It is simply a lie that this ruling implies an end to IVF. If it becomes established precedent will merely force IVF to be done the slow way it is permitted in Italy: fertilize one egg in vitro, implant, either the mother has a baby or a miscarriage, repeat if necessary.
All it would forbid is the creation of embryos which are not implanted, all in all a saluatory change.
There's also a big mistaken assertion in the article: "... being the first time any court in the US has acknowledged that a human being and a human embryo are one and the same." If one looks carefully, the circuit court in Ohio, I believe a year before the Roe ruling of 1973, made just that same acknowledgement, that the embryo is a human being. Their ruling was phrased slightly different from the journalist's assertion, but the weight of the ruling was similar. Blackmun et al neatly ignored that 'stare' so one can expect this ruling to be similarly ignored if it endangers the judicially granted rite of serial killing.