Differences in Morphokinetic Parameters and Incidence of Multinucleations in Human Embryos of Genetically Normal, Abnormal and Euploid Embryos Leading to Clinical Pregnancy.

embryo development morphokinetics multinucleation preimplantation genetic testing time-lapse monitoring

Journal

Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
05 Nov 2021
Historique:
received: 24 09 2021
revised: 26 10 2021
accepted: 02 11 2021
entrez: 13 11 2021
pubmed: 14 11 2021
medline: 14 11 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The selection of the best embryo for embryo transfer (ET) is one of the most important steps in IVF (in vitro fertilisation) treatment. Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) is an invasive method that can greatly facilitate the decision about the best embryo. An alternative way to select the embryo with the greatest implantation potential is by cultivation in a time-lapse system, which can offer several predictive factors. Non-invasive time-lapse monitoring can be used to select quality embryos with high implantation potential under stable culture conditions. The embryo for ET can then be selected based on the determined morphokinetic parameters and morphological features, which according to our results predict a higher implantation potential. This study included a total of 1027 morphologically high-quality embryos (552 normal and 475 abnormal PGT-tested embryos) from 296 patients (01/2016-06/2021). All embryos were cultivated in a time-lapse incubator and PGT biopsy of trophectoderm cells on D5 or D6 was performed. Significant differences were found in the morphological parameters cc2, t5 and tSB and the occurrence of multinucleations in the stage of two-cell and four-cell embryos between the group of genetically normal embryos and abnormal embryos. At the same time, significant differences in the morphological parameters cc2, t5 and tSB and the occurrence of multinucleations in the two-cell and four-cell embryo stage were found between the group of genetically normal embryos that led to clinical pregnancy after ET and the group of abnormal embryos. From the morphokinetic data found in the PGT-A group of normal embryos leading to clinical pregnancy, time intervals were determined based on statistical analysis, which should predict embryos with high implantation potential. Out of a total of 218 euploid embryos, which were transferred into the uterus after thawing (single frozen embryo transfer), clinical pregnancy was confirmed in 119 embryos (54.6%). Our results show that according to the morphokinetic parameters (cc2, t5, tSB) and the occurrence of multinucleations during the first two cell divisions, the best euploid embryo for ET can be selected with high probability.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34768693
pii: jcm10215173
doi: 10.3390/jcm10215173
pmc: PMC8584289
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Références

