IVF News

The American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) has named the five finalists for its INNOVATE Pitch Tank 2026. The showcase runs on 28 and 29 October 2026 in Baltimore, USA, and the winner receives US$10,000. ASRM Congress

• U-Ploid Biotechnologies (Jordan Abdi): Lyvanta, a therapeutic aimed at meiotic aneuploidy in eggs.
• The Proficient Lab (Unika Alexander): a platform for visualising and managing clinical lab quality and operations.
• illumicell AI (Michel Bielecki): volumetric 3D imaging designed to replace the manual microscope read.
• E-Cryogenics LLC (Rod DaSilva): next-generation cryopreservation for reproductive medicine and cell preservation.
• Ovo Labs (Oleksandr Yagensky): therapeutics to improve IVF outcomes by addressing egg quality.

Two finalists target egg quality and aneuploidy with drugs, the problem embryologists see most and can do least about. The other three are laboratory technologies: quality management software, 3D cell imaging and cryopreservation. Only the cryopreservation company names reproductive medicine explicitly.

For lab directors attending ASRM, the usual questions apply. What is the evidence, what is the regulatory status, has it been tested on human gametes or embryos, and what validation would the lab need before clinical use?

Quality data and AI in the laboratory are also themes of the next International IVF Initiative session, Beyond the Bench, on 13 October.

Sources

28 September 2026. ASRM Congress

• Meet the Pitch Tank Finalists!

IVF.net Newsdesk articles are written from the original sources listed above. If you spot an error, please contact IVF.net and we will correct it.

Professor Caroline Ogilvie OBE, the clinical cytogeneticist whose work at Guy's Hospital shaped preimplantation and prenatal genetic diagnosis in the UK, has died. Her obituary in BioNews, written by Professor Dusko Ilic, was published on 28 September 2026. BioNews

Across a career of around half a century, much of it at Guy's Hospital, London, Professor Ogilvie helped bring one new technology after another into clinical use:

• fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) at Guy's in the 1990s
• quantitative fluorescence PCR for rapid prenatal diagnosis of conditions such as Down's syndrome
• on-screen karyotyping and array comparative genomic hybridisation
• a national preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) service for chromosome rearrangements

She published more than 200 scientific papers and mentored generations of clinical scientists, many of them women who went on to senior roles. She was appointed OBE in the 2025 King's Birthday Honours for services to patients with genetic disorders. She continued voluntary work after her formal retirement. BioNews

For embryologists, her legacy is practical. In the UK, embryo testing for families carrying chromosome rearrangements builds on the service she helped establish. She also helped develop preimplantation genetic haplotyping to widen access to PGD for single-gene disorders.

For more on embryo testing today, see the International IVF Initiative session PGT: 360 Degrees.

Sources

28 September 2026. BioNews

• Obituary: Professor Caroline Ogilvie OBE

IVF.net Newsdesk articles are written from the original sources listed above. If you spot an error, please contact IVF.net and we will correct it.

A systematic review published in Human Reproduction Update on 25 September 2026 finds that live birth per randomised woman was comparable with and without preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A). The result bears directly on how labs counsel, consent and audit PGT-A cycles. Human Reproduction Update

Iwarsson and colleagues, from the Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Swedish universities including Karolinska Institutet, pooled seven randomised controlled trials. Live birth per randomised woman after the first planned embryo transfer did not differ significantly with or without PGT-A (odds ratio 1.16; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.45), and neither did cumulative live birth per oocyte retrieval (odds ratio 0.87; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.19).

The authors rated the certainty of the evidence for these outcomes as low (GRADE). They also noted that, in the Swedish setting, PGT-A almost doubles the cost of an IVF cycle.

The safety findings were more reassuring. Across 55 studies, embryo biopsy for PGT-A, PGT-M or PGT-SR showed no indication of more complications for pregnant women or children. Even so, the authors conclude that PGT-A is currently not ethically justifiable, given the lack of demonstrated patient benefit and the added cost. Iwarsson et al., 2026

The review sits alongside the UK regulator's position. The HFEA rates PGT-A red for improving the chances of having a baby for most fertility patients, because it often reduces the number of embryos available. It gives a separate green rating for reducing the risk of miscarriage, an outcome the new review could not evaluate. HFEA

For laboratories, the key message for patients is the difference between per-transfer and per-patient outcomes. Live birth per transfer was higher with PGT-A in the review (low certainty of evidence), because embryos called aneuploid are not transferred. Patients, however, want to know whether more of them will take a baby home. On that, the review found no evidence of benefit, including in women over 35. Of the only two studies that evaluated time to pregnancy, neither showed a shorter time to live birth. Patient information and consent wording that implies otherwise should be revised.

