A micro-fabricated device (microICSI) improves porcine blastocyst development and procedural efficiency for both porcine intracytoplasmic sperm injection and human microinjection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) imparts physical stress on the oolemma of the oocyte and remains among the most technically demanding skills to master, with success rates related to experience and expertise. ICSI is also time-consuming and requires workflow management in the laboratory. This study presents a device designed to reduce the pressure on the oocyte during injection and investigates if this improves embryo development in a porcine model. The impact of this device on laboratory workflow was also assessed. METHODS: Porcine oocytes were matured in vitro and injected with porcine sperm by conventional ICSI (C-ICSI) or with microICSI, an ICSI dish that supports up to 20 oocytes housed individually in microwells created through microfabrication. Data collected included set-up time, time to align the polar body, time to perform the injection, the number of hand adjustments between controllers, and degree of invagination at injection. Developmental parameters measured included cleavage and day 6 blastocyst rates. Blastocysts were differentially stained to assess cell numbers of the inner cell mass and trophectoderm. A pilot study with human donated MII oocytes injected with beads was also performed. RESULTS: A significant increase in porcine blastocyst rate for microICSI compared to C-ICSI was observed, while cleavage rates and blastocyst cell numbers were comparable between treatments. Procedural efficiency of microinjection was significantly improved with microICSI compared to C-ICSI in both species. CONCLUSION: The microICSI device demonstrated significant developmental and procedural benefits for porcine ICSI. A pilot study suggests human ICSI should benefit equally.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".