Table of Contents

1. What the guidelines actually ask for
2. The quiet cost of the conventional workaround 
3. What to look for in a platform
4. A short audit before your next infectious case
5. Why Geri for infectious workflows 
6. The same standard, for every patient 
7. References 

Every IVF laboratory has some version of this. A conventional incubator in a side room. A slot at the end of the day that the whole team quietly respects. A little extra ceremony around disinfection when a certain case comes through. These workarounds exist for the right reasons, because safety demands separation and the published guidelines back it up. 

The part worth questioning is not the separation. It is everything the separation drags along with it. 

Patients living with HIV, hepatitis B or hepatitis C can be, and routinely are, treated safely in IVF programmes. What should not be accepted as inevitable is that those patients also leave your lab without the things the rest of your patients take for granted: continuous time-lapse monitoring, a humidified culture environment and an incubation platform your team knows inside out. 

Separation is a safety decision. The compromise that usually arrives with it is a design decision. And design decisions can be made differently.

What the guidelines actually ask for

Read the major recommendations side by side, and a clear picture emerges. They agree far more than they differ, and none of them asks a laboratory to downgrade care for infectious patients. 

Jindal and colleagues put it most practically. In their 2016 review on risk reduction in assisted reproduction, they recommend isolating the patient in time, by placing them at the end of the daily workflow, and in space, by considering a separate incubator for culture. Note the word separate. Not a shared chamber with a protocol taped to the door. 

The 2021 ESHRE guideline on medically assisted reproduction in patients with a viral infection takes a broader, risk-based view: separate storage of reproductive cells according to viral status, careful separation of environments and rigorous decontamination between cases. 

And the older but still useful review by Steyaert and colleagues sets the floor everything else stands on: universal precautions, sterile technique and segregated storage, for every patient, every day. 

The common thread is that separation is the standard of care, not an extra for the cautious. What none of these documents does is tell you which incubator to buy. That gap is where the conventional workaround sneaks in, and where its costs accumulate. 

The quiet cost of the conventional workaround 

Move an infectious case to a conventional incubator, and the cycle loses its time-lapse record. Embryos get assessed only when someone opens a lid, which is exactly the disturbance time-lapse was invented to remove. The morphokinetic information your lab uses to counsel every other patient simply does not exist for this one. 

The culture environment may change too. GEMS media can be used successfully in dry incubators when dishes are prepared and handled appropriately, and many laboratories do exactly that. But because evaporation can increase osmolality, humidified incubation offers an added layer of control by helping minimisemay drift during culture. 

Then there is the operational tax. A second platform means a second training path, a second set of procedures and a second quality-control trail. Laboratories end up carrying permanent overhead for the patients who arrive least often. 

None of this is written in any guideline. It is simply what happens when the incubation hardware was never designed with these patients in mind. 

What to look for in a platform

Once you accept that separation is non-negotiable, the selection criteria almost write themselves. The interesting question is whether one single platform can meet them for standard and infectious workflows alike. 

One honest caveat belongs here. No incubator is a biosafety device, and none of this replaces your protocols. What a well-designed platform does is give your standard operating procedures the physical environments they ask for, while local regulation and your quality system keep defining how infectious cases are handled in your lab. 

A short audit before your next infectious case

If several answers come back as no, the limiting factor is probably not your team or your procedures. It is the hardware. 

Why Geri for infectious workflows 

Geri was developed around a clear principle: spatial separation should never come at the expense of clinical standards. Where conventional approaches force a laboratory to relocate infectious cases to a separate system, Geri integrates separation directly into its design, so isolating a patient in space becomes a native capability rather than an added workaround. This alignment with published recommendations means your laboratory can meet the guidelines’ requirements for time and space separation without downgrading the care those patients receive. 

The result is a laboratory that must no longer treat infectious cycles as an exception. Your patients receive the same consistent standard of care regardless of what is recorded in their chart, and your laboratory removes a compromise that was never required in the first place. Geri does not replace your standard operating procedures, but it removes the hardware limitation that has traditionally forced that compromise.

The same standard, for every patient 

There is a simple sentence that should hold true in any laboratory: the standard of care does not depend on the patient’s chart. Getting there is mostly a matter of choosing equipment that adapts to your protocols, instead of forcing your protocols to adapt to the equipment. 

