reverse cleavage, this phenomenon can result in aneuploidy or polyploidy. 32 However, the mechanisms underlying the rapid and reverse cleavage remain unclear.

3.2. Blastomere movement

3.2.1. Typical behavior

During culture in a time‐lapse system, immediately after the first mitosis, the cell membrane and cytoplasm of the blastomeres move in several directions during the 2‐cell stage, known as “blastomere movement”. 72 Approximately half of the embryos experience transient shrinking and expansion, which is categorized as “bouncing” and lasts 2–3 h.

3.2.2. Variation and clinical significance

Approximately 20% of embryos exhibit continuous cytoplasmic and membrane waving, defined as “wobbling” (Video S17). 72 , 73 , 74 About 30% exhibit “twist‐and‐crumble” type, involving blastomere rolling, followed by fragment generation (Video S18). 72 , 75 The development rates of wobbling embryos were comparable to those of bouncing embryos. However, embryos categorized as twist‐and‐crumble demonstrated a significant impairment in compaction, blastulation, and expansion compared to the embryos with bouncing, whereas the pregnancy outcomes after blastocyst transfers were not affected by blastomere movement. 73 Therefore, it is recommended that twist‐and‐crumble embryos should be cultured until the blastocyst stage is reached.

Prolonged blastomere movement (Video S19) detrimentally affects embryo development to the blastocyst stage 73 and pregnancy outcomes after cleavage‐stage embryo transfers, 72 regardless of the type of blastomere movement. The duration of blastomere movement does not affect pregnancy outcomes after blastocyst transfer. 73 If the movement duration during the 2‐cell stage exceeds 0.3 (3–3.3 h when the time during the 2‐cell stage is 10–11 h), these embryos are recommended to be cultured to the blastocyst stage.

3.2.3. Current and future research perspectives

The question of the mechanism underlying aberrant blastomere movements, characterized by twist‐and‐crumble and prolongation occurrence, and if they can be mitigated remains unanswered. In matured oocytes, actomyosin and Arp2/3 complex regulate the actin filaments flow continuously away from the animal cortex. 76 , 77 , 78 This flow retains cortical actin polarization and maintains the chromosomes and spindle at the cortex and in oocytes. 79 , 80 , 81 During fertilization, the distribution of the cytoskeleton, chromosomes, and organelles shifts from asymmetric to symmetric. 65 The insufficient redistribution of cell components may impact the establishment of cell polarity after the first cell division, which is crucial for embryo development, 82 generating the aberrant cytoplasmic flow and subsequent blastomere movement. Blastomere movement appears unrelated to patient characteristics, hormonal status, semen quality, or insemination method. Although the extended TI from PN juxtaposition to PNBD and from PNBD to the first cell division reportedly leads to prolonged blastomere movement, 72 the association between these phenomena and blastomere movement remains unclear. Furthermore, the association between blastomere movement and culture medium has not yet been examined. While there is controversy regarding whether the type of culture medium affects morphokinetics and morphological alteration 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 ; it is plausible that the medium may impact blastomere behavior. Molecular studies are required to reveal the mechanism behind aberrant blastomere movement and improve embryonic outcomes by preventing it.

3.3. Transzonal projection loss

3.3.1. Typical behavior

Granulosa cells extend transzonal projections, penetrating the zona pellucida to maintain direct contact with oocytes. This enables bidirectional communication between oocytes and granulosa or cumulus cells, which are important structures for oocyte growth. 87 , 88 , 89 Following a luteinizing hormone surge, human chorionic gonadotropin injection, or epidermal growth factor (EGF) treatment, transzonal projections typically disappear via several intermediate steps during oocyte maturation, known as “transzonal projection loss”. 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 , 96 , 97

3.3.2. Variation and clinical significance

Although there is no study showing that transzonal projections and clinically observed perivitelline threads have the same structure, perivitelline threads are considered to originate from residues of transzonal projections (Video S20). 98 They are defined as thin filaments extending across the perivitelline space, connecting the zona pellucida with the oolemma or blastomere membrane, observed in 56%–77% of embryos. 98 , 99 , 100 Perivitelline threads are associated with increased fragmentation at first cytokinesis and decreased embryo morphology. However, they are not associated with ploidy status 98 or pregnancy outcomes. 98 , 99 Removing the zona pellucida at the PN stage is one of the methods that prevent perivitelline thread‐associated fragmentation during the early cleavage stage. 101

3.3.3. Current and future research perspectives

The retraction of transzonal projections is primarily regulated by EGF signaling 95 , 102 ; this suggests that embryos with perivitelline threads may have impaired EGF signaling. As reports regarding perivitelline threads are limited, the functional and clinical relevance of perivitelline threads remains elusive. 100 The residual degree of perivitelline threads differs among embryos. A minority of zygotes exhibit the perivitelline threads around almost the entire cytoplasm, generating a high degree of fragments that impact the subsequent development. Developing a culture system that stimulates the transzonal projection loss during peri‐insemination would benefit such cases.

3.4. Blastomere nucleation

3.4.1. Typical behavior

During zygotic division, the two parental genomes replicate, unite, and segregate into two biparental diploid blastomeres. 69 The blastomeres form the nucleus, called “blastomere nucleation.” The blastomere nucleation status is defined as the presence or absence of nuclei, and single‐nucleated blastomeres are typically generated.

3.4.2. Variation and clinical significance

Multinucleation is defined as the presence of two or more nuclei of any size in a blastomere (Video S21). 103 The lagging chromosomes and multipolar segregation can lead to the formation of micronuclei (smaller than 10 μm) around lagging chromosomes or multinucleated daughter cells. 104 , 105 , 106 The incidence of this phenomenon is higher in 2‐cell (40%–65%) than in 4‐cell (15%–30%) embryos. 15 , 16 , 107 The influence of multinucleation on blastocyst formation, pregnancy, and perinatal outcomes is still controversial. 62 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 , 115 , 116 , 117 Most multinucleated 2‐cell embryos reverse to normal nuclear status when observed at the 4‐cell stage, and persistent multinucleation at the 4‐cell stage is associated with a decreased implantation rate. 107 , 115 Multinucleation is suggested to be associated with chromosomal aberrations 36 , 106 ; in fact, most embryos exhibiting the multinucleation at the cleavage stage were diagnosed as mosaics. 118 However, other studies reported a reduced incidence of multinucleation from the 2‐cell to 4‐cell stages and a similar incidence of multinucleation between the euploid and aneuploid embryos once they developed to the blastocyst stage. 119 Therefore, most multinucleated embryos likely have the capacity for self‐correction during early cleavage divisions and compaction and can develop into euploid blastocysts, resulting in healthy babies. 32 Embryos not exhibiting multinucleation during the cleavage stage should be prioritized for the transfer.

3.4.3. Current and future research perspectives

The clinical significance of multinucleation, as previously described, is questionable. Further large‐scale clinical studies are required to determine the effects of multinucleation on IVF outcomes. Additionally, little is known about the origins of the formation of supernumerary nuclei or micronuclei in a blastomere. 32 Previous studies using somatic cells reported that the knockdown or interference of kinesin family members (Kif), Kif13A, Kif13B, and Kif22, led to the formation of multinucleated cells. 120 , 121 , 122 , 123 Furthermore, the loss of Kif22‐mediated anaphase chromosome compaction is associated with multinucleation in embryos during the early cleavage stage. 124 , 125 Recent studies reported the other possible mechanism, the asynchronicity of PNBD and chromosome capture, which is linked to a different state of chromosome condensation between the two PNs, and multipolar chromosome segregations result in chromosome segregation errors and multinucleation. 36 , 106 , 126 Further studies aimed at identifying the possible causes of asynchronous chromosome condensation and subsequent multinucleation and elucidating the mechanisms underlying self‐correction following multinucleation are of significant interest.