Labs offering PGT-A should audit live birth per retrieval, not only per transfer. They should also record how many patients reach no embryo transfer after testing, and weigh the biopsy and vitrification workload against the clinical return.

For more on embryo testing, see the International IVF Initiative session PGT: 360 Degrees.

Sources

25 September 2026. Human Reproduction Update

• PGT-A, the theory versus the evidence: a systematic review on efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness

16 October 2023. HFEA

• Pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A)

IVF.net Newsdesk articles are written from the original sources listed above. If you spot an error, please contact IVF.net and we will correct it.

A frozen sample shipment fails at handovers, not in transit. The vessel is usually adequate. What goes wrong is the gap between the laboratory that packed it, the courier that moved it, the customs officer who held it and the laboratory that opened it.

Sizing comes first. A vapour phase dry shipper holds liquid nitrogen absorbed into a porous inner matrix rather than as free liquid, so samples travel in the vapour phase and the vessel can be inverted without spilling. Size it on the number and format of the samples, the journey length including a realistic delay allowance, and who is going to lift it. Sample format matters as much as count: straws, high security straws and vials occupy the canister differently, and a shipper quoted at a vial count assumes a format that is rarely the one an embryology laboratory runs.

Charging is where transports are lost. An undercharged shipper is the most common cause of a failed cryogenic transport and it is entirely preventable. The absorbent matrix has to be fully saturated, which takes appreciably longer than most protocols allow, and the vessel must then be inverted and drained so that no free liquid remains. Weigh the unit before and after charging and record both figures, because weight is the only practical measure of the cold mass genuinely in the vessel and the only check that catches a matrix which has not taken a full charge.

Charging is also the highest risk step for the person doing it. BCGA Code of Practice 30, on the safe use of liquid nitrogen dewars, records that asphyxia due to oxygen deficiency is often rapid with no prior warning to the victim. A freshly charged shipper does not share a lift with a person.

Treat the published hold time as a ceiling. Those figures are measured upright, unopened and at moderate ambient temperature, and real shipments meet none of those conditions reliably. Build margin against the delay you have not planned for.

On documentation, two provisions apply and they are constantly conflated. The shipper travels as not restricted under Special Provision A152 of the IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations, provided the packaging cannot build pressure or release nitrogen in any orientation and the air waybill carries the words not restricted with the special provision number. Packing Instruction 650 governs the biological samples inside, classified UN 3373 Category B, and applies to the samples rather than to the nitrogen holding them cold.

Then close the handovers. Name a contact at both ends who will be available on the day, confirm the receiving laboratory has a free canister position before the shipper leaves, send the tracking reference and expected arrival directly, and put the hold time and its expiry date in writing so a delay becomes a decision rather than a discovery.

Full article: https://cryolab.co.uk/sample-shipper-frozen-shipments/

Storage temperature is quoted as one number and it is not one. Samples immersed in liquid nitrogen sit at minus 195.8 degrees Celsius, uniformly, because the boiling liquid holds the whole canister at its boiling point. Minus 196 is the rounded figure most documentation uses.

Vapour phase storage is not at that temperature. Samples sit above the liquid in cold nitrogen gas, which removes direct contact with the liquid and the cross contamination route that comes with it. The ASRM and SART Practice Committees, writing on cryostorage in Fertility and Sterility (2020;114:486-491), note that liquid nitrogen is not sterile, which is the foundation of the vapour phase argument.

The trade off is a vertical temperature gradient. The bottom of the canister sits close to liquid temperature and the top sits warmer, by an amount that depends on vessel design, liquid level and how often the lid is opened. For an embryology laboratory the practical consequence is that the temperature to specify against is the warmest position a straw or vial can occupy, not the temperature at the bottom of the vessel. An inventory that fills the top of a canister in a vessel running at a low level is the specific failure this produces, and it produces it without any visible sign.

That is also why level monitoring carries more weight in vapour phase. In liquid phase a falling level still leaves the depth of liquid covering the samples as a margin. In vapour phase the samples are already above the liquid, so every centimetre lost pushes the warm end of the gradient further down the canister. The ESHRE recommendations on good practice in the IVF laboratory, published in Human Reproduction 41(8), 1245, expect cryostorage tanks to be continuously monitored with alarms that detect and log out of range temperature or liquid nitrogen level. A daily manual dipstick check is a point observation of a variable that moves between observations.

