Does smooth endoplasmic reticulum aggregation in oocytes impact the chromosome aneuploidy of the subsequent embryos? A propensity score matching study.
Chromosome aneuploidy
Clinical outcome
Oocyte dysmorphism
Preimplantation genetic testing
Smooth endoplasmic reticulum aggregation
Journal
Journal of ovarian research
ISSN: 1757-2215
Titre abrégé: J Ovarian Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101474849
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 Mar 2023
24 Mar 2023
Historique:
received:
23
06
2022
accepted:
09
03
2023
entrez:
24
3
2023
pubmed:
25
3
2023
medline:
28
3
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The appearance of smooth endoplasmic reticulum aggregation (SERa) is one of the most common dysmorphic phenotypes of oocytes, however, the impact of SERa occurrence on in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes is controversial. This study aimed to investigate the impact of SERa in oocytes on the aneuploidy of the subsequent embryos in IVF. In this retrospective cohort study, a total of 114 intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles with the appearance of SERa undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) were enrolled, and among them there were 323 SERa(+) oocytes and 1253 sibling unaffected oocytes. The 907 PGT-A cycles without SERa during the same period were enrolled as controls. A propensity score matching of 1:1 ratio between these two groups resulted in 113 matched cycles. The outcome parameters between the SERa(+) cycles/oocytes and the controls were compared. IVF laboratory outcomes, PGT-A outcomes, and clinical and neonatal outcomes were the main outcomes. Increased abnormal fertilization rate and reduced blastocyst formation rate can be observed in both SERa(+) cycles and oocytes, some other parameters on developmental potential, such as available embryo rate at Day 3 and available blastocyst rate, were also impaired in the case of SERa occurrences. Among the 910 blastocysts for PGT-A, the percentage of euploid embryos was similar between the matched cohorts, while an unpredicted increase of the proportions of euploid in the SERa(+) oocytes, compared to the SERa(-) oocytes. Moreover, there was no significance in terms of clinical and neonatal outcomes, such as implantation rate, biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, and live birth rate, regardless of the presence of SERa in cycles and oocytes. The appearance of SERa within mature oocytes has no significant impact on the aneuploidy of subsequent blastocysts. It is recommended to utilize these oocytes, especially for those with few oocytes or advanced maternal age, which is likely to increase the cumulative pregnancy rate. This study may offer evidence to assist embryologists to make clinical decisions concerning SERa(+) oocytes more consciously and rationally.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The appearance of smooth endoplasmic reticulum aggregation (SERa) is one of the most common dysmorphic phenotypes of oocytes, however, the impact of SERa occurrence on in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes is controversial. This study aimed to investigate the impact of SERa in oocytes on the aneuploidy of the subsequent embryos in IVF.
METHODS
METHODS
In this retrospective cohort study, a total of 114 intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles with the appearance of SERa undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) were enrolled, and among them there were 323 SERa(+) oocytes and 1253 sibling unaffected oocytes. The 907 PGT-A cycles without SERa during the same period were enrolled as controls. A propensity score matching of 1:1 ratio between these two groups resulted in 113 matched cycles. The outcome parameters between the SERa(+) cycles/oocytes and the controls were compared. IVF laboratory outcomes, PGT-A outcomes, and clinical and neonatal outcomes were the main outcomes.