References 

1. Jindal SK, Rawlins RG, Muller CH, Drobnis EZ. Guidelines for risk reduction when handling gametes from infectious patients seeking assisted reproductive technologies. Reprod Biomed Online. 2016;33(2):121-130. 

2. ESHRE Guideline Group on Viral infection/disease. ESHRE guideline: medically assisted reproduction in patients with a viral infection/disease. Hum Reprod Open. 2021;2021(4):hoab037. 

3. Steyaert SR, Leroux-Roels GG, Dhont M. Infections in IVF: review and guidelines. Hum Reprod Update. 2000;6(5):432-441. 

The post Infectious patients in the IVF lab: keeping time-lapse in every workflow  appeared first on Genea Biomedx.

Selecting the best IVF equipment, particularly the embryo culture incubator, is one of the most important decisions a clinic makes when designing or upgrading a lab. With rapid changes in culture systems, modern IVF incubators, and integrated workflow tools, the goal is no longer just about maintaining stable conditions. Today, labs need to create a high-performance environment that reduces stress on embryos and increases implantation potential.

Below, we outline the main categories of equipment and explore what to consider when picking solutions that support a modern IVF workflow.

Culture Systems: Prioritizing Stability, Flexibility, and Workflow Integration

A reliable culture system allows clinics to maintain steady environmental control from oocyte retrieval through blastocyst development. Consistent temperature, pH, and a low-oxygen gas environment remain essential. Systematic reviews link low-oxygen embryo culture to improved IVF success rates. Leading labs also focus on modularity and reducing dish handling.

When looking at culture systems, embryologists usually look for:

• Minimal lid-opening events
• Small, independent culture chambers
• Flexibility to support both standard and time-lapse culture
• Compatibility with validated media systems and dish formats (our guide on validating new media in your lab covers how to assess this in practice)

The Geri® system from Genea Biomedx, especially when used with the GEMS® culture media suite, shows this modern approach. It is built around workflow logic to lower variability while keeping daily handling simple for embryologists.

Benchtop Embryo Culture Incubators: Why Mini Chambers Are the Standard

Large box incubators are no longer the only standard in the IVF lab. Today, the preferred embryo culture incubator is often a benchtop model. These feature small-volume chambers that offer quick recovery and limit cross-patient interference. Research on benchtop incubators with lowered oxygen highlights why fast-recovering, stable micro-environments matter for fertilization and embryo development.

Key benefits of modern benchtop IVF incubators include:

• Faster temperature and gas recovery after opening
• Lower risk of cross-contamination
• Individual micro-environments for each patient
• Better workflow efficiency in a busy lab

Whether a clinic chooses a compact benchtop system or a more advanced platform, the main priority must be keeping the environment stable during busy hours. This is especially important for high-volume labs.

Multi-Room Incubators: Scaling Without Compromise

A multiroom incubator fills the gap between large box incubators and single-patient benchtop models. It offers multiple isolated chambers within one machine. This design gives embryologists the flexibility to work on individual patients without exposing others to temperature or gas changes.

Clinics should consider a multi-room system if their lab:

• Handles a high patient volume
• Needs backup chambers for risk management
• Wants a standardized, highly controlled environment across multiple modules

The Geri® incubator from Genea Biomedx is a clear example of this concept. Each patient gets their own completely isolated chamber, which cuts down on disturbance while supporting individualized culture. For a real-world example, you can read how Instituto Bernabeu transformed its embryology lab with Geri.

Time-Lapse Incubators: Insight Without Interruption

Time-lapse incubators have changed modern embryology. They do more than provide continuous imaging. They remove the need to take embryos out of their optimal culture environment for observation. Sibling-oocyte studies report improved blastocyst development and euploidy rates with time-lapse incubators, and ongoing systematic reviews continue to evaluate their role in embryo incubation and assessment. When paired with advanced assessment tools, including validated algorithms and AI solutions (as discussed in our article on the incorporation of AI into IVF), time-lapse systems help make embryo assessment more objective.