4. PERI‐COMPACTION STAGE

4.1. Blastomere compaction

4.1.1. Typical behavior

“Blastomere compaction” is the first morphogenetic event that occurs during blastocyst formation and coincides with the first lineage specification decision 127 (Table 4). This process is typically initiated at the 8–16 cell stage. 128 , 129 , 130 The onset of compaction varies among embryos and is usually confirmed at 74–85 hpi. 15 , 18 , 128 The completion of compaction requires approximately 9–10 h.

TABLE 4.

Developmental variation during compaction and blastulation.

Phenomena Variation Videos Outcomes
Compaction Early compaction Video S22 Blastocyst formation, embryo quality
Blastomere exclusion Video S23 Blastocyst formation, embryo quality, live birth
Blastomere extrusion Video S24 Blastocyst formation, embryo quality, live birth
Blastomere exclusion/extrusion Video S25 Blastocyst formation, embryo quality, live birth
Blastulation/expansion Blastocyst spontaneous collapse (high‐magnitude) Video S26 Blastocyst expansion, embryo quality, ploidy, live birth
Blastocyst spontaneous collapse (low‐magnitude) Video S27 Blastocyst expansion, embryo quality, ploidy, live birth
Cytoplasmic strings Video S28 Blastocyst spontaneous collapse

4.1.2. Variation and clinical significance

Compaction was observed in some embryos during the early cleavage stage. Approximately 10% of embryos initiate compaction before the 8‐cell stage, often categorized as having “early compaction” (Video S22). 130 The rates of blastocyst formation and good‐quality blastocysts are decreased in embryos showing early compaction. 130 , 131 Furthermore, the shortened TI from the 8‐cell stage to compaction onset (<11.5 h) is associated with decreased blastocyst formation and impaired quality. 15 Therefore, the shortened TI from the 8‐cell stage to compaction onset may also be considered as early compaction. The adverse effects of early compaction on pregnancy outcomes after blastocyst transfer have not been reported. Therefore, embryos should be cultured to the blastocyst stage; however, embryos without early compaction should be prioritized for transfer.

4.1.3. Current and future research perspectives

Early compaction is more likely to be observed in embryos showing a delay in cell division during the cleavage stage 131 or in embryos derived from young women (<35 years old). 15 During compaction, outer blastomeres undergo apical‐basal cell polarity acquisition and express protein kinase C‐ζ (PKCζ) at the contact‐free domain. This expression of PKCζ inhibits the Hippo signaling pathway and its nuclear expression effectors, such as Yes‐associated protein (YAP). 15 , 132 , 133 , 134 , 135 , 136 The expression and distribution of these cell polarity markers are crucial for blastomere compaction. Although recent studies have revealed the mechanism of blastomere compaction, it remains unclear why early compaction occurs and how this phenomenon can be avoided. One possible mechanism of early compaction could involve the premature localization of PKCζ at the apical membrane of outer cells. This localization of PKCζ induces nuclear localization of YAP and stimulates the expression of trophectoderm (TE)‐associated genes in outer cells, 134 , 135 , 137 ultimately resulting in early blastomere compaction.

4.2. Blastomere inclusion, exclusion, and extrusion during compaction

4.2.1. Typical behavior

Embryos with compaction that include all blastomeres are classified as “fully compacted morula” (or completely compacted morula). 71 , 138 , 139 The incidence of full compaction is approximately 35%–45%, representing the most common compaction pattern. 128 , 138 , 139 , 140

4.2.2. Variation and clinical significance

During the peri‐compaction period, excluded and extruded cells were identified. 139 The exclusion of blastomeres from the compaction process at the beginning is termed “blastomere exclusion.” The extrusion of blastomeres from an already compacted morula is termed “blastomere extrusion.” Morulae can be categorized into four groups: fully compacted morulae, partially compacted morulae with excluded cells (Video S23), partially compacted morulae with extruded cells (Video S24), and partially compacted morulae with both excluded and extruded cells (Video S25). 128 Increased numbers of excluded and extruded blastomeres are associated with decreased blastocyst rate, poor morphology, and impaired live birth rate after blastocyst transfer. 128 , 139 , 140 , 141 Therefore, fully compacted morulae should be prioritized for transfer. The association between compaction patterns and ploidy status of embryos remains controversial. 139 , 140 , 141 , 142 , 143

4.2.3. Current and future research perspectives

Blastomere exclusion is considered a possible self‐correction mechanism aimed at excluding aneuploid cells from mosaic embryos. 61 , 71 , 144 However, further studies are necessary to reveal the function of blastomere exclusion during compaction in human embryo plasticity and self‐correction. 32

The incidence of blastomere extrusion is increasing in women of advanced maternal age (AMA). 15 Furthermore, embryos from women of AMA exhibit delayed compaction, decreased PKCζ protein, and a failure of YAP translocation into the nucleus of outer cells of the morula, compared to embryos from young women. 15 The inhibition, knockdown, or knockout of PKCζ leads to the restricted YAP expression in the cytoplasm, 134 , 135 , 145 , 146 expression of specific inner cell markers in outer cells of morula, cavitation deficiency, and embryonic arrest at the morula stage. 134 These findings suggest that insufficient regulation of cell polarity markers, PKCζ, may contribute to insufficient TE differentiation and subsequent increased blastomere extrusion in women with AMA, potentially leading to morula arrest. However, the influence of maternal aging on blastomere compaction, exclusion, and extrusion and the expression of cell polarity markers remain unclear. More basic research is required to shed light on this fascinating area of research.

5. BLASTOCYST STAGE

5.1. Blastulation (cavitation) and expansion

5.1.1. Typical behavior

Blastocysts are characterized by the formation of a fluid‐filled cavity and an inner cell mass surrounded by the TE, a process known as “blastulation” 147 (Table 4). As the blastocyst develops, the blastocoel cavity expands, filling the embryo and surpassing its original volume, a stage referred to as “expansion”. Embryos initiate blastulation, primarily regulated by aquaporins and Na+/K+ ATPase isoforms α1, β1, and β3, 148 , 149 , 150 , 151 at 97–104 hpi and reach the expanded blastocyst stage at 103–120 hpi. 16 , 152 , 153 , 154

5.1.2. Variation and clinical significance

Human embryos have considerable morphokinetic flexibility, with the ability to achieve blastocyst development occurring between days 4 and 7 (day 4, 0.7%; day 5, 64.0%; day 6, 33.8%; and day 7, 1.6%). 53 The TI between the initiation of expansion and the achievement of full expansion was longer in days 6 and 7 blastocysts than on days 4 and 5. 53 , 155 Increasing times to blastocyst formation is associated with poor embryo quality, decreased euploid rate, and worse pregnancy outcomes, although neonatal outcomes, such as birth length, weight, and malformations, remain unaffected by the developmental speed. 18 , 19 , 53 , 156 , 157 , 158 , 159 Moreover, developmental speed is associated with pregnancy outcomes, even after single euploid blastocyst transfers. 160 Therefore, blastocysts from days 4 and 5 should be prioritized for transfer over those from days 6 and 7. However, ending the embryo culture on day 6 results in a relative reduction of 7.3% of patients obtaining euploid blastocysts and a 4.4% decrease in live births. 155

5.1.3. Current and future research perspectives

The expansion of the blastocoel cavity requires high levels of ATP 150 ; however, maternal aging induces decreased mitochondrial function, resulting in reduced ATP and metabolic activity. 49 , 161 , 162 Additionally, maternal aging prolongs the time required for blastocyst expansion. 15 , 23 , 154 , 163 Therefore, further studies are required to prevent mitochondrial dysfunction‐associated developmental delays. Although developmental speed diverges immediately after fertilization, 53 the question of whether and how differences among such embryos emerge during fertilization remains entirely unanswered. Determining the factors that affect developmental speed would contribute to understanding the relative impact of intrinsic and extrinsic causes on developmental kinetics and competence, obtaining more blastocysts on days 4 or 5, and improving pregnancy outcomes.