Decide liquid or vapour phase deliberately and document the reason, since it is among the first things an inspector asks. Specify monitoring to match, with a remote output and a relay to a system somebody answers out of hours. And track nitrogen consumption from day one, because a rising trend at unchanged workload is the earliest indication that the vessel's vacuum is degrading.

Full article: https://cryolab.co.uk/liquid-nitrogen-storage-temperature/

Most IVF units sit on cylinder or portable vessel supply, and most inherited that arrangement rather than choosing it. It is worth reviewing, because supply mode and delivery frequency between them set a cost the unit carries every week for as long as the samples are stored.

The forecasting question matters more than the mode. A cryogenic vessel loses nitrogen continuously whether anybody opens it or not, and that standing loss typically dominates the losses caused by handling. A unit that reduces its access frequency often sees very little change in its nitrogen bill, because the work was never the expensive part.

For an embryology laboratory the practical steps are these. Establish a baseline in litres per week, in your own room, under your own workload, once the vessel has settled. Decide in advance the level at which you will act, bearing in mind that in vapour phase storage that level is higher than most people assume: samples sit above the liquid and the temperature gradient up the vessel worsens as the level falls. Then set delivery frequency so that a missed or delayed delivery still leaves headroom, with particular attention to bank holiday weekends, when levels run down unattended.

Log consumption per vessel rather than per site. A rising trend at unchanged workload is the earliest practical sign that a vacuum is degrading, and it typically appears months before frost becomes visible on the outer shell.

When reviewing the supply agreement, confirm routine and urgent lead times, minimum order and any vessel rental, who owns the vessels and who is responsible for their periodic examination, what cover exists over bank holidays, and the named escalation route when a delivery fails.

Full article: https://cryolab.co.uk/liquid-nitrogen-supply/

The article addresses a compatibility problem common in laboratories specifying or consolidating cryogenic storage. Straw format determines goblet compatibility, goblet selection determines cane and canister layout, and canister layout determines rack configuration and the neck diameter required in a storage vessel. Because the vessel is the largest cost and the longest lead time, it typically reaches procurement first, ahead of the decisions that should constrain it.

The guidance covers straw and sealer matching, goblet and visotube capacity read against straw diameter, aluminium cryocanes and cryosleeves, cryovials as a parallel organisation system, and identification requirements against the 55 year storage period the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority confirms following the Health and Care Act 2022.

Cryolab was established in 2000 and holds ISO 9001:2015 BSI Quality Management System certification. The company is the exclusive UK and Ireland distributor for CryoBioSystems, a brand of ART, and supplies public and private sector laboratories in the UK and internationally.

Full article: https://cryolab.co.uk/cryogenic-straws-canes-goblets/

Straw or vial format determines which goblets and visotubes are compatible. Those determine cane and canister layout. Canister layout determines rack configuration and the neck diameter the vessel requires. The storage tank is the final decision in that sequence.

It is also the largest single cost and the longest lead time, so it is the first item to reach procurement. A laboratory that orders the vessel before settling its organisation system has constrained choices it has not yet consciously made, and those constraints surface after installation when they are expensive to unwind.

Capacity figures and format assumptions

Headline vial counts assume a format, and it is rarely the one in use. A goblet rated for a given number of 0.25 ml straws holds considerably fewer high security straws. Quoting the larger figure is a familiar way to make a storage number look better than it is.

A workable standard: every straw format in the laboratory should have a documented path to a specific canister position. If that path cannot be drawn on paper, the specification is incomplete regardless of how finished the purchase order appears.

Neck diameter and access frequency

Everything about a cryogenic vessel is a negotiation between access and heat, and the neck is where it is settled. Wider necks allow cleaner canister retrieval, less time with arms over an open vessel and fewer awkward lifts. They also admit more heat, shortening hold time and raising consumption for the working life of the vessel.

The correct compromise follows access frequency rather than sample count. A working sperm store opened several times daily is a fundamentally different specification from an archive opened monthly, even where inventories are identical. Archive specification in a working store is the commonest invisible error in cryogenic procurement precisely because nothing about it announces itself.

Vapour phase and liquid phase

Liquid phase storage holds samples immersed, giving the most stable temperature, a negligible gradient through the canister and the longest hold time during a power failure.

Vapour phase holds samples above the liquid, removing direct contact with the nitrogen and the cross contamination route associated with it. The ASRM and SART Practice Committees, writing on cryostorage in Fertility and Sterility (2020;114:486-491), note that liquid nitrogen is not sterile, which is the foundation of the vapour phase argument. The trade is a vertical temperature gradient and considerably less tolerance if the liquid level is allowed to fall.