When looking at a time-lapse platform, clinics should check:

• Image quality, frame rate, and capture interval
• Number and adjustability of focal planes
• Chamber design (are the embryos for each patient truly isolated?)
• Culture conditions like dry, humid, or both (learn why incubator humidity really matters for IVF outcomes)
• Integrated morphokinetic and annotation tools
• Data storage, export, and reporting options
• AI compatibility (whether it is tied to one system or flexible enough to work with different options)
• Ease of use during busy clinical cycles

The Geri® time-lapse incubator is a patient-focused device that combines uninterrupted culture with real-time imaging inside six fully independent micro-environments.

Matching Equipment to Your Laboratory Goals

When investing in new technology, embryologists and clinic directors need to match equipment choices with lab goals:

• To improve embryo culture stability: Choose multi-chamber IVF incubators and low-disturbance culture systems.
• To scale up or standardize a larger clinic: A modular multiroom incubator allows for predictable growth with consistent operations.
• To improve selection accuracy and documentation: A time-lapse incubator provides deeper real-time insights without changing culture conditions.
• To streamline workflows: Systems like Genea Biomedx’s Geri for incubation and GEMS for media lower variability and make daily tasks easier.

Final Thoughts

Picking the right embryo culture incubator and IVF equipment goes beyond comparing specifications. It involves matching technology to your lab’s workflow and patient load. Whether you are looking at culture systems, upgrading IVF incubators, or moving to time-lapse technology, the best solutions consistently support stable and patient-specific embryo care. You can explore Genea Biomedx’s full range of IVF and embryology lab solutions to see how these systems work together.

The post Choosing the Right Embryo Culture Incubator: A Guide for Modern IVF Labs appeared first on Genea Biomedx.

History of Gems® Media Suite: Evolution of Modern Gems Media Suite

DISCOVER HOW GEMS® MEDIA HAS BEEN OPTIMISED THOUGHOUT THE DECADES

The post History of Gems® Media Suite: Evolution of Modern Gems Media Suite appeared first on Genea Biomedx.

Validating New Media In Your Lab

Learn how you can incorporate GEMs into your lab, and practice. Download the Tech Notes to explore how it can help optimize your embryo nurturing process.

The post Validating New Media In Your Lab appeared first on Genea Biomedx.

Geri®

The world’s first humidified time-lapse incubator.

Discover Product

Guardian

Guardian is an electronic witnessing system using both types of identification label technologies, RFID chips and QR codes, designed as a simplified sample traceability system for patients and IVF clinics.

Discover Product

Geri® Connect & Assess

Streamlining lab operations and enhancing patient communication.

Discover Product

Gems®

A next-generation culture media formula developed by embryologists, enriched with antioxidants.

Discover Product

Gidget®

An easy-to-use electronic witnessing system designed to aid sample identification and tracking during ART procedures, while minimising the chance of human error. 

Discover Product

The post Embryology Solution appeared first on Genea Biomedx.

What is Culture Media? 

Embryo culture media is a specially formulated aqueous solution designed to support the growth and early development of embryos in the laboratory during IVF procedures until they are ready to be transferred to the uterus. It mimics the natural conditions of the female reproductive tract by providing essential nutrients, energy sources, and an optimal balance of pH and osmolality to sustain embryo viability. 

Culture media typically contain: 

• – Carbohydrates (e.g. glucose, lactate, pyruvate) to provide energy. 
• – Amino acids to support protein synthesis and cell function. 
• – A pH buffer to regulate the acidity of the media. 
• – Osmotic regulators to maintain a stable environment. 
• – Other optional components, such as antioxidants to reduce oxidative stress (included in the formulation of the Gems culture media Genea Biomedx). 

The Role of Culture Media in Embryo Development:

Embryo culture media serves as a surrogate environment that mimics the conditions of the female reproductive tract, providing essential nutrients, energy sources, and optimal pH and osmolality for embryo growth. Since early embryonic development is highly sensitive to external conditions, the composition of the media can influence embryo quality, implantation rates, and live birth outcomes. 

Historically, culture media have evolved from simple salt solutions designed for somatic cell culture to complex formulations that support embryos from fertilisation to the blastocyst stage. Modern culture media aim to balance embryo developmental needs while minimising stress and epigenetic modifications. 

Two primary approaches dominate modern IVF laboratories: sequential and one-step culture media. The choice between these approaches depends on various factors, including laboratory preferences, patient characteristics, and technological advancements. 