Although not proven, mitotic errors during early embryonic division are considered to result in slower cleavage, longer cell cycles, and subsequently delayed blastocyst formation. 164 , 165 , 166 These embryos have an intrinsic capacity for self‐correction, which may occur through selective apoptosis and reduced proliferation of aneuploid cells. 32 , 167 , 168 A recent study proposed four models for self‐correction: (1) embryonic mortality, (2) aneuploidy rescue, (3) preferential allocation, and (4) clonal depletion. They also reported increased apoptotic levels and impaired differentiation capacity in TE cells of human mosaic and aneuploid embryos. 169 However, the mechanisms by which embryos detect aneuploid cells and induce apoptosis remain unclear. Revealing the mechanism would provide valuable insights not only into future studies to uncover the cause of differential developmental speed but also into embryo evaluation and selection in the embryology laboratory.

5.2. Blastocyst spontaneous collapse/contraction (anomalous behavior)

5.2.1. Typical behavior

“Blastocyst spontaneous collapse” consists of one or more contractions caused by sequential efflux and uptake of blastocoel fluid, probably due to the partial loss and reconstitution of intercellular contacts between TE cells. 170 Approximately 20%–50% of blastocysts collapse, and the number (1–9 collapses) and degree of collapses vary among embryos (Videos S26 and S27). 153 , 170 , 171 , 172

5.2.2. Variation and clinical significance

Blastocyst spontaneous collapses and the frequency of these occurrences are associated with degeneration before full expansion, delayed development, reduced morphological quality, and higher rates of aneuploidy. 153 , 173 Additionally, blastocyst transfer results in poor pregnancy outcomes. 170 , 172 , 173 , 174 Blastocysts without spontaneous collapse should be prioritized for transfer.

5.2.3. Current and future research perspectives

The underlying molecular mechanisms and developmental significance of this phenomenon remain poorly understood. The gap junction intercellular communication can be observed from the late cleavage stage and plays an important role in embryo development to the blastocyst stage. 175 , 176 A previous study reported that the inhibition of gap junction intercellular communication increases the incidence of blastocyst collapse, suggesting that embryos possessing insufficient gap junction intercellular communication would likely exhibit the collapse after expansion. 177 Another study showed that a lower number of TE cells per maximum expansion cross‐sectional area correlated with more frequent collapses. 178 Furthermore, a recent study indicates that slower cell cycles may cause the blastocyst collapse since the tight junctions in the TE would fail to resist the hydrostatic pressure of a progressively increasing blastocoel fluid in these blastocysts. 153 Further studies are required to elucidate the molecular signals and physical forces governing blastocyst expansion, collapse, and re‐expansion dynamics. 153 Furthermore, the definition of spontaneous blastocyst collapse reported in previous studies is inconsistent. 153 , 170 , 172 , 173 Therefore, standardization of the definition of spontaneous blastocyst collapse is clinically needed to improve comparability between future studies.

5.3. Cytoplasmic strings

5.3.1. Typical behavior

“Cytoplasmic strings” that bridge the inner cell mass and TE are commonly present in early blastocysts (approximately 55%–85%) and may withdraw as the blastocyst expands (Video S28). 56 , 179 , 180 These strings are suggested to play a role in the direct communication between the mural TE and inner cell mass cells. 181

5.3.2. Variation and clinical significance

A static observational study reported that their persistence in expanded blastocysts was associated with poor embryo quality, poor media conditions, or breakdown in polarization. 182 However, recent time‐lapse studies have reported that this morphological feature has no negative impact on pregnancy outcomes. Instead, it is a positive predictor of pregnancy outcomes, although the cytoplasmic strings are associated with increased blastocyst spontaneous collapse. 179 , 180 , 183 , 184 Consequently, the observation of cytoplasmic strings is currently deemed unnecessary for predicting pregnancy outcomes.

5.3.3. Current and future research perspectives

Although recent studies have suggested that strings positively influence blastocyst expansion and post‐implantation development, 180 , 183 , 184 the clinical and biological significance of cytoplasmic strings has yet to be determined. The vesicle‐like structures moving along cytoplasmic strings can be observed, suggesting that the migration of signaling molecules, including FGRR2 and ErbB3, or the exchange of cytoplasmic material occurs through cytoplasmic strings. 93 , 180 , 185 However, the precise nature of the molecules being transported through cytoplasmic strings and the mechanisms involved remain unknown. Further biological studies are necessary to elucidate how cytoplasmic strings facilitate communication between TE and inner cell mass cells and their potential role in subsequent implantation and development.

6. CONCLUSION

The TLT enables us to observe consecutive changes in embryo morphology, serving as biomarkers for embryo assessment. To maximize the clinical benefits of this technology, it is crucial to understand the biological mechanisms and significance of each phenomenon. Therefore, further research on embryonic phenomenology is required in both the clinical and molecular fields. Moreover, in assisted reproductive technology laboratories, several phenomena, such as fertilization deficiency and morula arrest, remain undisclosed. Collaborative work between the clinical and molecular fields and subsequent translational studies are required to advance embryonic outcomes and assessment.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

Authors declare no Conflict of Interest for this article.

HUMAN RIGHTS STATEMENTS AND INFORMED CONSENT

This article does not contain any studies involving human participants that were performed by any of the authors.

ANIMAL STUDIES

This article does not contain any studies with animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Supporting information

Video S1.–S28.

RMB2-23-e12593-s001.zip (216.1MB, zip)

Ezoe K, Takahashi T, Miki T, Kato K. Developmental perturbation in human embryos: Clinical and biological significance learned from time‐lapse images. Reprod Med Biol. 2024;23:e12593. 10.1002/rmb2.12593