Mol Cytogenet. 2012 May 02;5(1):24
pubmed: 22551456
Reprod Biomed Online. 2012 Nov;25(5):474-80
pubmed: 22995750
Reprod Biomed Online. 2008 Aug;17(2):229-36
pubmed: 18681997
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012 Jun;29(6):565-72
pubmed: 22460082
Nat Biotechnol. 2010 Oct;28(10):1115-21
pubmed: 20890283
Fertil Steril. 2013 Mar 1;99(3):738-744.e4
pubmed: 23245683
Reprod Biomed Online. 2015 Jan;30(1):57-66
pubmed: 25458852
Fertil Steril. 2013 Sep;100(3):697-703
pubmed: 23731996
Fertil Steril. 2011 Oct;96(4):856-9
pubmed: 21851938
Reprod Biomed Online. 2019 Oct;39(4):569-579
pubmed: 31395516
Fertil Steril. 2014 Oct;102(4):1029-1033.e1
pubmed: 25086787
Hum Reprod. 2013 Oct;28(10):2643-51
pubmed: 23900207
Hum Reprod Update. 2006 Jul-Aug;12(4):333-40
pubmed: 16567347
Fertil Steril. 2014 Mar;101(3):656-663.e1
pubmed: 24355045
Reprod Biomed Online. 2006 Feb;12(2):234-53
pubmed: 16478592
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012 Sep;29(9):891-900
pubmed: 22714134
Reprod Biomed Online. 2013 Feb;26(2):120-9
pubmed: 23273754
Hum Reprod. 2009 Feb;24(2):300-7
pubmed: 18927130
Hum Reprod. 2013 Mar;28(3):794-800
pubmed: 23293223
Fertil Steril. 2021 Jul;116(1):165-173
pubmed: 33766460
Hum Reprod Update. 2014 Sep-Oct;20(5):617-31
pubmed: 24890606
Fertil Steril. 2013 Jul;100(1):100-7.e1
pubmed: 23548942
Fertil Steril. 2017 Mar;107(3):723-730.e3
pubmed: 28139240
Cytogenet Genome Res. 2013;139(3):189-92
pubmed: 23306383
Reprod Biomed Online. 2013 May;26(5):477-85
pubmed: 23518033
Mol Hum Reprod. 2014 Feb;20(2):117-26
pubmed: 24184690
J Reprod Fertil. 1993 Jul;98(2):549-58
pubmed: 8410824
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013 Jun;30(5):703-10
pubmed: 23585186
Reprod Biomed Online. 2014 Mar;28(3):380-7
pubmed: 24447961
Hum Reprod. 2011 Oct;26(10):2658-71
pubmed: 21828117
Reprod Biomed Online. 2012 Oct;25(4):371-81
pubmed: 22877944
Nat Commun. 2012;3:1251
pubmed: 23212380
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2014 Jun 20;12:54
pubmed: 24951056
Hum Reprod. 2014 Jun;29(6):1173-81
pubmed: 24578475
Reprod Biomed Online. 2016 Nov;33(5):537-549
pubmed: 27569702
Semin Reprod Med. 2015 Mar;33(2):103-17
pubmed: 25734348
Mol Hum Reprod. 2016 Oct;22(10):704-718
pubmed: 27578774
Fertil Steril. 2011 Feb;95(2):520-4
pubmed: 20537630
Reprod Biomed Online. 2010 Apr;20(4):510-5
pubmed: 20129824
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2013 May 15;11:41
pubmed: 23672340
Hum Reprod. 2016 Oct;31(10):2245-54
pubmed: 27591227
Fertil Steril. 2017 Jan;107(1):229-235.e2
pubmed: 27816230
Am J Med Genet A. 2015 Apr;167A(4):821-5
pubmed: 25736076
Fertil Steril. 2014 Mar;101(3):699-704
pubmed: 24424365
Fertil Steril. 2017 Feb;107(2):413-421.e4
pubmed: 27939508
Fertil Steril. 2000 Jun;73(6):1155-8
pubmed: 10856474
Fertil Steril. 2017 Nov;108(5):722-729
pubmed: 29101997
Lancet. 1992 Jul 4;340(8810):17-8
pubmed: 1351601
Hum Genet. 2013 Sep;132(9):1001-13
pubmed: 23620267
Reprod Biomed Online. 2003 Jan-Feb;6(1):43-53
pubmed: 12626142
Fertil Steril. 2016 Sep 1;106(3):608-614.e2
pubmed: 27206619
Fertil Steril. 2013 Jun;99(7):1944-50
pubmed: 23465820
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013 Jun;168(2):167-72
pubmed: 23351671

Auteurs

Katerina Tvrdonova (K)

Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Hradec Kralove, 500 03 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
Clinic of Reproductive Medicine and Gynecology Zlin, U Lomu 638, 760 01 Zlin, Czech Republic.

Silvie Belaskova (S)

Institute of Mathematics and Statistics, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, 611 37 Brno, Czech Republic.

Tatana Rumpikova (T)

Clinic of Reproductive Medicine and Gynecology Zlin, U Lomu 638, 760 01 Zlin, Czech Republic.

Alice Malenovska (A)

Association of Reproductive Embryology, Seifertova 801/64, 633 00 Brno, Czech Republic.

David Rumpik (D)

Clinic of Reproductive Medicine and Gynecology Zlin, U Lomu 638, 760 01 Zlin, Czech Republic.

Alena Myslivcova Fucikova (A)

Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Hradec Kralove, 500 03 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.

Frantisek Malir (F)

Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Hradec Kralove, 500 03 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.

Classifications MeSH