Neither position is unsupportable on the evidence. An undecided or inherited position is, since it is among the first questions asked at inspection and the answer must be justified rather than assumed.

Evaporation rate and the cost of ownership

Static evaporation rate, measured with the vessel closed and undisturbed under defined conditions, determines running cost far more than purchase price does. A larger vessel with a poor rate can cost more across ten years than a smaller vessel with a good one.

Manufacturer figures should be read as laboratory baselines rather than predictions for a working store room. Every lid lift, every cane retrieval and every warm object introduced adds heat the measurement deliberately excluded, so in service consumption is always higher. A busy IVF store running at several multiples of its static rate is behaving normally rather than indicating a fault.

Once installed, the absolute figure stops being useful and the trend replaces it. Establishing a local baseline in litres per week, under your own workload, gives an early warning route: a steady rise at unchanged workload is a vacuum question, and it typically appears months before frost becomes visible on the outer shell.

The full article, including monitoring specification and the capacity planning consequences of the 55 year storage limit introduced under the Health and Care Act 2022, is available here: Choosing a Liquid Nitrogen Storage Tank for an IVF Laboratory

Running cost sets the ten year figure

A cryogenic vessel consumes liquid nitrogen continuously, irrespective of use. The static evaporation rate establishes that baseline, and across a decade the gap between a good rate and a poor one routinely exceeds the purchase price difference between the vessels under comparison.

The first question, therefore, is not what the vessel costs but what it costs to run. Two figures belong in every quotation: the static evaporation rate, and what that translates to as a weekly nitrogen order at your capacity. Where neither appears on the specification sheet, both should be requested in writing.

The vacuum annulus accounts for most legitimate difference

The insulation in these vessels is a vacuum, and vacuums are not equally good. Better vessels carry more layers of multilayer insulation, cleaner internal materials that outgas less, and a larger getter, the chemically active component that absorbs stray gas molecules and holds the annulus evacuated. Getter capacity is a direct determinant of how many years the vessel holds its performance.

None of this is visible on delivery and none of it appears on a comparison table. All of it costs money to build and all of it reappears later as evaporation rate and as service life.

Build quality becomes visible only as a failure

Neck construction, internal support design and weld quality decide whether a vessel survives being caught by a trolley. A mechanical shock can crack a weld or fracture an internal support without leaving external evidence, and the vacuum degrades quietly from that point onward. A vessel specified for a store room it never leaves is a different build from one moved between rooms weekly, and the cheaper quotation is frequently the former being offered for the latter duty.

Safety devices and statutory obligations

BCGA Code of Practice 36, covering cryogenic liquid storage at users premises, requires at least two independent safety devices on the inner vessel of a pressurised tank, typically a pressure relief valve and a separate bursting disc, with the outer jacket relief device set to open at not more than 0.5 bar. A quotation omitting that arrangement is not a cheaper version of the same product.

Where a vessel operates above 0.5 bar above atmospheric pressure, the Pressure Systems Safety Regulations 2000 require a written scheme of examination drawn up by a competent person, with HSE guidance INDG178 setting out what that scheme must cover. That is a recurring cost attached to the vessel and it belongs in any honest comparison.

Monitoring, included or excluded

The ESHRE recommendations on good practice in the IVF laboratory, published in Human Reproduction (41(8), 1245), expect cryostorage tanks to be continuously monitored with alarms that detect and log out of range temperature or LN2 level.

Larger vessels frequently include level, temperature and power alarms with a remote output. Smaller vessels generally do not. A vessel that appears cheaper because monitoring was excluded is quoting an incomplete installation, and the relay to a building management system or autodialler is a further line that is easy to leave out and expensive to leave out.

The items that arrive after the order

Roller bases and trolleys for moving vessels without manual handling risk. Racks and canisters matched to the straw format actually in use rather than to a reference format. A dispensing dewar. A dipstick for the daily manual check. Cryogenic gloves, apron and face protection for the staff who will handle it. Individually modest, and collectively the reason a budget built from a single line item runs short.

Full article: Liquid Nitrogen Container Price: Why Two Quotations at the Same Capacity Are Not Comparable

Tuesday 15th Sept 3pm ET, 8pm BST, 9pm CET

This webinar is kindly sponsored by Thermo Fisher Scientific

Moderators
Prof. Evrim Ünsal and Giles Palmer

Presenters
Dr. Adam Pillon: Beyond the Karyotype: Using PGT-A to Detect Balanced Translocations
Dr. Luis Antonio Alcaraz Mas: Maximising the Potential of PGT-M: NGS vs CE Sequencing
Q&A 

REGISTER HERE