REFERENCES

  • 1. Payne D, Flaherty SP, Barry MF, Matthews CD. Preliminary observations on polar body extrusion and pronuclear formation in human oocytes using time‐lapse video cinematography. Hum Reprod. 1997;12:532–541. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Lemmen JG, Agerholm I, Ziebe S. Kinetic markers of human embryo quality using time‐lapse recordings of IVF/ICSI‐fertilized oocytes. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008;17:385–391. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Boueilh T, Reignier A, Barriere P, Freour T. Time‐lapse imaging systems in IVF laboratories: a French national survey. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018;35:2181–2186. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Dolinko AV, Farland LV, Kaser DJ, Missmer SA, Racowsky C. National survey on use of time‐lapse imaging systems in IVF laboratories. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017;34:1167–1172. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Glatthorn HN, Decherney A. The efficacy of add‐ons: selected IVF “add‐on” procedures and future directions. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2022;39:581–589. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. ESHRE working group on time‐lapse technology . Good practice recommendations for the use of time‐lapse technology. Hum Reprod Open. 2020;2020:hoaa008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Armstrong S, Bhide P, Jordan V, Pacey A, Marjoribanks J, Farquhar C. Time‐lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;5:CD011320. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Ahlstrom A, Lundin K, Lind AK, Gunnarsson K, Westlander G, Park H, et al. A double‐blind randomized controlled trial investigating a time‐lapse algorithm for selecting day 5 blastocysts for transfer. Hum Reprod. 2022;37:708–717. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Guo YH, Liu Y, Qi L, Song WY, Jin HX. Can time‐lapse incubation and monitoring Be beneficial to assisted reproduction technology outcomes? A randomized controlled trial using day 3 double embryo transfer. Front Physiol. 2021;12:794601. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Kermack AJ, Fesenko I, Christensen DR, Parry KL, Lowen P, Wellstead SJ, et al. Incubator type affects human blastocyst formation and embryo metabolism: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2022;37:2757–2767. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Kieslinger DC, Vergouw CG, Ramos L, Arends B, Curfs M, Slappendel E, et al. Clinical outcomes of uninterrupted embryo culture with or without time‐lapse‐based embryo selection versus interrupted standard culture (SelecTIMO): a three‐armed, multicentre, double‐blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2023;401:1438–1446. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Meng Q, Xu Y, Zheng A, Li H, Ding J, Xu Y, et al. Noninvasive embryo evaluation and selection by time‐lapse monitoring vs. conventional morphologic assessment in women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a single‐center randomized controlled study. Fertil Steril. 2022;117:1203–1212. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Zhang XD, Zhang Q, Han W, Liu WW, Shen XL, Yao GD, et al. Comparison of embryo implantation potential between time‐lapse incubators and standard incubators: a randomized controlled study. Reprod Biomed Online. 2022;45:858–866. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Coticchio G, Mignini Renzini M, Novara PV, Lain M, De Ponti E, Turchi D, et al. Focused time‐lapse analysis reveals novel aspects of human fertilization and suggests new parameters of embryo viability. Hum Reprod. 2018;33:23–31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Ezoe K, Miki T, Akaike H, Shimazaki K, Takahashi T, Tanimura Y, et al. Maternal age affects pronuclear and chromatin dynamics, morula compaction and cell polarity, and blastulation of human embryos. Hum Reprod. 2023;38:387–399. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Ezoe K, Takahashi T, Shimazaki K, Miki T, Tanimura Y, Amagai A, et al. Human 1PN and 3PN zygotes recapitulate all morphokinetic events of normal fertilization but reveal novel developmental errors. Hum Reprod. 2022;37:2307–2319. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Azzarello A, Hoest T, Mikkelsen AL. The impact of pronuclei morphology and dynamicity on live birth outcome after time‐lapse culture. Hum Reprod. 2012;27:2649–2657. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Chamayou S, Patrizio P, Storaci G, Tomaselli V, Alecci C, Ragolia C, et al. The use of morphokinetic parameters to select all embryos with full capacity to implant. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013;30:703–710. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Kirkegaard K, Kesmodel US, Hindkjaer JJ, Ingerslev HJ. Time‐lapse parameters as predictors of blastocyst development and pregnancy outcome in embryos from good prognosis patients: a prospective cohort study. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:2643–2651. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Otsuki J, Iwasaki T, Tsuji Y, Katada Y, Sato H, Tsutsumi Y, et al. Potential of zygotes to produce live births can be identified by the size of the male and female pronuclei just before their membranes break down. Reprod Med Biol. 2017;16:200–205. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Otsuki J, Iwasaki T, Enatsu N, Katada Y, Furuhashi K, Shiotani M. Noninvasive embryo selection: kinetic analysis of female and male pronuclear development to predict embryo quality and potential to produce live birth. Fertil Steril. 2019;112:874–881. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Wu L, Han W, Zhang X, Wang J, Liu W, Xiong S, et al. A retrospective analysis of morphokinetic parameters according to the implantation outcome of IVF treatment. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;197:186–190. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Barrie A, Smith R, Campbell A, Fishel S. Optimisation of the timing of fertilisation assessment for oocytes cultured in standard incubation: lessons learnt from time‐lapse imaging of 78 348 embryos. Hum Reprod. 2021;36:2840–2847. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Labs EGGoGPiI , De los Santos MJ, Apter S, Coticchio G, Debrock S, Lundin K, et al. Revised guidelines for good practice in IVF laboratories (2015). Hum Reprod. 2016;31:685–686. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Alpha Scientists in Reproductive M, Embryology ESIGo . The Istanbul consensus workshop on embryo assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:1270–1283. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Destouni A, Dimitriadou E, Masset H, Debrock S, Melotte C, Van Den Bogaert K, et al. Genome‐wide haplotyping embryos developing from 0PN and 1PN zygotes increases transferrable embryos in PGT‐M. Hum Reprod. 2018;33:2302–2311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Kobayashi T, Ishikawa H, Ishii K, Sato A, Nakamura N, Saito Y, et al. Time‐lapse monitoring of fertilized human oocytes focused on the incidence of 0PN embryos in conventional in vitro fertilization cycles. Sci Rep. 2021;11:18862. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Liu J, Wang XL, Zhang X, Shen CY, Zhang Z. Live births resulting from 0PN‐derived embryos in conventional IVF cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016;33:373–378. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Ezoe K, Coticchio G, Takenouchi H, Taoda S, Namerikawa S, Honda K, et al. Spatiotemporal perturbations of pronuclear breakdown preceding syngamy affect early human embryo development: a retrospective observational study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2022;39:75–84. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Coticchio G, Borini A, Zaca C, Makrakis E, Sfontouris I. Fertilization signatures as biomarkers of embryo quality. Hum Reprod. 2022;37:1704–1711. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Kaser DJ, Racowsky C. Clinical outcomes following selection of human preimplantation embryos with time‐lapse monitoring: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20:617–631. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Coticchio G, Barrie A, Lagalla C, Borini A, Fishel S, Griffin D, et al. Plasticity of the human preimplantation embryo: developmental dogmas, variations on themes and self‐correction. Hum Reprod Update. 2021;27:848–865. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Agerholm IE, Hnida C, Cruger DG, Berg C, Bruun‐Petersen G, Kolvraa S, et al. Nuclei size in relation to nuclear status and aneuploidy rate for 13 chromosomes in donated four cells embryos. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2008;25:95–102. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Okajima N, Xiao W, Lopata A, Sankai T, Yasmin L, Nagai Y, et al. Nuclear‐to‐cytoplasmic ratios of 1PN and 2PN zygotes after in vitro fertilization of mouse oocytes. Zygote. 2022;30:120–124. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Okuno T, Li WY, Hatano Y, Takasu A, Sakamoto Y, Yamamoto M, et al. Zygotic nuclear F‐Actin safeguards embryonic development. Cell Rep. 2020;31:107824. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Cavazza T, Takeda Y, Politi AZ, Aushev M, Aldag P, Baker C, et al. Parental genome unification is highly error‐prone in mammalian embryos. Cell. 2021;184:2860–2877.e22. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Kyogoku H, Kitajima TS, Miyano T. Nucleolus precursor body (NPB): a distinct structure in mammalian oocytes and zygotes. Nucleus. 2014;5:493–498. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Balaban B, Urman B, Isiklar A, Alatas C, Aksoy S, Mercan R, et al. The effect of pronuclear morphology on embryo quality parameters and blastocyst transfer outcome. