Removal of 2 cells from cleavage stage embryos is likely to reduce the efficacy of chromosomal tests that are used to enhance implantation rates

被引:141
作者
Cohen, Jacques
Wells, Dagan
Munne, Santiago
机构
[1] Reprogenet LLC, W Orange, NJ USA
[2] Yale Univ, Sch Med, Dept Obstet Gynecol & Reprod Sci, New Haven, CT USA
关键词
aneuploidy; mosaicism; single cell biopsy; efficacy of PGD;
D O I
10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.07.1516
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective: To evaluate whether differences in results between studies that involve preimplantation genetic diagnosis for chromosome testing are affected by technology, such as the number of cells to be biopsied or by differences in study design. Design: Evaluation of studies of aneuploidy testing according to the use of probes, fixation technology, error determination, and number of cells per embryo analyzed. Setting: Preimplantation genetic diagnosis laboratories. Patient(s): Patients in published studies who underwent preimplantation genetic diagnosis for infertility or repeated pregnancy loss. Intervention(s): As determined by each evaluated study, the number of biopsied cells and its effect on further development was evaluated by a comparison of models of embryo freezing and partial cell loss. Main Outcome Measure(s): Use of probes, fixation strategy, number of biopsied cells, and error rate determination of different published studies. Result(S): Differences in results between studies can be explained by the technology used and are not affected necessarily by differences in design and patient allocation. Conclusion(s): Studies that contradict the finding that aneuploidy screening improves implantation and lowers miscarriage rates all have >= 1 of the following aspects in common: (I) an excess of cells having been removed; (II) inadequate choice of probes; and (III) suboptimal fixation technology. (Fertil Steril (R) 2007;87:496-503. (c) 2007 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)
引用
收藏
页码:496 / 503
页数:8
相关论文
共 40 条
[1]   The relationship between chromosomal abnormality in the human preimplantation embryo and development in vitro [J].
Almeida, PA ;
Bolton, VN .
REPRODUCTION FERTILITY AND DEVELOPMENT, 1996, 8 (02) :235-241
[2]   Chromosomal mosaicism throughout human preimplantation development in vitro:: incidence, type, and relevance to embryo outcome [J].
Bielanska, M ;
Tan, SL ;
Ao, A .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2002, 17 (02) :413-419
[3]   Cytogenetic analysis of human blastocysts [J].
Clouston, HJ ;
Herbert, M ;
Fenwick, J ;
Murdoch, AP ;
Wolstenholme, J .
PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS, 2002, 22 (12) :1143-1152
[4]  
COONEN E, 1994, HUM GENET, V94, P609
[5]   An improved fixation technique for fluorescence in situ hybridization for preimplantation genetic diagnosis [J].
Dozortsev, DI ;
McGinnis, KT .
FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2001, 76 (01) :186-188
[6]   A quantitative analysis of the impact of cryopreservation on the implantation potential of human early cleavage stage embryos [J].
Edgar, DH ;
Bourne, H ;
Speirs, AL ;
McBain, JC .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2000, 15 (01) :175-179
[7]   The developmental potential of cryopreserved human embryos [J].
Edgar, DH ;
Bourne, H ;
Jericho, H ;
McBain, JC .
MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR ENDOCRINOLOGY, 2000, 169 (1-2) :69-72
[8]   Comparative genomic hybridization analysis of human oocytes and polar bodies [J].
Fragouli, E. ;
Wells, D. ;
Thornhill, A. ;
Serhal, P. ;
Faed, M. J. W. ;
Harper, J. C. ;
Delhanty, J. D. A. .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2006, 21 (09) :2319-2328
[9]  
FUJIMOTO S, 1974, J REPROD FERTIL, V40, P177, DOI 10.1530/jrf.0.0400177
[10]   Preimplantation diagnosis for aneuploidies in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization with a poor prognosis:: identification of the categories for which it should be proposed [J].
Gianaroli, L ;
Magli, MC ;
Ferraretti, AP ;
Munné, S .
FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 1999, 72 (05) :837-844