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Increased abnormal fertilization rate and reduced blastocyst formation rate can be observed in both SERa(+) cycles and oocytes, some other parameters on developmental potential, such as available embryo rate at Day 3 and available blastocyst rate, were also impaired in the case of SERa occurrences. Among the 910 blastocysts for PGT-A, the percentage of euploid embryos was similar between the matched cohorts, while an unpredicted increase of the proportions of euploid in the SERa(+) oocytes, compared to the SERa(-) oocytes. Moreover, there was no significance in terms of clinical and neonatal outcomes, such as implantation rate, biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, and live birth rate, regardless of the presence of SERa in cycles and oocytes.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The appearance of SERa within mature oocytes has no significant impact on the aneuploidy of subsequent blastocysts. It is recommended to utilize these oocytes, especially for those with few oocytes or advanced maternal age, which is likely to increase the cumulative pregnancy rate. This study may offer evidence to assist embryologists to make clinical decisions concerning SERa(+) oocytes more consciously and rationally.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36959673
doi: 10.1186/s13048-023-01135-z
pii: 10.1186/s13048-023-01135-z
pmc: PMC10037775
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
59Subventions
Organisme : National Key Research and Development Project
ID : 2018YFC1002103
Organisme : Health Commission of Hubei Province Scientific Research Project
ID : WJ2021M110
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Hum Reprod. 2019 Apr 1;34(4):591-600
pubmed: 30805638
Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Jun;11(3):307-11
pubmed: 10369209
Hum Reprod. 2002 Feb;17(2):393-406
pubmed: 11821285
Fertil Steril. 2016 Dec;106(7):1718-1724
pubmed: 27743693
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014 Nov;31(11):1461-7
pubmed: 25205205
Front Cell Dev Biol. 2021 Jul 21;9:672081
pubmed: 34368125
Hum Reprod. 2021 Mar 18;36(4):907-917
pubmed: 33527992
Stem Cells Dev. 2013 Sep 1;22(17):2449-56
pubmed: 23557100
Hum Reprod. 2004 Jul;19(7):1591-7
pubmed: 15180981
Rev Reprod. 1996 Sep;1(3):137-43
pubmed: 9414450
Hum Reprod. 2001 Oct;16(10):2118-23
pubmed: 11574502
Mitochondrion. 2011 Sep;11(5):797-813
pubmed: 20933103
Gynecol Endocrinol. 2016;32(4):315-8
pubmed: 26607857
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015 Jun;32(6):945-50
pubmed: 25894687
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2016 Jul;294(1):175-84
pubmed: 26983832
Reprod Sci. 2021 May;28(5):1439-1446
pubmed: 33400212
Fertil Steril. 2018 Mar;109(3):429-436
pubmed: 29566854
Mol Hum Reprod. 2018 Jun 1;24(6):310-317
pubmed: 29635518
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015 Nov;32(11):1629-35
pubmed: 26431954
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018 May;35(5):899-905
pubmed: 29357025
Reprod Biomed Online. 2021 Jul;43(1):26-32
pubmed: 34006484
J Hum Reprod Sci. 2019 Apr-Jun;12(2):156-163
pubmed: 31293331
Reprod Biomed Online. 2017 Nov;35(5):494-510
pubmed: 28784335
Hum Reprod Update. 2011 Jan-Feb;17(1):34-45
pubmed: 20639518
Nature. 2014 Apr 24;508(7497):483-7
pubmed: 24739963
Hum Reprod. 1993 Aug;8(8):1274-81
pubmed: 8408526
Hum Reprod. 2011 Jun;26(6):1270-83
pubmed: 21502182
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2020 Oct 6;18(1):98
pubmed: 33023576
Hum Reprod. 1998 Apr;13(4):1003-13
pubmed: 9619562
EClinicalMedicine. 2021 Aug;38:101013
pubmed: 34250457
Reprod Biomed Online. 2008 Jan;16(1):113-8
pubmed: 18252056
Reprod Biomed Online. 2021 Feb;42(2):323-331
pubmed: 33250412
Reprod Biomed Online. 2017 Apr;34(4):337-344
pubmed: 28169188
Fertil Steril. 2011 Jul;96(1):143-149.e7
pubmed: 21621206
Hum Reprod. 1997 Jun;12(6):1267-70
pubmed: 9222015
Fertil Steril. 2009 Oct;92(4):1496.e1-1496.e3
pubmed: 19646689
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014 Aug;31(8):1105-10
pubmed: 24893729
Front Physiol. 2021 Dec 09;12:732547
pubmed: 34955873