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:2357–2361. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Montag M, van der Ven H, German Pronuclear Morphology Study G . Evaluation of pronuclear morphology as the only selection criterion for further embryo culture and transfer: results of a prospective multicentre study. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:2384–2389. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Tesarik J, Greco E. The probability of abnormal preimplantation development can be predicted by a single static observation on pronuclear stage morphology. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:1318–1323. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Salumets A, Hyden‐Granskog C, Suikkari AM, Tiitinen A, Tuuri T. The predictive value of pronuclear morphology of zygotes in the assessment of human embryo quality. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:2177–2181. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Inoue T, Taguchi S, Uemura M, Tsujimoto Y, Kokunai K, Ikawa K, et al. The migration speed of nucleolar precursor bodies in pronuclei affects in vitro fertilization‐derived human embryo ploidy status and live birth. Reprod Med Biol. 2023;22:e12497. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Inoue T, Taguchi S, Uemura M, Tsujimoto Y, Miyazaki K, Yamashita Y. Migration speed of nucleolus precursor bodies in human male pronuclei: a novel parameter for predicting live birth. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021;38:1725–1736. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Scott LA, Smith S. The successful use of pronuclear embryo transfers the day following oocyte retrieval. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:1003–1013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Ezoe K, Hickman C, Miki T, Okimura T, Uchiyama K, Yabuuchi A, et al. Cytoplasmic halo characteristics during fertilization and their implications for human preimplantation embryo development and pregnancy outcome. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;41:191–202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Ezoe K, Miki T, Okimura T, Uchiyama K, Yabuuchi A, Kobayashi T, et al. Characteristics of the cytoplasmic halo during fertilisation correlate with the live birth rate after fresh cleaved embryo transfer on day 2 in minimal ovarian stimulation cycles: a retrospective observational study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2021;19:172. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Ebner T, Moser M, Sommergruber M, Gaiswinkler U, Wiesinger R, Puchner M, et al. Presence, but not type or degree of extension, of a cytoplasmic halo has a significant influence on preimplantation development and implantation behaviour. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:2406–2412. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Stalf T, Herrero J, Mehnert C, Manolopoulos K, Lenhard A, Gips H. Influence of polarization effects in ooplasma and pronuclei on embryo quality and implantation in an IVF program. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2002;19:355–362. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Van Blerkom J. Mitochondrial function in the human oocyte and embryo and their role in developmental competence. Mitochondrion. 2011;11:797–813. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Bavister BD, Squirrell JM. Mitochondrial distribution and function in oocytes and early embryos. Hum Reprod. 2000;15(Suppl 2):189–198. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Meseguer M, Herrero J, Tejera A, Hilligsoe KM, Ramsing NB, Remohi J. The use of morphokinetics as a predictor of embryo implantation. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:2658–2671. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Mizobe Y, Oya N, Iwakiri R, Yoshida N, Sato Y, Miyoshi K, et al. Effects of early cleavage patterns of human embryos on subsequent in vitro development and implantation. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:348–353.e2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Coticchio G, Ezoe K, Lagalla C, Zaca C, Borini A, Kato K. The destinies of human embryos reaching blastocyst stage between day 4 and day 7 diverge as early as fertilization. Hum Reprod. 2023;38:1690–1699. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Wong CC, Loewke KE, Bossert NL, Behr B, De Jonge CJ, Baer TM, et al. Non‐invasive imaging of human embryos before embryonic genome activation predicts development to the blastocyst stage. Nat Biotechnol. 2010;28:1115–1121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Kola I, Trounson A, Dawson G, Rogers P. Tripronuclear human oocytes: altered cleavage patterns and subsequent karyotypic analysis of embryos. Biol Reprod. 1987;37:395–401. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Ciray HN, Campbell A, Agerholm IE, Aguilar J, Chamayou S, Esbert M, et al. Proposed guidelines on the nomenclature and annotation of dynamic human embryo monitoring by a time‐lapse user group. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:2650–2660. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Rubio I, Kuhlmann R, Agerholm I, Kirk J, Herrero J, Escriba MJ, et al. Limited implantation success of direct‐cleaved human zygotes: a time‐lapse study. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:1458–1463. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Lee T, Peirce K, Natalwala J, Chapple V, Mark PJ, Sanders K, et al. Abnormal cleavage up to day 3 does not compromise live birth and neonatal outcomes of embryos that have achieved full blastulation: a retrospective cohort study. Hum Reprod. 2024;39:955–962. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59. Athayde Wirka K, Chen AA, Conaghan J, Ivani K, Gvakharia M, Behr B, et al. Atypical embryo phenotypes identified by time‐lapse microscopy: high prevalence and association with embryo development. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:1637–1648.e1–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60. Zhan Q, Ye Z, Clarke R, Rosenwaks Z, Zaninovic N. Direct unequal cleavages: embryo developmental competence, genetic constitution and clinical outcome. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0166398. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Barrie A, Homburg R, McDowell G, Brown J, Kingsland C, Troup S. Preliminary investigation of the prevalence and implantation potential of abnormal embryonic phenotypes assessed using time‐lapse imaging. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017;34:455–462. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Desai N, Ploskonka S, Goodman LR, Austin C, Goldberg J, Falcone T. Analysis of embryo morphokinetics, multinucleation and cleavage anomalies using continuous time‐lapse monitoring in blastocyst transfer cycles. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2014;12:54. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63. Liu Y, Chapple V, Roberts P, Matson P. Prevalence, consequence, and significance of reverse cleavage by human embryos viewed with the use of the embryoscope time‐lapse video system. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:1295–1300.e2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64. Goodman LR, Goldberg J, Falcone T, Austin C, Desai N. Does the addition of time‐lapse morphokinetics in the selection of embryos for transfer improve pregnancy rates? A randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:275–285.e10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65. Coticchio G, Cimadomo D, Cermisoni GC, Rienzi L, Papaleo E, Ubaldi FM, et al. The first mitotic division: a perilous bridge connecting the zygote and the early embryo. Hum Reprod. 2023;38:1019–1027. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66. McCollin A, Swann RL, Summers MC, Handyside AH, Ottolini CS. Abnormal cleavage and developmental arrest of human preimplantation embryos in vitro. Eur J Med Genet. 2020;63:103651. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67. McCoy RC, Newnham LJ, Ottolini CS, Hoffmann ER, Chatzimeletiou K, Cornejo OE, et al. Tripolar chromosome segregation drives the association between maternal genotype at variants spanning PLK4 and aneuploidy in human preimplantation embryos. Hum Mol Genet. 2018;27:2573–2585. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68. Ottolini CS, Kitchen J, Xanthopoulou L, Gordon T, Summers MC, Handyside AH. Tripolar mitosis and partitioning of the genome arrests human preimplantation development in vitro. Sci Rep. 2017;7:9744. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69. De Coster T, Masset H, Tsuiko O, Catteeuw M, Zhao Y, Dierckxsens N, et al. Parental genomes segregate into distinct blastomeres during multipolar zygotic divisions leading to mixoploid and chimeric blastocysts. Genome Biol. 2022;23:201. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70. Watanabe S, Yoshikai K, Matsuda Y, Miyai S, Sawada Y, Kurahashi H, et al. The effect of early irregular cell division of human embryos on blastocyst euploidy: considerations from the subsequent development of the blastomeres by direct or reverse cleavage. F S Sci. 2023;4:21–29. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71. Lagalla C, Tarozzi N, Sciajno R, Wells D, Di Santo M, Nadalini M, et al. Embryos with morphokinetic abnormalities may develop into euploid blastocysts. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017;34:137–146. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72. Ezoe K, Ohata K, Morita H, Ueno S, Miki T, Okimura T, et al. Prolonged blastomere movement induced by the delay of pronuclear fading and first cell division adversely affects pregnancy outcomes after fresh embryo transfer on day 2: a time‐lapse study. Reprod Biomed Online. 2019;38:659–668. