@GLiperis@LaurCraciunas@SCobanMune@MicahJHillDO@drbarisata@PaolaVigano3#eshrejc
Well cost-effectiveness and risk analysis are required here in my view. Provided that the patients does not dropout and is willing to go another stimulation (psychologically, physically and economically), you can try another cycle. In Italy we have no choice due to Law40
@juanjo_fraire#ESHREjc
We tried to discuss this topic in the past
To define ivf as journey and not a single attempt
Gills paper well fits into this context
https://t.co/oNM6zXXbjS
@IreneCuevasSaiz@GLiperis#eshrejc we asked them to be honest, but clearly this cannot be absolutely kept under control. The good thing is that I knew the true outcome of those embryos, and the discard rate was rather low among euploid blast and LBs. Maybe, embryologists can distinguish low from too low
@OmarRawi89@juliauraji#eshrejc not to my knowledge, but simply because the decisional support is currently based on prioritisation (i.e., transfer first or later) and not opportunity of clinical use (i.e., quality too low in this given couple for clinical use). Still, an interesting use case I think
@eficonstantinou#eshrejc absolutely. No doubt about that: we make decisions every day based on subjective assessments. One of the main advantages of AI will be standardisation even more than prediction
@SCobanMune@alteri_ale @SofiaMakieva @juanjo_fraire@PisaturoValerio#eshrejc these embryos are more aneuploid and less competent, but apparently they are not more subject to an impact of the biopsy (I.e., pre-vitrification or post-warming degeneration) nor to higher risks of no result.