Quality is a system property
No laboratory step exists in isolation. Patient identification, gamete handling, fertilisation, embryo culture, biopsy, cryopreservation and transfer form one chain. ESHRE’s 2026 update replaces the 2015 good-practice document and reframes the IVF laboratory as a coordinated safety and quality system.
What does the update cover?
The recommendations address organisation, staff competence, quality management, safety, patient identification and traceability, andrology procedures, fertilisation, embryo culture and transfer, PGT biopsy, cryopreservation, documentation and emergency management.
The document is not simply a checklist of equipment. Its value is in making responsibilities, escalation routes and process controls explicit.
Traceability under real workload
Traceability should be tested during peak activity, handovers, concurrent procedures and electronic-system downtime — not only during a scheduled audit. A discrepancy should trigger root-cause analysis, corrective action and verification that the correction works.
Electronic witnessing can support safety, but it does not remove the need for human factors, staff competence and a downtime process.
KPIs that lead to action
A laboratory KPI is useful only if it is consistently defined, interpreted in context and linked to a decision. A trend in abnormal fertilisation, cryosurvival or environmental parameters should activate a pre-defined review rather than end as a dashboard item.
Contingency planning
A workable contingency plan defines decision authority, communication, protection of biological material, equipment redundancy and external support. Periodic exercises are essential. A document that has never been tested is not evidence of operational readiness.
What does the guidance not prove?
The recommendations were developed by a ten-member working group through literature review, expert consensus and stakeholder consultation. The authors acknowledge that direct evidence is not available for every recommendation.
Adoption should therefore not be marketed as proof of a higher live-birth rate. Its impact should be assessed through process reliability, incident learning, traceability failures, laboratory outcomes and patient-relevant endpoints.
Conclusion
The 2026 document provides a common language for responsibility across the IVF laboratory. Its most important use is not formal compliance but a safer, testable and continuously learning system.
Source: ESHRE Good Practice in the IVF Lab Working Group. Human Reproduction. 2026;41(8):1245–1269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deag096