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73. Ohata K, Ezoe K, Miki T, Morita H, Tsuchiya R, Kaneko S, et al. Blastomere movement post first cell division correlates with embryonic compaction and subsequent blastocyst formation. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2019;17:44. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74. Yang ST, Shi JX, Gong F, Zhang SP, Lu CF, Tan K, et al. Cleavage pattern predicts developmental potential of day 3 human embryos produced by IVF. Reprod Biomed Online. 2015;30:625–634. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75. Ebner T, Hoggerl A, Oppelt P, Radler E, Enzelsberger SH, Mayer RB, et al. Time‐lapse imaging provides further evidence that planar arrangement of blastomeres is highly abnormal. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2017;296:1199–1205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76. Yi C, Troutman S, Fera D, Stemmer‐Rachamimov A, Avila JL, Christian N, et al. A tight junction‐associated Merlin‐angiomotin complex mediates Merlin's regulation of mitogenic signaling and tumor suppressive functions. Cancer Cell. 2011;19:527–540. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77. Yi K, Unruh JR, Deng M, Slaughter BD, Rubinstein B, Li R. Dynamic maintenance of asymmetric meiotic spindle position through Arp2/3‐complex‐driven cytoplasmic streaming in mouse oocytes. Nat Cell Biol. 2011;13:1252–1258. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78. Ajduk A, Zernicka‐Goetz M. Polarity and cell division orientation in the cleavage embryo: from worm to human. Mol Hum Reprod. 2016;22:691–703. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79. Halet G, Carroll J. Rac activity is polarized and regulates meiotic spindle stability and anchoring in mammalian oocytes. Dev Cell. 2007;12:309–317. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80. Duan X, Sun SC. Actin cytoskeleton dynamics in mammalian oocyte meiosis. Biol Reprod. 2019;100:15–24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81. Coticchio G, Guglielmo MC, Albertini DF, Dal Canto M, Mignini Renzini M, De Ponti E, et al. Contributions of the Actin cytoskeleton to the emergence of polarity during maturation in human oocytes. Mol Hum Reprod. 2014;20:200–207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82. Sun SC, Wang QL, Gao WW, Xu YN, Liu HL, Cui XS, et al. Actin nucleator Arp2/3 complex is essential for mouse preimplantation embryo development. Reprod Fertil Dev. 2013;25:617–623. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83. Basile N, Morbeck D, Garcia‐Velasco J, Bronet F, Meseguer M. Type of culture media does not affect embryo kinetics: a time‐lapse analysis of sibling oocytes. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:634–641. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84. Ciray HN, Aksoy T, Goktas C, Ozturk B, Bahceci M. Time‐lapse evaluation of human embryo development in single versus sequential culture media—a sibling oocyte study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012;29:891–900. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85. Hardarson T, Bungum M, Conaghan J, Meintjes M, Chantilis SJ, Molnar L, et al. Noninferiority, randomized, controlled trial comparing embryo development using media developed for sequential or undisturbed culture in a time‐lapse setup. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:1452–1459.e1–4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86. van Duijn L, Rousian M, Kramer CS, van Marion ES, Willemsen SP, Speksnijder JP, et al. The impact of culture medium on morphokinetics of cleavage stage embryos: an observational study. Reprod Sci. 2022;29:2179–2189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87. Clarke HJ. History, origin, and function of transzonal projections: the bridges of communication between the oocyte and its environment. Anim Reprod. 2018;15:215–223. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88. Clarke HJ. Regulation of germ cell development by intercellular signaling in the mammalian ovarian follicle. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Dev Biol. 2018;7:7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89. Fushii M, Yamada R, Lee J, Miyano T. Reestablishment of transzonal projections and growth of bovine oocytes in vitro. J Reprod Dev. 2021;67:300–306. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90. Dekel N, Lawrence TS, Gilula NB, Beers WH. Modulation of cell‐to‐cell communication in the cumulus‐oocyte complex and the regulation of oocyte maturation by LH. Dev Biol. 1981;86:356–362. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91. Eppig JJ. The relationship between cumulus cell‐oocyte coupling, oocyte meiotic maturation, and cumulus expansion. Dev Biol. 1982;89:268–272. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92. Norris RP, Freudzon M, Mehlmann LM, Cowan AE, Simon AM, Paul DL, et al. Luteinizing hormone causes MAP kinase‐dependent phosphorylation and closure of connexin 43 gap junctions in mouse ovarian follicles: one of two paths to meiotic resumption. Development. 2008;135:3229–3238. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93. Salustri A, Siracusa G. Metabolic coupling, cumulus expansion and meiotic resumption in mouse cumuli oophori cultured in vitro in the presence of FSH or dcAMP, or stimulated in vivo by hCG. J Reprod Fertil. 1983;68:335–341. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94. Shuhaibar LC, Egbert JR, Norris RP, Lampe PD, Nikolaev VO, Thunemann M, et al. Intercellular signaling via cyclic GMP diffusion through gap junctions restarts meiosis in mouse ovarian follicles. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112:5527–5532. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95. Abbassi L, El‐Hayek S, Carvalho KF, Wang W, Yang Q, Granados‐Aparici S, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor signaling uncouples germ cells from the somatic follicular compartment at ovulation. Nat Commun. 2021;12:1438. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96. Kawashima I, Liu Z, Mullany LK, Mihara T, Richards JS, Shimada M. EGF‐like factors induce expansion of the cumulus cell‐oocyte complexes by activating calpain‐mediated cell movement. Endocrinology. 2012;153:3949–3959. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97. Barrett SL, Albertini DF. Cumulus cell contact during oocyte maturation in mice regulates meiotic spindle positioning and enhances developmental competence. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2010;27:29–39. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98. Derrick R, Hickman C, Oliana O, Wilkinson T, Gwinnett D, Whyte LB, et al. Perivitelline threads associated with fragments in human cleavage stage embryos observed through time‐lapse microscopy. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017;35:640–645. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99. Kellam L, Pastorelli LM, Bastida AM, Senkbeil A, Montgomery S, Fishel S, et al. Perivitelline threads in cleavage‐stage human embryos: observations using time‐lapse imaging. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017;35:646–656. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100. Van Blerkom J, Alikani M. Perivitelline threads: an overlooked feature of cleavage‐stage human embryos or an epiphenomenon in search of a function? Reprod Biomed Online. 2017;35:625–626. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101. Yumoto K, Shimura T, Mio Y. Removing the zona pellucida can decrease cytoplasmic fragmentations in human embryos: a pilot study using 3PN embryos and time‐lapse cinematography. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020;37:1349–1354. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102. Clarke HJ. Transzonal projections: essential structures mediating intercellular communication in the mammalian ovarian follicle. Mol Reprod Dev. 2022;89:509–525. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103. Meriano J, Clark C, Cadesky K, Laskin CA. Binucleated and micronucleated blastomeres in embryos derived from human assisted reproduction cycles. Reprod Biomed Online. 2004;9:511–520. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104. Fenech M, Kirsch‐Volders M, Natarajan AT, Surralles J, Crott JW, Parry J, et al. Molecular mechanisms of micronucleus, nucleoplasmic bridge and nuclear bud formation in mammalian and human cells. Mutagenesis. 2011;26:125–132. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105. Vazquez‐Diez C, FitzHarris G. Causes and consequences of chromosome segregation error in preimplantation embryos. Reproduction. 2018;155:R63–R76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106. Currie CE, Ford E, Benham Whyte L, Taylor DM, Mihalas BP, Erent M, et al. The first mitotic division of human embryos is highly error prone. Nat Commun. 2022;13:6755. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107. Aguilar J, Rubio I, Munoz E, Pellicer A, Meseguer M. Study of nucleation status in the second cell cycle of human embryo and its impact on implantation rate. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:291–299.e2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 108. Alikani M, Calderon G, Tomkin G, Garrisi J, Kokot M, Cohen J. Cleavage anomalies in early human embryos and survival after prolonged culture in‐vitro. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:2634–2643. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109. Egashira A, Yamauchi N, Tanaka K, Mine C, Otsubo H, Murakami M, et al. Developmental capacity and implantation potential of the embryos with multinucleated blastomeres. J Reprod Dev. 2015;61:595–600. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110. Yakin K, Balaban B, Urman B. Impact of the presence of one or more multinucleated blastomeres on the developmental potential of the embryo to the blastocyst stage. Fertil Steril. 