Cleavage-stage human embryo arrest, is it embryo genetic composition or others?
Adult
Aneuploidy
Blastocyst
/ cytology
Blastomeres
/ cytology
Cells, Cultured
Cleavage Stage, Ovum
/ cytology
Comparative Genomic Hybridization
/ methods
Embryo Transfer
Embryo, Mammalian
/ cytology
Embryonic Development
/ genetics
Female
Fertilization in Vitro
Genetic Testing
/ methods
Humans
Live Birth
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Rate
Trophoblasts
/ cytology
Blastocyst stage
CGH
Cleavage-stage
Euploidy
Human embryos
Journal
Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E
ISSN: 1477-7827
Titre abrégé: Reprod Biol Endocrinol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101153627
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 Mar 2022
17 Mar 2022
Historique:
received:
11
02
2022
accepted:
04
03
2022
entrez:
18
3
2022
pubmed:
19
3
2022
medline:
29
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Embryo transfer is a crucial step in IVF cycle, with increasing trend during the last decade of transferring a single embryo, preferably at the blastocyst stage. Despite increasing evidence supporting Day 5 blastocyst-stage transfer, the optimal day of embryo transfer remains controversial. The crucial questions are therefore, whether the mechanisms responsible to embryos arrest are embryo aneuploidy or others, and whether those embryos arrested in-vitro between the cleavage to the blastocyst stage would survive in-vivo if transferred on the cleavage-stage. We therefore aim to explore whether aneuploidy can directly contribute to embryo development to the blastocyst stage. Thirty Day-5 embryos, that their Day-3 blastomere biopsy revealed a single-gene defect, were donated by 10 couples undergoing preimplantation genetic testing treatment at our center. Affected high quality Day-3 embryos were cultured to Day-5, and were classified to those that developed to the blastocyst-stage and those that were arrested. Each embryo underwent whole genome amplification. Eighteen (60%) embryos were arrested, did not develop to the blastocyst stage and 12 (40%) have developed to the blastocyst stage. Nineteen embryos (63.3%) were found to be euploid. Of them, 12 (66.6%) were arrested embryos and 7 (58.3%) were those that developed to the blastocyst-stage. These figures were not statistically different (p = 0.644). Our observation demonstrated that the mechanism responsible to embryos arrest in vitro is not embryo aneuploidy, but rather other, such as culture conditions. If further studies will confirm that Day-5 blastocyst transfer might cause losses of embryos that would have been survived in vivo, cleavage-stage embryo transfer would be the preferred timing. This might reduce the cycle cancellations due to failure of embryo to develop to the blastocyst stage and will provide the best cumulative live birth-rate per started cycle.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35300691
doi: 10.1186/s12958-022-00925-2
pii: 10.1186/s12958-022-00925-2
pmc: PMC8928691
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
52Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Fertil Steril. 2013 Dec;100(6):1695-703
pubmed: 24034939
Prenat Diagn. 2000 Jul;20(7):552-60
pubmed: 10913953
Hum Reprod. 2019 Jan 01;34(1):181-192
pubmed: 30418565
Hum Reprod. 2017 Apr 1;32(4):853-859
pubmed: 28166330
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017 May;49(5):583-591
pubmed: 27731533
Fertil Steril. 2002 Jun;77(6):1300-1
pubmed: 12057748
Fertil Steril. 2019 Dec;112(6):1071-1079.e7
pubmed: 31551155
Fertil Steril. 2009 Sep;92(3):890-896
pubmed: 18829021
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jun 30;(6):CD002118
pubmed: 27357126
N Engl J Med. 2021 Nov 25;385(22):2047-2058
pubmed: 34818479
Hum Reprod. 2004 Sep;19(9):2174
pubmed: 15756718
Fertil Steril. 2016 Aug;106(2):244-50
pubmed: 27421614
J Ovarian Res. 2014 Jun 13;7:65
pubmed: 24955133
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2020 Oct 6;18(1):98
pubmed: 33023576
Reprod Biomed Online. 2019 Dec;39(6):916-923
pubmed: 31685365
Reproduction. 2004 Sep;128(3):281-91
pubmed: 15333779
Hum Reprod Update. 2014 Jul-Aug;20(4):571-81
pubmed: 24667481
Nat Commun. 2020 Aug 10;11(1):3987
pubmed: 32778678
Fertil Steril. 1998 Jan;69(1):84-8
pubmed: 9457939