Sequential Culture Media: Characteristics and Advantages 

Sequential culture media systems use different formulations tailored to the changing needs of the embryo during its development. Typically, one type of medium supports early cleavage-stage embryos, from fertilisation until day 3, while a separate medium is used from that point onwards for blastocyst development. 

Advantages of Sequential Media: 

• Stage-Specific Nutrient Optimisation: Different media formulations can be optimised to match the specific metabolic needs of embryos at different stages. 
• Minimised Metabolic Stress: By providing fresh media partway through development, waste accumulation is reduced, and essential nutrients are replenished. 

Challenges of Sequential Media: 

• Frequent Handling: Media changes require additional handling, increasing the risk of temperature and pH fluctuations that could stress embryos. 
• Increased Labour and Cost: Sequential culture protocols are more labour-intensive and require additional media products, making them more expensive than one-step systems. 
• Potential for Human Error: Each media exchange introduces an opportunity for errors, contamination, or inconsistencies in embryo culture. 

One-Step Culture Media: Characteristics and Advantages 

One-step culture media, also known as single-step or continuous media, are designed to support embryo development from fertilisation to the blastocyst stage without media changes. These formulations contain all necessary nutrients, amino acids, and energy sources in a stable composition and at optimised concentrations, allowing uninterrupted culture. 

Advantages of One-Step Media: 

Reduced Handling and Stress: Since embryos remain undisturbed in the same medium throughout development, exposure to environmental stressors, such as temperature fluctuations and pH changes, is minimised. 

Stable Culture Conditions: Continuous culture provides a stable environment, which may help reduce stress-related developmental issues. 

Simplification of Laboratory Workflow: Eliminating media changes simplifies protocols, reduces labour intensity, and lowers the risk of contamination or errors. 

Potential for Time-Lapse Monitoring: One-step media are the perfect partner for time-lapse imaging systems, allowing non-invasive embryo assessment without the need for media exchange, providing a totally undisturbed culture. 

Challenges of One-Step Media: 

Accumulation of Metabolic By-Products: As embryos grow, they release waste products that can accumulate in static media, potentially affecting embryo development. 

Scientific Perspectives: Which System is Better? 

The debate over one-step versus sequential media remains active, with studies showing varying results depending on laboratory conditions, patient populations, and specific protocols. 

Evidence Supporting Sequential Media: 

Some research indicates that stage-specific culture conditions in sequential media may better mimic in vivo conditions, leading to higher-quality embryos and improved implantation rates. The ability to tailor nutrients and reduce metabolic waste accumulation can enhance embryo viability in some cases. 

Evidence Supporting One-Step Media: 

Other studies suggest that continuous culture in one-step media leads to comparable, if not improved, blastocyst formation rates and pregnancy outcomes compared to sequential media. The reduced handling and stable environment may benefit embryo development, particularly in automated systems using time-lapse imaging. 

Clinical Considerations and Laboratory Preferences 

The choice between sequential and one-step culture media often depends on: 

Laboratory Workflow: Labs equipped with time-lapse incubators may favour one-step media, while traditional setups may benefit from sequential media. 

Patient-Specific Factors: Some patient populations, such as those with poor embryo quality or advanced maternal age, may respond better to specific media formulations. 

Cost and Resource Availability: Budget constraints and laboratory expertise can influence media selection 

Conclusion: Finding the Best Approach 

Both sequential and one-step culture media have their respective advantages and challenges, and there is no universally superior option, as both can successfully support embryo development to the blastocyst stage. IVF laboratories must carefully evaluate their workflows, technological capabilities, and patient needs when selecting culture media. Ongoing research and advancements in embryo culture technology will continue to refine these choices, ultimately improving IVF success rates and patient outcomes. 

Given the lack of consensus on which is the better strategy, many companies offer both options in their portfolio, allowing customers to choose their preferred approach. For example, the Gems media suite by Genea Biomedx offers the Cleavage and Blastocyst Media for a sequential strategy and Geri Medium for continuous culture—specifically designed to be the perfect partner for the Geri incubator with an integrated embryo monitoring system. 

Regardless of the approach, optimising embryo culture conditions remains a cornerstone of IVF success, helping more families achieve their dreams of parenthood. 

The post Embryo Culture Media for IVF: Sequential vs. One-Step Media  appeared first on Genea Biomedx.