2005;83:243–245. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111. Talbot AL, Alexopoulou E, Kallemose T, Freiesleben NC, Nielsen HS, Zedeler A. Binucleated embryos at the two‐cell stage show higher blastocyst formation rates and higher pregnancy and live birth rates compared to non‐multinucleated embryos. Hum Reprod Open. 2022;2022:hoac049. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 112. Basile N, Vime P, Florensa M, Aparicio Ruiz B, Garcia Velasco JA, Remohi J, et al. The use of morphokinetics as a predictor of implantation: a multicentric study to define and validate an algorithm for embryo selection. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:276–283. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 113. Desai N, Ploskonka S, Goodman L, Attaran M, Goldberg JM, Austin C, et al. Delayed blastulation, multinucleation, and expansion grade are independently associated with live‐birth rates in frozen blastocyst transfer cycles. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:1370–1378. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 114. Fauque P, Audureau E, Leandri R, Delaroche L, Assouline S, Epelboin S, et al. Is the nuclear status of an embryo an independent factor to predict its ability to develop to term? Fertil Steril. 2013;99:1299–1304.e3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 115. Ergin EG, Caliskan E, Yalcinkaya E, Oztel Z, Cokelez K, Ozay A, et al. Frequency of embryo multinucleation detected by time‐lapse system and its impact on pregnancy outcome. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:1029–1033.e1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 116. Hashimoto S, Nakano T, Yamagata K, Inoue M, Morimoto Y, Nakaoka Y. Multinucleation per se is not always sufficient as a marker of abnormality to decide against transferring human embryos. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:133–139.e6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 117. Seikkula J, Oksjoki S, Hurme S, Mankonen H, Polo‐Kantola P, Jokimaa V. Pregnancy and perinatal outcomes after transfer of binucleated or multinucleated frozen‐thawed embryos: a case‐control study. Reprod Biomed Online. 2018;36:607–613. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118. Magli MC, Gianaroli L, Ferraretti AP. Chromosomal abnormalities in embryos. Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2001;183(Suppl 1):S29–S34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 119. Balakier H, Sojecki A, Motamedi G, Librach C. Impact of multinucleated blastomeres on embryo developmental competence, morphokinetics, and aneuploidy. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:608–614.e2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 120. Sagona AP, Nezis IP, Pedersen NM, Liestol K, Poulton J, Rusten TE, et al. PtdIns(3)P controls cytokinesis through KIF13A‐mediated recruitment of FYVE‐CENT to the midbody. Nat Cell Biol. 2010;12:362–371. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 121. Tokai‐Nishizumi N, Ohsugi M, Suzuki E, Yamamoto T. The chromokinesin kid is required for maintenance of proper metaphase spindle size. Mol Biol Cell. 2005;16:5455–5463. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 122. Unno K, Hanada T, Chishti AH. Functional involvement of human discs large tumor suppressor in cytokinesis. Exp Cell Res. 2008;314:3118–3129. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 123. Zhu C, Bossy‐Wetzel E, Jiang W. Recruitment of MKLP1 to the spindle midzone/midbody by INCENP is essential for midbody formation and completion of cytokinesis in human cells. Biochem J. 2005;389:373–381. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 124. Ohsugi M, Adachi K, Horai R, Kakuta S, Sudo K, Kotaki H, et al. Kid‐mediated chromosome compaction ensures proper nuclear envelope formation. Cell. 2008;132:771–782. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 125. Egashira A, Yamauchi N, Islam MR, Yamagami K, Tanaka A, Suyama H, et al. Kid depletion in mouse oocytes associated with multinucleated blastomere formation and inferior embryo development. Anim Sci J. 2016;87:1048–1054. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 126. Santaguida S, Amon A. Short‐ and long‐term effects of chromosome mis‐segregation and aneuploidy. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2015;16:473–485. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 127. Smith HL, Stevens A, Minogue B, Sneddon S, Shaw L, Wood L, et al. Systems based analysis of human embryos and gene networks involved in cell lineage allocation. BMC Genomics. 2019;20:171. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 128. Coticchio G, Ezoe K, Lagalla C, Shimazaki K, Ohata K, Ninomiya M, et al. Perturbations of morphogenesis at the compaction stage affect blastocyst implantation and live birth rates. Hum Reprod. 2021;36:918–928. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 129. White MD, Zenker J, Bissiere S, Plachta N. How cells change shape and position in the early mammalian embryo. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 2017;44:7–13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 130. Iwata K, Yumoto K, Sugishima M, Mizoguchi C, Kai Y, Iba Y, et al. Analysis of compaction initiation in human embryos by using time‐lapse cinematography. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014;31:421–426. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 131. Matot R, Kalma Y, Rahav R, Azem F, Amir H, Ben‐Yosef D. Cleavage stage at compaction‐a good predictor for IVF outcome. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2023;161:997–1003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 132. Ota M, Sasaki H. Mammalian Tead proteins regulate cell proliferation and contact inhibition as transcriptional mediators of Hippo signaling. Development. 2008;135:4059–4069. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 133. Zhao B, Ye X, Yu J, Li L, Li W, Li S, et al. TEAD mediates YAP‐dependent gene induction and growth control. Genes Dev. 2008;22:1962–1971. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 134. Gerri C, McCarthy A, Alanis‐Lobato G, Demtschenko A, Bruneau A, Loubersac S, et al. Initiation of a conserved trophectoderm program in human, cow and mouse embryos. Nature. 2020;587:443–447. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 135. Hirate Y, Hirahara S, Inoue K, Suzuki A, Alarcon VB, Akimoto K, et al. Polarity‐dependent distribution of angiomotin localizes Hippo signaling in preimplantation embryos. Curr Biol. 2013;23:1181–1194. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 136. Regin M, Essahib W, Demtschenko A, Dewandre D, David L, Gerri C, et al. Lineage segregation in human pre‐implantation embryos is specified by YAP1 and TEAD1. Hum Reprod. 2023;38:1484–1498. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 137. Frum T, Murphy TM, Ralston A. HIPPO signaling resolves embryonic cell fate conflicts during establishment of pluripotency in vivo. Elife. 2018;7:7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 138. Ebner T, Moser M, Shebl O, Sommergruber M, Gaiswinkler U, Tews G. Morphological analysis at compacting stage is a valuable prognostic tool for ICSI patients. Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;18:61–66. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 139. Lagalla C, Coticchio G, Sciajno R, Tarozzi N, Zaca C, Borini A. Alternative patterns of partial embryo compaction: prevalence, morphokinetic history and possible implications. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;40:347–354. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 140. Hur C, Nanavaty V, Yao M, Desai N. The presence of partial compaction patterns is associated with lower rates of blastocyst formation, sub‐optimal morphokinetic parameters and poorer morphologic grade. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2023;21:12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 141. Parriego M, Coll L, Carrasco B, Garcia S, Boada M, Polyzos NP, et al. Blastocysts from partial compaction morulae are not defined by their early mistakes. Reprod Biomed Online. 2023;48:103729. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 142. De Martin H, Bonetti TCS, Nissel CAZ, Gomes AP, Fujii MG, Monteleone PAA. Association of early cleavage, morula compaction and blastocysts ploidy of IVF embryos cultured in a time‐lapse system and biopsied for genetic test for aneuploidy. Sci Rep. 2024;14:739. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 143. Shenoy CC, Bader A, Walker DL, Fredrickson JR, Weaver AL, Zhao Y. Embryo blastomere exclusion identified in a time‐lapse culture system is associated with embryo ploidy. Reprod Sci. 2023;30:1911–1916. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 144. Daughtry BL, Rosenkrantz JL, Lazar NH, Fei SS, Redmayne N, Torkenczy KA, et al. Single‐cell sequencing of primate preimplantation embryos reveals chromosome elimination via cellular fragmentation and blastomere exclusion. Genome Res. 2019;29:367–382. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 145. Korotkevich E, Niwayama R, Courtois A, Friese S, Berger N, Buchholz F, et al. The apical domain is required and sufficient for the first lineage segregation in the mouse embryo. Dev Cell. 2017;40:235–247.e7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 146. Plusa B, Frankenberg S, Chalmers A, Hadjantonakis AK, Moore CA, Papalopulu N, et al. Downregulation of Par3 and aPKC function directs cells towards the ICM in the preimplantation mouse embryo. J Cell Sci. 2005;118:505–515. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 147. Saiz N, Plusa B. Early cell fate decisions in the mouse embryo. Reproduction. 2013;145:R65–R80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 148. Fujishima A, Takahashi K, Goto M, Hirakawa T, Iwasawa T, Togashi K, et al. Live visualisation of electrolytes during mouse embryonic development using electrolyte indicators. PLoS One. 2021;16:e0246337. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 149. Watson AJ, Barcroft LC. Regulation of blastocyst formation. Front Biosci. 2001;6:D708–D730. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 150. Watson AJ. The cell biology of blastocyst development. Mol Reprod Dev. 1992;33:492–504. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 151. Hirakawa T, Goto M, Takahashi K, Iwasawa T, Fujishima A, Makino K, et al. Na+/K+ ATPase alpha1 and beta3 subunits are localized to the basolateral membrane of trophectoderm cells in human blastocysts. Hum Reprod. 2022;37:1423–1430. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 152. Wiegel RE, Danser AHJ, van Duijn L, Willemsen SP, Laven JSE, Steegers EAP, et al. Circulating maternal prorenin and oocyte and preimplantation embryo development: the Rotterdam periconception cohort. Hum Reprod. 2023;38:582–595. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 153. Cimadomo D, Marconetto A, Trio S, Chiappetta V, Innocenti F, Albricci L, et al. Human blastocyst spontaneous collapse is associated with worse morphological quality and higher degeneration and aneuploidy rates: a comprehensive analysis standardized through artificial intelligence. Hum Reprod. 2022;37:2291–2306. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 154. Lebovitz O, Michaeli M, Aslih N, Poltov D, Estrada D, Atzmon Y, et al. Embryonic development in relation to maternal age and conception probability. Reprod Sci. 2021;28:2292–2300. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 155. Cimadomo D, Soscia D, Casciani V, Innocenti F, Trio S, Chiappetta V, et al. How slow is too slow? A comprehensive portrait of day 7 blastocysts and their clinical value standardized through artificial intelligence. Hum Reprod. 2022;37:1134–1147. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 156. Kato K, Ueno S, Yabuuchi A, Uchiyama K, Okuno T, Kobayashi T, et al. Women's age and embryo developmental speed accurately predict clinical pregnancy after single vitrified‐warmed blastocyst transfer. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;29:411–416. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 157. Majumdar G, Majumdar A, Verma IC, Upadhyaya KC. Relationship between morphology, euploidy and implantation potential of cleavage and blastocyst stage embryos. J Hum Reprod Sci. 2017;10:49–57. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 158. Chen NQ, Si CR, Yung SC, Hon SK, Arasoo J, Ng SC. Analysis of a preimplantation genetic test for aneuploidies in 893 screened blastocysts using KaryoLite BoBs: a single‐centre experience. Singapore Med J. 2024;10:4103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 159. Popovic M, Borot L, Lorenzon AR, Lopes A, Sakkas D, Lledo B, et al. Implicit bias in diagnosing mosaicism amongst preimplantation genetic testing providers: results from a multicenter study of 36 395 blastocysts. Hum Reprod. 2024;39:258–274. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 160. Chen CH, Lee CI, Huang CC, Chen HH, Chang CY, Cheng EH, et al. Increased incidence of live births in implanted day 5 versus day 6 blastocysts following single embryo transfers with PGT‐A. Sci Rep. 2023;13:12725. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 161. Eichenlaub‐Ritter U. Oocyte ageing and its cellular basis. Int J Dev Biol. 2012;56:841–852. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 162. Wilding M, Dale B, Marino M, di Matteo L, Alviggi C, Pisaturo ML, et al. Mitochondrial aggregation patterns and activity in human oocytes and preimplantation embryos. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:909–917. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 163. Kirkegaard K, Sundvall L, Erlandsen M, Hindkjaer JJ, Knudsen UB, Ingerslev HJ. Timing of human preimplantation embryonic development is confounded by embryo origin. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:324–331. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 164. Chavez SL, Loewke KE, Han J, Moussavi F, Colls P, Munne S, et al. Dynamic blastomere behaviour reflects human embryo ploidy by the four‐cell stage. Nat Commun. 2012;3:1251. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 165. Lee CI, Chen CH, Huang CC, Cheng EH, Chen HH, Ho ST, et al. Embryo morphokinetics is potentially associated with clinical outcomes of single‐embryo transfers in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy cycles. Reprod Biomed Online. 2019;39:569–579. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 166. Martin A, Mercader A, Dominguez F, Quinonero A, Perez M, Gonzalez‐Martin R, et al. Mosaic results after preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy may be accompanied by changes in global gene expression. Front Mol Biosci. 2023;10:1180689. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 167. Baker NE. Emerging mechanisms of cell competition. Nat Rev Genet. 2020;21:683–697. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 168. Regin M, Spits C, Sermon K. On the origins and fate of chromosomal abnormalities in human preimplantation embryos: an unsolved riddle. Mol Hum Reprod. 2022;28:gaac011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 169. Martin A, Mercader A, Beltran D, Mifsud A, Nohales M, Pardinas ML, et al. Trophectoderm cells of human mosaic embryos display increased apoptotic levels and impaired differentiation capacity: a molecular clue regarding their reproductive fate? Hum Reprod. 2024;39:709–723. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 170. Marcos J, Perez‐Albala S, Mifsud A, Molla M, Landeras J, Meseguer M. Collapse of blastocysts is strongly related to lower implantation success: a time‐lapse study. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:2501–2508. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 171. Gabrielsen A, Iversen LH, Fedder J, Eskildsen TV, Englund AL, Hansen SR, et al. Pre‐vitrification and post‐warming variables of vitrified‐warmed blastocysts that are predictable for implantation. J Clin Med. 2023;12:6389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 172. Bodri D, Sugimoto T, Yao Serna J, Kawachiya S, Kato R, Matsumoto T. Blastocyst collapse is not an independent predictor of reduced live birth: a time‐lapse study. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:1476–1483.e3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 173. Bickendorf K, Qi F, Peirce K, Natalwala J, Chapple V, Liu Y. Spontaneous collapse as a prognostic marker for human blastocysts: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Hum Reprod. 2023;38:1891–1900. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 174. Sciorio R, Meseguer M. Focus on time‐lapse analysis: blastocyst collapse and morphometric assessment as new features of embryo viability. Reprod Biomed Online. 2021;43:821–832. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 175. Lo CW, Gilula NB. Gap junctional communication in the preimplantation mouse embryo. Cell. 1979;18:399–409. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 176. Becker DL, Davies CS. Role of gap junctions in the development of the preimplantation mouse embryo. Microsc Res Tech. 1995;31:364–374. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 177. Togashi K, Kumagai J, Sato E, Shirasawa H, Shimoda Y, Makino K, et al. Dysfunction in gap junction intercellular communication induces aberrant behavior of the inner cell mass and frequent collapses of expanded blastocysts in mouse embryos. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015;32:969–976. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 178. Iwasawa T, Takahashi K, Goto M, Anzai M, Shirasawa H, Sato W, et al. Human frozen‐thawed blastocyst morphokinetics observed using time‐lapse cinematography reflects the number of trophectoderm cells. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0210992. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 179. Ebner T, Sesli O, Kresic S, Enengl S, Stoiber B, Reiter E, et al. Time‐lapse imaging of cytoplasmic strings at the blastocyst stage suggests their association with spontaneous blastocoel collapse. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;40:191–199. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 180. Joo K, Nemes A, Dudas B, Berkes‐Bara E, Murber A, Urbancsek J, et al. The importance of cytoplasmic strings during early human embryonic development. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2023;11:1177279. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 181. Salas‐Vidal E, Lomeli H. Imaging filopodia dynamics in the mouse blastocyst. Dev Biol. 2004;265:75–89. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 182. Scott LA. Oocyte and embryo polarity. Semin Reprod Med. 2000;18:171–183. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 183. Eastick J, Venetis C, Cooke S, Chapman M. The presence of cytoplasmic strings in human blastocysts is associated with the probability of clinical pregnancy with fetal heart. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021;38:2139–2149. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 184. Ma BX, Yang L, Tian Y, Jin L, Huang B. Cytoplasmic strings between ICM and mTE are a positive predictor of clinical pregnancy and live birth outcomes: a time‐lapse study. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022;9:934327. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 185. Miller J, Fraser SE, McClay D. Dynamics of thin filopodia during sea urchin gastrulation. Development. 1995;121:2501–2511. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Video S1.–S28.

RMB2-23-e12593-s001.zip (216.1MB, zip)

Articles from Reproductive Medicine and Biology are provided here courtesy of John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japan Society for Reproductive Medicine.

RESOURCES